These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

What would happen if CCP finally nerfed hisec?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
#2221 - 2014-02-04 04:48:32 UTC
Changing PVE to make PVE ships use PVP-viable fittings is a long-overdue buff for PVE in all areas and'd make the game a lot more interesting
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2222 - 2014-02-04 05:00:37 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
Changing PVE to make PVE ships use PVP-viable fittings is a long-overdue buff for PVE in all areas and'd make the game a lot more interesting



Sounds like an incursion fleet.
Kimmi Chan
Tastes Like Purple
#2223 - 2014-02-04 09:38:26 UTC
Tauranon wrote:
Kimmi Chan wrote:
stuff


Don't waste your time, come back with a prophecy or a taranis kill the guy, the BS and loot. If he has lost his flag or his ship is too big, bump him with a prophecy which is pretty quick, pretty agile and easy to bump with. Those pilots are happy if they obstruct you, really happy if they flag your marauder, but not really interested in an insured space ship that is going to be done before they get their killboat on grid, and a pilot who plainly enjoys fighting back and has the relevant insurable spacepixels. They may enjoy the resulting incident, but they won't be seeking you for tears or pinata in the future.

You can forum warrior whilst you wait out your flags.

if thats all too hard, cancel the mission and leave him there.


The guy was in a Caracal Navy Issue and was able to destroy all the other BS and BCs on the grid at the time in the time that I had warped off to a safe and came back. In truth, this was the second time ever that I had a visitor in a mission hub in 6 years. The first time I was flying a CNR and took the bait. The guy burned out his scram and I was able to warp off. So I was unsure what to do. I considered warping off and failing the mission but gambled on him getting bored and realizing that I wasn't going to take the bait and that maybe his efforts would be better spent elsewhere. I also considered that NullSec anom runners typically deal with similar situations by docking up and waiting out the uninvited guest. So considered that the best option. Biased or not, I was happy to show that PvE in HighSec is not always without interruption. The only other ships in the mission hangar are 2 shuttles.

Going forward, if another player decides to come introduce himself, I will simply warp off, fail the mission, and get another. That seems to be the best alternative.

"Grr Kimmi  Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide

www.eve-radio.com  Join Eve Radio channel in game!
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#2224 - 2014-02-04 09:42:58 UTC
Kimmi Chan wrote:


Going forward, if another player decides to come introduce himself, I will simply warp off, fail the mission, and get another. That seems to be the best alternative.


It is.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#2225 - 2014-02-04 09:54:00 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
hedge betts Shiyurida wrote:
It would turn into the stagnant joke that is null. Look at the 24 hour kill stats on the map, more ships go pop in high sec than low. Only real difference between low 0.0 and high is you get to say that 0.0 is yours


More get killed in 0.0 per head of population than in high sec at any given time and more ships get killed overall in 0.0 than in highsec. I recall seeing that the bulk of killed ships are also made by just a single organisation in highsec.



Well that is undeniable. The majority of high sec dwellers choose to stay on protected grounds (npc corp or 2-3 man corps) and are safe from everything but ganking.

But if you had a way to get the number pf non carebears in high sec and get the ratio usign only them, it would be very close to 0.0 (maybe check the number of people that DID kill at least one ship in high sec and not consider the others).

Pvper in high sec are as active as the 0.0 ones, they are just in a much smaller number.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#2226 - 2014-02-04 09:56:15 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:

You fail to see your so called counters are irrelevant. Regardless of my argument or your argument or anyone’s argument, data or numbers. It doesn’t change the facts. Null got nerfed.

I have free choice to play in any part of the sandbox I want. Should I feel null-sec is my place to play it’s my choice….should I choose WH space it’s my choice. Insert (part of sandbox here) it’s my choice.

You can’t expect CCP to modify another part of the sandbox because you don’t like how it works as compared to the part of the sandbox you chose.

You shouldn’t need to understand numbers or data to grasp such a simple concept.


You aren't even talking about stuff relevant to the points being made in this thread. What exactly are you trying to get across here?



he is talking about the OP.. so he is more "in thread"than most.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#2227 - 2014-02-04 10:02:49 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Kimmi Chan wrote:


Even so, since 69% of the income is coming from LP, how do you feel it would be best to nerf highsec income Baltec? That is the part that I have not seen iterated by anyone here to my recollection.


Stop blitzing. If CCP wish to keep LP levels high then remove ship bounties from high sec missions or stop blitzing and add on LP rewards on NPC kills in null sec space (without needing the ESS)



They cannot simply remove bounties. Because new players would not get the initial influx of isk they need to even USE the LP. Also that would unbalance too much the isk sinks / isk faucet ratio.

Some missions that are too easy to blitz, yes those should be reevaluated. Most missions should be impossible to blitz and the ones that are possible should demand some skill.


High sec income have been massively nerfed when the t loot was removed (back then it payed more than the LP). The result is that people changed into blitzing mode and too many missiosn are trivial to do so. For example the first blockade should not allow you to cross the gate before you kill the rats. Things like that would be enough already to balance the abusive behavior without hurting the peopel tha play missiosn as CCP intends to be played.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kimmi Chan
Tastes Like Purple
#2228 - 2014-02-04 10:50:23 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
Kimmi Chan wrote:
Once again this goes off the rails.

welcome to The Big Lie

Kimmi Chan wrote:
If you reduce the amount of LP in New Eden, you reduce the effectiveness of the LP Store sink.

stop thinking 'sinks are good, faucets are bad'. they're just money flows, and neither is inherantly unbalanced. there was a percieved inflation problem a while back, but ccp's economist says things are evening out. from what i understand, an economy needs a certain amount of inflation, and if nerfing blitzing somehow unbalanced inflation rates, there are plenty of options to introduce greater sinks elsewhere.


Benny, no one is claiming faucets are bad or that sinks are good. But it does have to be balanced and I think that is the challenge with nerfing or buffing anything. An economy where inflation rises steadily is not a bad thing if it rises at a slow, steady pace. At a slower pace the market, this one in particular, can react very quickly to compensate. If, however, there is a sharp rise in inflation, the market is suddenly filled with high priced items. Dr. EyojG likes how efficient our market is; how quickly it is able to react. So again, any nerf or buff needs be evaluated in the long term. It might be a good idea now but 6 months from now, who knows?

If you read that thread that Jenn posted about the FW LP, the guy claims that the LP earned in FW is the reason PLEX prices jumped up to 600m per. Of course, when you're making 600m ISK/hr off that LP store, the cost of a PLEX is an hours work for you but for a Anom Runner it's 7 hours (@90m/hr), a high end mission runner it's 6 hours (@100m/hr), and an average mission runner it's 10 hours or more (@<60m/hr).

You would think this would be something that would be nerfed but it isn't. The guy is dropping ISK into a sink AND buying up all the PLEX ($$ for Iceland).

Benny Ohu wrote:
by the way can we all agree to stop using horrible portgoonteaus tia


Yea, I don't know what that is.

"Grr Kimmi  Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide

www.eve-radio.com  Join Eve Radio channel in game!
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#2229 - 2014-02-04 13:18:31 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Kagura Nikon wrote:



They cannot simply remove bounties. Because new players would not get the initial influx of isk they need to even USE the LP. Also that would unbalance too much the isk sinks / isk faucet ratio.

Some missions that are too easy to blitz, yes those should be reevaluated. Most missions should be impossible to blitz and the ones that are possible should demand some skill.


High sec income have been massively nerfed when the t loot was removed (back then it payed more than the LP). The result is that people changed into blitzing mode and too many missiosn are trivial to do so. For example the first blockade should not allow you to cross the gate before you kill the rats. Things like that would be enough already to balance the abusive behavior without hurting the peopel tha play missiosn as CCP intends to be played.


That loot nerf also hit null and low sec.

I agree that removing bounties wouldn't be the best answer, removing blitzing is the best answer in my book. To keep LP levels the same CCP could then add LP rewards to null and low sec bounties or even tie them to the anoms themselves.
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
#2230 - 2014-02-04 13:22:04 UTC
Kimmi Chan wrote:
Benny, no one is claiming faucets are bad or that sinks are good.

Sorry if I read it wrong.

Kimmi Chan wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
by the way can we all agree to stop using horrible portgoonteaus tia


Yea, I don't know what that is.

You're not the offender :P
Kagura Nikon wrote:
he is talking about the OP.. so he is more "in thread"than most.

That one's an outright troll alt
Kasife Vynneve
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2231 - 2014-02-04 13:24:14 UTC
Quote:
Why would many PvE gamers play a game that doesn't have much PvE content?


There is plenty of PvE to be enjoyed in EVE ~ The better question is why do PvPers care so much about the choices of what others do or where they close to play?

There could be people out there who do nothing but sit docked on a station all day talking to people and you may not like it but for them its a legitimate and worthwhile way to play the game.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#2232 - 2014-02-04 13:28:08 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:



They cannot simply remove bounties. Because new players would not get the initial influx of isk they need to even USE the LP. Also that would unbalance too much the isk sinks / isk faucet ratio.

Some missions that are too easy to blitz, yes those should be reevaluated. Most missions should be impossible to blitz and the ones that are possible should demand some skill.


High sec income have been massively nerfed when the t loot was removed (back then it payed more than the LP). The result is that people changed into blitzing mode and too many missiosn are trivial to do so. For example the first blockade should not allow you to cross the gate before you kill the rats. Things like that would be enough already to balance the abusive behavior without hurting the peopel tha play missiosn as CCP intends to be played.


That loot nerf also hit null and low sec.

I agree that removing bounties wouldn't be the best answer, removing blitzing is the best answer in my book. To keep LP levels the same CCP could then add LP rewards to null and low sec bounties or even tie them to the anoms themselves.



Think non FW low sec is where most HELP is needed. But if LP levels rise a bit I do nto think woudl be a problem. Most of the LP go to the cheap things as navy battleships. An increase of 10% would be negligible on that case. Only nomad sets and SOE stuff would get really expensive.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#2233 - 2014-02-04 13:29:08 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
Kimmi Chan wrote:
Benny, no one is claiming faucets are bad or that sinks are good.

Sorry if I read it wrong.

Kimmi Chan wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
by the way can we all agree to stop using horrible portgoonteaus tia


Yea, I don't know what that is.

You're not the offender :P
Kagura Nikon wrote:
he is talking about the OP.. so he is more "in thread"than most.

That one's an outright troll alt



You clearly show your incompetence on Forum Fu if you think I am anyone's alt.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
#2234 - 2014-02-04 13:30:57 UTC
E-2C Hawkeye.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#2235 - 2014-02-04 13:35:06 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:


Think non FW low sec is where most HELP is needed. But if LP levels rise a bit I do nto think woudl be a problem. Most of the LP go to the cheap things as navy battleships. An increase of 10% would be negligible on that case. Only nomad sets and SOE stuff would get really expensive.


Bumping up LP rewards in low sec would be a very nice start.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2236 - 2014-02-04 15:09:50 UTC
Kasife Vynneve wrote:
Quote:
Why would many PvE gamers play a game that doesn't have much PvE content?


There is plenty of PvE to be enjoyed in EVE ~ The better question is why do PvPers care so much about the choices of what others do or where they close to play?

There could be people out there who do nothing but sit docked on a station all day talking to people and you may not like it but for them its a legitimate and worthwhile way to play the game.



Because the game is not packed with isolated systems anything you do affects what someone else does.

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
Notorious Fellon
#2237 - 2014-02-04 15:32:50 UTC
Talk about Risk vs. Reward without including *all* risks and *all* rewards is meaningless.

Add in PI to your calculations, say across a month of play in both null and hisec. Then let us compare.

The risk in null is balanced because of total income potential. Not just anoms.

Crime, it is not a "career", it is a lifestyle.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#2238 - 2014-02-04 15:36:00 UTC
Notorious Fellon wrote:
Talk about Risk vs. Reward without including *all* risks and *all* rewards is meaningless.

Add in PI to your calculations, say across a month of play in both null and hisec. Then let us compare.

The risk in null is balanced because of total income potential. Not just anoms.


Lol, this is about as hard of a derail as I have yet seen.

Individual person income totally includes moon goo, right? Roll

"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.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2239 - 2014-02-04 15:38:07 UTC  |  Edited by: La Nariz
Notorious Fellon wrote:
Talk about Risk vs. Reward without including *all* risks and *all* rewards is meaningless.

Add in PI to your calculations, say across a month of play in both null and hisec. Then let us compare.

The risk in null is balanced because of total income potential. Not just anoms.


No it isn't, we are comparing two analogous activities here and showing that highsec has more reward than nullsec. Its looking like this is true even with the ESS at the estimated highest value of LP. No matter how many times you say this it doesn't obliterate the fact that I've shown ~70m is an average for mid-range combat PVE in nullsec and Stoic has shown ~100m is an average for mid-range combat PVE in highsec. You're harping on a strawman there is literal proof here that shows highsec has more reward than nullsec.

Which should be changed we almost got to "how" but, then a bunch of highsec pubbies jumped in and tried to derail the thread. So maybe you should stick to how highsec mission running should be adjusted.

La Nariz wrote:
Highsec L4s : ~100m

Forsaken Hubs: ~70m (no ESS)

The ESS test is still going because I got ganked and there's a tonne of roaming gangs going around.

Proof and verification of fit:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqC-BTui2uSGdDlxa2dWOG5ieHB0QXBVWW82bGN5TFE&usp=sharing

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=21728022

That test shows in mid-range PVE activity highsec is not adhering to risk : reward at all and that needs to be changed.

E1: Have to acquire an ESS.


E2: All activity reward excluding market activity should be Nullsec WH > lowsec > highsec.

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
Notorious Fellon
#2240 - 2014-02-04 15:43:24 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Notorious Fellon wrote:
Talk about Risk vs. Reward without including *all* risks and *all* rewards is meaningless.

Add in PI to your calculations, say across a month of play in both null and hisec. Then let us compare.

The risk in null is balanced because of total income potential. Not just anoms.


Lol, this is about as hard of a derail as I have yet seen.

Individual person income totally includes moon goo, right? Roll


Nice try, but no.

Total income, not just the part you want to analyze.

Also note that PI is individual income. You seem to be confused.

Crime, it is not a "career", it is a lifestyle.