EVE General Discussion

I will confirm that afk cloaking on renters is hilarious. I used to talk to mine, tell them I thought they had a really nice Oracle, or whatever it was they were using.

I'd also be parked about 100km up from the station, talk to them whenever they docked up and stuff.

Anyway, as to the difference between the kind of ships that carebears fly, and the kind that nullbears fly...

The nullbears tend to not fly bling ships. The falsely perceived safety of highsec makes their particular carebears more daring with bringing out the shinies.

This demonstrates really really well that you don't know what you're talking about lol.

Show me the DED 10/10 that doesn't have a gate so you can get a carrier into it in the 1st place. And a nightmare....in a complex that shoots a citadel torp at you....lol no thanks. What you WILL see in 10/10s are ishtars, Tengus, remote rep domi teams and the like.

Contrast that with the marauders doing lvl 4 missions, or the pirate BS' doing incursions. The "starter' machariel fit for TVP (The Valhalla Project) cost 1.2 bil. The "Elite' machariel fit for TVP only costs about 5 billion isk , that is if you don't count the recommended implants that will run you another 4 billion isk (including the pashan's) that no one in null would DARE have in their clones because of the risk of being bubbled.

And ISN flies noting BUT shiny, my starter vindicator I flew with ISN costs +5bil.

There is a reason where there are multiple high sec incursion communities and not one low sec standing community at all.

the mach fit is pretty much t2 last time i looked at the mailing list. the bulk of the 1.2bn isk price tag is the hull, not the modules.

The TVP starter mach has tech2 rigs now (and 1 t1 ancillary rig). The hull is only like 800 mil now.

Didn't you get the memo? Hi-sec is hard-mode piracy.

The fact that there are multiple high sec incursion communities (each of which lists multi billion isk fits including starter fits in their MOTDs, mailing lists and web sites) and not a single standing low sec incursion community is not anecdotal evidence. Sure, people use shiny stuff in null sometimes, but it can't compare to high sec.

For example, a 40 ship ISN HQ fleet costs more in terms of isk than a 100 carrier null sec slowcat fleet..

I think the notion that is high sec (illusion of safety) is CCP fault, this is why you see people whining when they get killed there mostly

I don't want people to get slaughtered, gankers controlling everything, but and you have to admit, in a game like EvE Concord is a pretty **** concept "God-mode blap", pfftt... it's pretty much useless actually since it prohibits gameplay not adds to it (i'm not talking about just ganking here) since if someone really wants you dead you will die, concord is pretty freaking useless.. just an illusion of safety..

But CCP might be going in the right direction in the future for it, we'll see..

I read the article and can see absolutely no trace of any bias whatsoever in the text. The writer should get an award for outstanding journalism.

On the flip side though I have gleaned from the CSM minutes that the themepark is coming to EVE online as apparently 90% of players are not engaged enough to keep CCP Seagul Happy. In other words if you only do one thing. I.e. fleet fights in null, you are not engaged unless of course you do exploration, low sec and wormhole stuff all at the same time.

I personally would like Highsec to be a tougher place to live but not through nerfdom, some things need to be buffed. War dec fees should be lowered (buff) and Concord should only protect people at gates and stations, faction police can protect players at belts as faction police are easily beaten. I would go as far as making a 0.5 system (low sec lite) by extending concord delays considerably in these systems. Too much hand holding is bad for the game. As for high sec income though I would add that this shouldn't be nerfed. It's already difficult for players with limited time to earn enough cash to pay for nice things. The more stuff costs the less likely people are going to want to risk losing it. When I started playing Eve battlecrusiers and cruiser hulls were everywhere in low with frigs and destroyers filling the gaps. Now all I see are cheap, disposable frigs, most of which are built to run, not fight. This is a direct result of price rises.

Ganking of loot pinatas, ganking of miners in general, Hulkageddon, Gallente ice interdiction, recently the use of mobile structures to draw drone aggression and create limited engagements, ninja salvaging, ninja looking in bait ships and probably a few things I'm forgetting off the top of my head are all things that are enabled and thrive by the plethora of PvE players in game. Particularly in high sec.

Additionally it appears to have typically been mission hubs around which trade hubs have formed, themselves becoming focal points of content and interaction.

Quite frankly, considering the fact that PvE players have been and still are complaining about undesired interaction, your comment amount to a pile of BS.

Reading is fundemental lol. As we all ways go over time and time and time again, Tippia is talking about PLAYERS, not CHARACTERS. in the q3 2010 QEN you reference, it says that 11% of CHARACTERS were in null sec.

Each account has 3 character slots. I have 4 accounts, 8 of my characters are right now logged of somewhere in 'empire' low sec or high sec.

CCP has never published any information about where the players are for what length of time on what character, or even asked players how they identify themselves (ie "do you call your self a high sec player" or whatever). What all this means is that the "empire" figure (86.5 percent in high and low sec combined) accounts for somewhere less than 86.5% of "players" because some portion of "null sec players" have 'empire' alts for various functions like isk making, spying, using locator agents, hauling and whatever.

I strongly suspect that the "only plays in high sec" type player is a minority (and a disinterested, disorganized minority at that), as evidenced by high sec inability and sheer unwillingness to group together for anything like fighting goons or electing CSMs. In other words, the mythical high sec majority is just that, a myth.