These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Missions & Complexes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Lv4s 100-150mil/h+: Breakdown

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#261 - 2015-11-30 14:04:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Anize Oramara wrote:

You know better than anyone that's not how it works.


That's exactly how it should work. Highsec, lowest reward for the highest safety and least effort put in, lowsec, mid risk and effort for mid reward, nullsec, highest risk and effort for big rewards, WH, high risk and biggest effort for the biggest reward.


But but, if it made sense like that, how can one have one's cake AND eat it too like you can right now in 'relative safety'?

The above question is where every balance discussion ends up eventually...



You two are way too intelligent to post crap like this.

Both of you know that if you remove Incursions from HS, not many will care. But those that are effected will turn to lvl 4 missions.

Remove lvl 4 missions and people will blitz the lvl 3's

At some point you need to realize that this entire endeavor is just to make HS so bad, so poor of space that people are willing to get rid of it all together, THAT is your ultimate goal.

You guys are just trying to get CCP to soften everyone up to the idea in baby steps.


I call the above "defensive prejudice". It's the same idea as "you just want people to play your way" and "you just want me to leave high sec so you can shoot me". All of which are lies.

According to Anize most people do missions 'wrong' anyways. Fixing the issues of hyper-blitzing (like fixing incursions) only affects the small number of true min/maxers that exist (many of whom are just null sec alts to begin with lol). In fact, it's my belief that fixing these issues not only would serve to free many of us who belong outside of high sec from a high sec that is too good to ignore, it would also help the majority that are 'doing missions wrong' by returning value to their activities as well.

It pleases me to no end to know that (in your short-sightedness) you think you are defending high sec and lowly solo/casuals, when in reality you are actually defending a status quo that benefits null sec and it's already space-rich overlords (where a lot of the min/maxxed wealth ends up).
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#262 - 2015-11-30 14:31:30 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Anize Oramara wrote:

You know better than anyone that's not how it works.


That's exactly how it should work. Highsec, lowest reward for the highest safety and least effort put in, lowsec, mid risk and effort for mid reward, nullsec, highest risk and effort for big rewards, WH, high risk and biggest effort for the biggest reward.


But but, if it made sense like that, how can one have one's cake AND eat it too like you can right now in 'relative safety'?

The above question is where every balance discussion ends up eventually...



You two are way too intelligent to post crap like this.

Both of you know that if you remove Incursions from HS, not many will care. But those that are effected will turn to lvl 4 missions.

Remove lvl 4 missions and people will blitz the lvl 3's

At some point you need to realize that this entire endeavor is just to make HS so bad, so poor of space that people are willing to get rid of it all together, THAT is your ultimate goal.

You guys are just trying to get CCP to soften everyone up to the idea in baby steps.


I call the above "defensive prejudice". It's the same idea as "you just want people to play your way" and "you just want me to leave high sec so you can shoot me". All of which are lies.

According to Anize most people do missions 'wrong' anyways. Fixing the issues of hyper-blitzing (like fixing incursions) only affects the small number of true min/maxers that exist (many of whom are just null sec alts to begin with lol). In fact, it's my belief that fixing these issues not only would serve to free many of us who belong outside of high sec from a high sec that is too good to ignore, it would also help the majority that are 'doing missions wrong' by returning value to their activities as well.

It pleases me to no end to know that (in your short-sightedness) you think you are defending high sec and lowly solo/casuals, when in reality you are actually defending a status quo that benefits null sec and it's already space-rich overlords (where a lot of the min/maxxed wealth ends up).



All I can say to this is the level of self-developed delusion about how this game and people works is appalling.

Good luck in your crusade, I hope your ideas never see the light of a whiteboard in CCP's offices.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
King Aires
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#263 - 2015-11-30 14:38:06 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

It pleases me to no end to know that (in your short-sightedness) you think you are defending high sec and lowly solo/casuals, when in reality you are actually defending a status quo that benefits null sec and it's already space-rich overlords (where a lot of the min/maxxed wealth ends up).


I will give you an answer to this with personal experience.

You can see what alliance I am in, you can see where we live.

Most of us with alts appear to run incursions or missions in high sec, most of us without alts or with specialized alts run Mordus missions for insane LP rewards, far greater than anything you can get in high sec.

But I really doubt my overlords are really benefiting from my alts running burner missions for soe and having our alliance live in NPC stations.

On a contrasting note, the CFC we are fighting tend to spend massive amounts of time ratting and running sites in their home systems. If their alts are also running missions in empire, so be it. But what I know for a fact is sov alliances tend to use their space. So I guess I have no idea what world you live in, but it must not be the same as mine.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#264 - 2015-11-30 14:42:44 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Anize Oramara wrote:

You know better than anyone that's not how it works.


That's exactly how it should work. Highsec, lowest reward for the highest safety and least effort put in, lowsec, mid risk and effort for mid reward, nullsec, highest risk and effort for big rewards, WH, high risk and biggest effort for the biggest reward.


But but, if it made sense like that, how can one have one's cake AND eat it too like you can right now in 'relative safety'?

The above question is where every balance discussion ends up eventually...



You two are way too intelligent to post crap like this.

Both of you know that if you remove Incursions from HS, not many will care. But those that are effected will turn to lvl 4 missions.

Remove lvl 4 missions and people will blitz the lvl 3's

At some point you need to realize that this entire endeavor is just to make HS so bad, so poor of space that people are willing to get rid of it all together, THAT is your ultimate goal.

You guys are just trying to get CCP to soften everyone up to the idea in baby steps.


Point out where I said I want incursions and level 4 missions removed. I'm talking about altering rewards not removing content.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#265 - 2015-11-30 14:49:12 UTC
King Aires wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

It pleases me to no end to know that (in your short-sightedness) you think you are defending high sec and lowly solo/casuals, when in reality you are actually defending a status quo that benefits null sec and it's already space-rich overlords (where a lot of the min/maxxed wealth ends up).


I will give you an answer to this with personal experience.

You can see what alliance I am in, you can see where we live.

Most of us with alts appear to run incursions or missions in high sec, most of us without alts or with specialized alts run Mordus missions for insane LP rewards, far greater than anything you can get in high sec.

But I really doubt my overlords are really benefiting from my alts running burner missions for soe and having our alliance live in NPC stations.

On a contrasting note, the CFC we are fighting tend to spend massive amounts of time ratting and running sites in their home systems. If their alts are also running missions in empire, so be it. But what I know for a fact is sov alliances tend to use their space. So I guess I have no idea what world you live in, but it must not be the same as mine.


Even with the changes to anoms we don't have enough to go around and the bulk of the people doing anoms are using afk setups so they earn isk while doing something else. Being able to afk anoms is their only selling point.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#266 - 2015-11-30 14:59:24 UTC
King Aires wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

It pleases me to no end to know that (in your short-sightedness) you think you are defending high sec and lowly solo/casuals, when in reality you are actually defending a status quo that benefits null sec and it's already space-rich overlords (where a lot of the min/maxxed wealth ends up).


I will give you an answer to this with personal experience.

You can see what alliance I am in, you can see where we live.

Most of us with alts appear to run incursions or missions in high sec, most of us without alts or with specialized alts run Mordus missions for insane LP rewards, far greater than anything you can get in high sec.

But I really doubt my overlords are really benefiting from my alts running burner missions for soe and having our alliance live in NPC stations.

On a contrasting note, the CFC we are fighting tend to spend massive amounts of time ratting and running sites in their home systems. If their alts are also running missions in empire, so be it. But what I know for a fact is sov alliances tend to use their space. So I guess I have no idea what world you live in, but it must not be the same as mine.


A few months ago I was running incursions with TVP (The Valhalla Project) when a guy on comms started laughing and posted a killmail of a Sabre in fleet chat. He was a member of Get Off my Lawn (a CfC alliance), he was running 3 afk Ishtars while running incursions, not paying attention to the ishtars at all. Apparently a Sabre had warped in on one of his Ishtars, and the ishtar killed it without him even knowing it.

This is why the afk-ability of null anoms needs to die a firey death along with an incursion nerf , they spews isk into the economy for nothing (the mission blitzing loophoels are a seperate but related issue). This is why there needs to be an across the board review of PVE rewards and activities. Of course, the high sec partisans here thinks that needs to happen with an eye towards actually maintaining the imbalances they they benefit from (or that they think they do).
King Aires
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#267 - 2015-11-30 15:13:41 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
King Aires wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

It pleases me to no end to know that (in your short-sightedness) you think you are defending high sec and lowly solo/casuals, when in reality you are actually defending a status quo that benefits null sec and it's already space-rich overlords (where a lot of the min/maxxed wealth ends up).


I will give you an answer to this with personal experience.

You can see what alliance I am in, you can see where we live.

Most of us with alts appear to run incursions or missions in high sec, most of us without alts or with specialized alts run Mordus missions for insane LP rewards, far greater than anything you can get in high sec.

But I really doubt my overlords are really benefiting from my alts running burner missions for soe and having our alliance live in NPC stations.

On a contrasting note, the CFC we are fighting tend to spend massive amounts of time ratting and running sites in their home systems. If their alts are also running missions in empire, so be it. But what I know for a fact is sov alliances tend to use their space. So I guess I have no idea what world you live in, but it must not be the same as mine.


A few months ago I was running incursions with TVP (The Valhalla Project) when a guy on comms started laughing and posted a killmail of a Sabre in fleet chat. He was a member of Get Off my Lawn (a CfC alliance), he was running 3 afk Ishtars while running incursions, not paying attention to the ishtars at all. Apparently a Sabre had warped in on one of his Ishtars, and the ishtar killed it without him even knowing it.

This is why the afk-ability of null anoms needs to die a firey death along with an incursion nerf , they spews isk into the economy for nothing (the mission blitzing loophoels are a seperate but related issue). This is why there needs to be an across the board review of PVE rewards and activities. Of course, the high sec partisans here thinks that needs to happen with an eye towards actually maintaining the imbalances they they benefit from (or that they think they do).



I don't see anyone here advocating for a buff to Incursions, or saying they are perfect. Even McNut there thinks the LP should be removed.

Alt-Creep is what you just described though. 3 AFK ishtars was the problem, not the incursion. See that guy had 75-100 Million in isk flowing in from AFK characters, while making 108-150 Million isk from an actively engaged account.

And you think the problem with that is the Incursions? I don't like incursions, they feel to "Exclusive" to me with fleets in my TZ being hard to get into at first and completely lacking quality near the end of my night. I would love it if they removed them.

However, I still have to laugh hard at the concept that you take more exception to the active account in a fleet of peers making isk than the 3 AFK accounts he couldn't even bother to check if his character was dying or not.
Estella Osoka
Cranky Bitches Who PMS
#268 - 2015-11-30 15:21:42 UTC
All of this would be moot if PLEX was removed from the game.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#269 - 2015-11-30 15:22:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
King Aires wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
King Aires wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

It pleases me to no end to know that (in your short-sightedness) you think you are defending high sec and lowly solo/casuals, when in reality you are actually defending a status quo that benefits null sec and it's already space-rich overlords (where a lot of the min/maxxed wealth ends up).


I will give you an answer to this with personal experience.

You can see what alliance I am in, you can see where we live.

Most of us with alts appear to run incursions or missions in high sec, most of us without alts or with specialized alts run Mordus missions for insane LP rewards, far greater than anything you can get in high sec.

But I really doubt my overlords are really benefiting from my alts running burner missions for soe and having our alliance live in NPC stations.

On a contrasting note, the CFC we are fighting tend to spend massive amounts of time ratting and running sites in their home systems. If their alts are also running missions in empire, so be it. But what I know for a fact is sov alliances tend to use their space. So I guess I have no idea what world you live in, but it must not be the same as mine.


A few months ago I was running incursions with TVP (The Valhalla Project) when a guy on comms started laughing and posted a killmail of a Sabre in fleet chat. He was a member of Get Off my Lawn (a CfC alliance), he was running 3 afk Ishtars while running incursions, not paying attention to the ishtars at all. Apparently a Sabre had warped in on one of his Ishtars, and the ishtar killed it without him even knowing it.

This is why the afk-ability of null anoms needs to die a firey death along with an incursion nerf , they spews isk into the economy for nothing (the mission blitzing loophoels are a seperate but related issue). This is why there needs to be an across the board review of PVE rewards and activities. Of course, the high sec partisans here thinks that needs to happen with an eye towards actually maintaining the imbalances they they benefit from (or that they think they do).



I don't see anyone here advocating for a buff to Incursions, or saying they are perfect. Even McNut there thinks the LP should be removed.

Alt-Creep is what you just described though. 3 AFK ishtars was the problem, not the incursion. See that guy had 75-100 Million in isk flowing in from AFK characters, while making 108-150 Million isk from an actively engaged account.

And you think the problem with that is the Incursions? I don't like incursions, they feel to "Exclusive" to me with fleets in my TZ being hard to get into at first and completely lacking quality near the end of my night. I would love it if they removed them.

However, I still have to laugh hard at the concept that you take more exception to the active account in a fleet of peers making isk than the 3 AFK accounts he couldn't even bother to check if his character was dying or not.


The afk in null problem has nothing to do with the incursion problem or alts. And i don't think incursions need to be removed (i've said less isk OR mroe risk, Drifter incursions and/or other changes might do the trick already though).

I don't take exception to an active account making isk. I take exception to ANY activty (incursions, hyper-blitzing burners, FW missions etc) being so good that I and people like me are enticed to do it because that 150 mil an hour activly flying one ship in high sec is way more than we would be making flying one ship actively where we actually live where at least people casn shoot us without NPCs falling out of the sky..

This creates a whole bunch of bad situations in the game beyond the affects of our individual wallets. PVE is supposed to enable interactions and content, not stifle them, but the current PVE meta in EVE does just that.

You are conflating issues here.
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#270 - 2015-11-30 15:30:55 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
King Aires wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
King Aires wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

It pleases me to no end to know that (in your short-sightedness) you think you are defending high sec and lowly solo/casuals, when in reality you are actually defending a status quo that benefits null sec and it's already space-rich overlords (where a lot of the min/maxxed wealth ends up).


I will give you an answer to this with personal experience.

You can see what alliance I am in, you can see where we live.

Most of us with alts appear to run incursions or missions in high sec, most of us without alts or with specialized alts run Mordus missions for insane LP rewards, far greater than anything you can get in high sec.

But I really doubt my overlords are really benefiting from my alts running burner missions for soe and having our alliance live in NPC stations.

On a contrasting note, the CFC we are fighting tend to spend massive amounts of time ratting and running sites in their home systems. If their alts are also running missions in empire, so be it. But what I know for a fact is sov alliances tend to use their space. So I guess I have no idea what world you live in, but it must not be the same as mine.


A few months ago I was running incursions with TVP (The Valhalla Project) when a guy on comms started laughing and posted a killmail of a Sabre in fleet chat. He was a member of Get Off my Lawn (a CfC alliance), he was running 3 afk Ishtars while running incursions, not paying attention to the ishtars at all. Apparently a Sabre had warped in on one of his Ishtars, and the ishtar killed it without him even knowing it.

This is why the afk-ability of null anoms needs to die a firey death along with an incursion nerf , they spews isk into the economy for nothing (the mission blitzing loophoels are a seperate but related issue). This is why there needs to be an across the board review of PVE rewards and activities. Of course, the high sec partisans here thinks that needs to happen with an eye towards actually maintaining the imbalances they they benefit from (or that they think they do).



I don't see anyone here advocating for a buff to Incursions, or saying they are perfect. Even McNut there thinks the LP should be removed.

Alt-Creep is what you just described though. 3 AFK ishtars was the problem, not the incursion. See that guy had 75-100 Million in isk flowing in from AFK characters, while making 108-150 Million isk from an actively engaged account.

And you think the problem with that is the Incursions? I don't like incursions, they feel to "Exclusive" to me with fleets in my TZ being hard to get into at first and completely lacking quality near the end of my night. I would love it if they removed them.

However, I still have to laugh hard at the concept that you take more exception to the active account in a fleet of peers making isk than the 3 AFK accounts he couldn't even bother to check if his character was dying or not.


The afk in null problem has nothing to do with the incursion problem or alts. And i don't think incursions need to be removed (i've said less isk OR mroe risk, Drifter incursions and/or other changes might do the trick already though).

I don't take exception to an active account making isk. I take exception to ANY activty (incursions, hyper-blitzing burners, FW missions etc) being so good that I and people like me are enticed to do it because that 150 mil an hour activly flying one ship in high sec is way more than we would be making flying one ship actively where we actually live where at least people casn shoot us without NPCs falling out of the sky..

This creates a whole bunch of bad situations in the game beyond the affects of our individual wallets. PVE is supposed to enable interactions and content, not stifle them, but the current PVE meta in EVE does just that.

You are conflating issues here.


Funny how you are trying to make yourself look more reasonable now... when all you called for in the last year was to burn high sec to the ground.

Also, actively running anoms CAN make more than incursions. and Incursions CAN end up making less than even level 3's. It is all about the variables and situation.

One thing is for certain... Anoms, Belt ratting, DED and Missions can all be picked up, solo and at your own discretion with your available game time. Incursions are a group activity that put you at the mercy of others competence and availability in fleet.

It is possible if you only have 2 hours a day that you could be waiting 40 minutes for an incursion fleet, thus making less than you could if you just ran Sanctums for 2 hours in null (Especially since you can AFK them in three different characters).

You are ignoring a critical piece of the puzzle here Jenn. And you are looking like American Conservatives who pander to the far-right to get their party support and then try and look normal for the election (I only get CNN from Merika')

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#271 - 2015-11-30 15:45:40 UTC
Market McSelling Alt wrote:

Funny how you are trying to make yourself look more reasonable now... when all you called for in the last year was to burn high sec to the ground.


You are lying.. Link where I said any such thing. This is the internet, if what you say i said exists, you will be able to find it and post it.


Quote:

Also, actively running anoms CAN make more than incursions. and Incursions CAN end up making less than even level 3's. It is all about the variables and situation.


Can, sure. Do they? 8 trillion isk says no.

Quote:

One thing is for certain... Anoms, Belt ratting, DED and Missions can all be picked up, solo and at your own discretion with your available game time. Incursions are a group activity that put you at the mercy of others competence and availability in fleet.


Which has exactly what to do with anything? All the things you mention can be disrupted without needing an 80 man mom-popping fleet yet you fail to mention that part.

Quote:

It is possible if you only have 2 hours a day that you could be waiting 40 minutes for an incursion fleet, thus making less than you could if you just ran Sanctums for 2 hours in null (Especially since you can AFK them in three different characters).


And what does that have to do with anything?

Quote:

You are ignoring a critical piece of the puzzle here Jenn. And you are looking like American Conservatives who pander to the far-right to get their party support and then try and look normal for the election (I only get CNN from Merika')


There it is, the underlying prejudice that colors your thinking.
Estella Osoka
Cranky Bitches Who PMS
#272 - 2015-11-30 16:10:17 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
King Aires wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

It pleases me to no end to know that (in your short-sightedness) you think you are defending high sec and lowly solo/casuals, when in reality you are actually defending a status quo that benefits null sec and it's already space-rich overlords (where a lot of the min/maxxed wealth ends up).


I will give you an answer to this with personal experience.

You can see what alliance I am in, you can see where we live.

Most of us with alts appear to run incursions or missions in high sec, most of us without alts or with specialized alts run Mordus missions for insane LP rewards, far greater than anything you can get in high sec.

But I really doubt my overlords are really benefiting from my alts running burner missions for soe and having our alliance live in NPC stations.

On a contrasting note, the CFC we are fighting tend to spend massive amounts of time ratting and running sites in their home systems. If their alts are also running missions in empire, so be it. But what I know for a fact is sov alliances tend to use their space. So I guess I have no idea what world you live in, but it must not be the same as mine.


Even with the changes to anoms we don't have enough to go around and the bulk of the people doing anoms are using afk setups so they earn isk while doing something else. Being able to afk anoms is their only selling point.


Then un-blue some people.
Anize Oramara
WarpTooZero
#273 - 2015-11-30 16:36:20 UTC
Anize Oramara wrote:
Does anyone know why, if Mission LP is such a huge problem, SOE modules and ships are rising in price? This is exactly the opposite problem we would be seeing if missions was paying out too much. If you reduce the LP or speed LP can be gained, the market will react to reduced supply and you'd end up with the same wealth generated, just more expensive modules and incursion runners making more isk.

Ooh dodged this one for 2 pages now, lets see if we can make a 3rd!

A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.2.3
Estella Osoka
Cranky Bitches Who PMS
#274 - 2015-11-30 16:49:45 UTC
Anize Oramara wrote:
Anize Oramara wrote:
Does anyone know why, if Mission LP is such a huge problem, SOE modules and ships are rising in price? This is exactly the opposite problem we would be seeing if missions was paying out too much. If you reduce the LP or speed LP can be gained, the market will react to reduced supply and you'd end up with the same wealth generated, just more expensive modules and incursion runners making more isk.

Ooh dodged this one for 2 pages now, lets see if we can make a 3rd!


Umm, market economy? If people are willing to buy PLEX at 1.2bil, then why not pay more for other items?
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#275 - 2015-11-30 16:50:57 UTC
Anize Oramara wrote:
Anize Oramara wrote:
Does anyone know why, if Mission LP is such a huge problem, SOE modules and ships are rising in price? This is exactly the opposite problem we would be seeing if missions was paying out too much. If you reduce the LP or speed LP can be gained, the market will react to reduced supply and you'd end up with the same wealth generated, just more expensive modules and incursion runners making more isk.

Ooh dodged this one for 2 pages now, lets see if we can make a 3rd!


It's ignored because it's just more of the same: you keep talking about meta-issues that aren't under discussion.

You seem to think that the problem is people running SOE missions are making to much wealth. This isn't the case. The problem (in the case of missions) is that because you can blitz them like you do, this creates a 'backwards incentive' for high end pve players to just do that rather than other things that do not have the same "relative safety" (your words).

No one is saying any of this (even incursions) is ruining the economy. We're talking about personal incentives but you keep trying to change the subject (which is why, other than this reply explaining the problem for you, no one is replying to what you posted).
Anize Oramara
WarpTooZero
#276 - 2015-11-30 17:18:44 UTC
Like I said way back at the start of this thread, null sucks and you're blaming it on HS instead of taking your leaderships to task on why null sucks.

Besides of all my null / bitter vet friends I've shown and tried to convince to try out the mission/blitz thing, not a single one of them are doing it. They would rather go into manufacturing, anoms, ratting or heck even mining of all things. You are fabricating a problem that does not exist.

Look, if the SOE market is rising AND people are generally getting more LP per time invested, that means less people are running missions. This is the exact opposite of what you're saying. How do you explain less people running missions with a 'backwards incentive' for high end pve players to just run missions?

See this is what eve is (in)famous for and what the entire draw is of this game in the first place; the lies, agendas, schemes and meta games of null. You literally can't trust a single word coming from null to be the truth or lies or heck, a little bit of both even.

Yes yes, 'null prejudice', etc. get it out of your system.

A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.2.3
Anize Oramara
WarpTooZero
#277 - 2015-11-30 17:21:04 UTC
Estella Osoka wrote:
Anize Oramara wrote:
Anize Oramara wrote:
Does anyone know why, if Mission LP is such a huge problem, SOE modules and ships are rising in price? This is exactly the opposite problem we would be seeing if missions was paying out too much. If you reduce the LP or speed LP can be gained, the market will react to reduced supply and you'd end up with the same wealth generated, just more expensive modules and incursion runners making more isk.

Ooh dodged this one for 2 pages now, lets see if we can make a 3rd!


Umm, market economy? If people are willing to buy PLEX at 1.2bil, then why not pay more for other items?

The problem is the proposed changes don't actually change anything. MIssion runners keep making the same, incursion runners make a little bit more in fact and nullsec ratting isk is devalued.

Good job, you just nerfed null.

A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.2.3
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#278 - 2015-11-30 17:54:26 UTC
Anize Oramara wrote:
Like I said way back at the start of this thread, null sucks and you're blaming it on HS instead of taking your leaderships to task on why null sucks.


Null doesn't suck. In some ways it's too good for making (afk) isk. What it's not good for is isk making for people who make an effort (the difference between my actively piloted mach and an afk ishtars is like 30 mil per hour). What, am I supposed to demand that my "leadership" flip a switch and change the way anomalies work?

Even if they could I wouldn't, because 90 mil an hour from anomalies is plenty...until you realize that you could just log in a high sec alt and make the isk you want for whatever your want it for in less time.. That means that 2 extremes of high sec (high level mission blitzing, and incursions) are indeed the 'problem'. Most people in high sec don't do that, so they aren't the problem.

You are. And you are defending a status quo you benefit from while saying (without prompting) that most people in high sec don't do what you do. That's why no one is suggesting a nerf of most people in high sec. Only you fat cats who (by exploiting weaknesses in CCPs much neglected pve designs) are doing something you shouldn't be able to do ,pulling down low/null/WH level income from the relative safety (your words) of high sec.

It's just high sec lvl 5s all over again. They didn't want to give up their advantages either btw, you will still find some saying 'bring lvl 5s back to high sec'.



Quote:

Besides of all my null / bitter vet friends I've shown and tried to convince to try out the mission/blitz thing, not a single one of them are doing it. They would rather go into manufacturing, anoms, ratting or heck even mining of all things. You are fabricating a problem that does not exist.


So you talked to a few of the thousands of players doing PVE in this game and decided based on that that a problem you could measure for youself (but won't) doesn't exist. Yep, nothing dishonest about that at all.

Quote:

Look, if the SOE market is rising AND people are generally getting more LP per time invested, that means less people are running missions. This is the exact opposite of what you're saying. How do you explain less people running missions with a 'backwards incentive' for high end pve players to just run missions?


It's not the opposite of what I'm saying. That just means more regular mission runners are not runnign missions. Maybe they got tired of blitzers and CONCORD LP slinging Incursions runners devaluing their work...

Quote:

See this is what eve is (in)famous for and what the entire draw is of this game in the first place; the lies, agendas, schemes and meta games of null. You literally can't trust a single word coming from null to be the truth or lies or heck, a little bit of both even.

Yes yes, 'null prejudice', etc. get it out of your system.


And there it is again, the prejudice informing the opinion.

A question: how would YOU know? You never advanced past the novice stage in null sec (LOL MYRMIDON). Why not gain some experience, then post?
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#279 - 2015-11-30 19:31:30 UTC
Any chance we can keep the discussion civil here gang?

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
The Bigpuns
United Standings Improvement Agency
#280 - 2015-11-30 19:53:48 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Any chance we can keep the discussion civil here gang?



Absolutely not, smelly pants! :)

There have been 1 or two reasonable balancing suggestions in this thread (reduce max rewards for burners, change reward style for anoms) but a lot of this bile is just stated without acknowledging the bad impact it would have on the rest of the game (eg. removing blitz as an option).

It's probably time this thread got locked. It won't be long till someone mentions the N's or Mr H and we all have to go home.