These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

PSA Null is safer than High Sec

Author
DioKahn
RedStar Inc
#41 - 2017-02-08 06:46:40 UTC
47 6f 64 wrote:
It's true.


Are we allowed to flame anyone that posts an unpopular view? You are correct , nullsec is safer than highsec if you know what you are doing. Most don't. Mods have a set of rules which can be tailored to fit any situation so watch yourself when you reply to all the approved flames.
Salvos Rhoska
#42 - 2017-02-08 08:50:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Any change to any sector mechanics will always benefit larger/experienced groups, more than smaller ones.
Thats just how it is, but its not a reason not to implement changes.

The argument that Local should not be removed from Player Sov, as made by members of larger entities here, that Local defends smaller entities, and smaller entities are too stupid to understand that, is just a boiled down self-interest of larger groups.

"Hey, little guys, we wouldnt mind losing Local, but we are trying to defend you ignorant little guys from your own stupidity."
Its disingenuous.
DioKahn
RedStar Inc
#43 - 2017-02-08 09:02:46 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Any change to any sector mechanics will always benefit larger/experienced groups, more than smaller ones.
Thats just how it is, but its not a reason not to implement changes.

The argument that Local should not be removed from Player Sov, as made by members of larger entities here, that Local defends smaller entities, and smaller entities are too stupid to understand that, is just a boiled down self-interest of larger groups.

"Hey, little guys, we wouldnt mind losing Local, but we are trying to defend you ignorant little guys from your own stupidity."
Its disingenuous.

Wtf did you just say? Is this roleplay? My roleplay name is Daddy.
Salvos Rhoska
#44 - 2017-02-08 09:16:56 UTC
DioKahn wrote:
Wtf did you just say? Is this roleplay? My roleplay name is Daddy.


No, this is not your bedroom.
Keep your perversions to yourself.
Qwerty Ernaga
State War Academy
Caldari State
#45 - 2017-02-08 09:40:44 UTC
Heh...

High sec IS safe. It´s all matter of having enough tank vs the cost of your ship and then you can afk as much as you like. Haven´t lost any ship for half year and maybe 1 in a year. Most of the time not fully paying attention, playing other games and having EVE on background.

Null sec? You can smash D-SCAN whole day every 20 secs (yay, fun?), but I was still losing ships weekly. Mostly to AWOX, but sometimes you have to go for toilet or you have a call you have to pick up etc.
DioKahn
RedStar Inc
#46 - 2017-02-08 09:44:08 UTC  |  Edited by: DioKahn
Qwerty Ernaga wrote:
Heh...

High sec IS safe. It´s all matter of having enough tank vs the cost of your ship and then you can afk as much as you like. Haven´t lost any ship for half year and maybe 1 in a year. Most of the time not fully paying attention, playing other games and having EVE on background.

Null sec? You can smash D-SCAN whole day every 20 secs (yay, fun?), but I was still losing ships weekly. Mostly to AWOX, but sometimes you have to go for toilet or you have a call you have to pick up etc.

If high sec is so safe... why can't I fly jita? Maybe you can because you hide in nulsec or behind cap fleets and blobs? You guys call AWOX pvp? That's kinda like looking at your sister.... yeah she's there but how can you brag?
Qwerty Ernaga
State War Academy
Caldari State
#47 - 2017-02-08 09:48:25 UTC
DioKahn wrote:
Qwerty Ernaga wrote:
Heh...

High sec IS safe. It´s all matter of having enough tank vs the cost of your ship and then you can afk as much as you like. Haven´t lost any ship for half year and maybe 1 in a year. Most of the time not fully paying attention, playing other games and having EVE on background.

Null sec? You can smash D-SCAN whole day every 20 secs (yay, fun?), but I was still losing ships weekly. Mostly to AWOX, but sometimes you have to go for toilet or you have a call you have to pick up etc.

If high sec is so safe... why can't I fly jita? Maybe you can because you hide in nulsec or behind cap fleets and blobs? You guys call AWOX pvp? That's kinda like looking at your sister.... yeah she's there but how can you brag?


I do not understand one sentence from what you wrote. And I guess neither you have understood what I have written before.
DioKahn
RedStar Inc
#48 - 2017-02-08 09:56:10 UTC
Qwerty Ernaga wrote:
DioKahn wrote:
Qwerty Ernaga wrote:
Heh...

High sec IS safe. It´s all matter of having enough tank vs the cost of your ship and then you can afk as much as you like. Haven´t lost any ship for half year and maybe 1 in a year. Most of the time not fully paying attention, playing other games and having EVE on background.

Null sec? You can smash D-SCAN whole day every 20 secs (yay, fun?), but I was still losing ships weekly. Mostly to AWOX, but sometimes you have to go for toilet or you have a call you have to pick up etc.

If high sec is so safe... why can't I fly jita? Maybe you can because you hide in nulsec or behind cap fleets and blobs? You guys call AWOX pvp? That's kinda like looking at your sister.... yeah she's there but how can you brag?


I do not understand one sentence from what you wrote. And I guess neither you have understood what I have written before.

Is the fact the you are lost really something that you felt the need to post? Did you see the other thread with the guy bitching about us saying things that don't matter? Lol. I've yet to see anything useful come from this but a good laugh and that's all the really matters.
Salvos Rhoska
#49 - 2017-02-08 10:00:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
DioKahn wrote:
I've yet to see anything useful come from this but a good laugh and that's all the really matters.


Go back to calling yourself "Daddy" and staring at your sister.
Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners
Already Replaced.
#50 - 2017-02-08 13:13:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Any change to any sector mechanics will always benefit larger/experienced groups, more than smaller ones.
Thats just how it is, but its not a reason not to implement changes.

The argument that Local should not be removed from Player Sov, as made by members of larger entities here, that Local defends smaller entities, and smaller entities are too stupid to understand that, is just a boiled down self-interest of larger groups.

"Hey, little guys, we wouldnt mind losing Local, but we are trying to defend you ignorant little guys from your own stupidity."
Its disingenuous.


I do dearly hope CCP does what you want one day, so I can laugh my backside off when folks like you see what actually happens, the way Goons did with Dominion.

I mean it is the exact same thing. Goons warned people "we will use this system to ruin nullsec for you and make you 'bend the knee'". Idiot anti goon 'small group' people said "you're just trying to use reverse psychology on CCP, you don't want this to happen because you know it will end your power in space!!!!".

Well, then CCP implemented the Dominion sov system, and Goons/CFC used it to become the new and improved Northern Coalition that was so strong it lasted longer than the original Northern Coalition of only ended because of internal rot and some pissed off space rich guys. It also created OTEC and expanded the practice of renting in insane ways.


So please CCP. Do as these numbskulls wish, let them see what large groups (that have Large IT departments and can make EULA compliant intel Apps and use listening post alts) get a local free sov null sec. Like Dominion, it's the only way to prove people like this wrong, so lets do it.
Tappits
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#51 - 2017-02-08 13:29:14 UTC
It's true,
I hate going to highsec because if someone comes and attacks me there is little I or my friends can do to punish them back. Were as in null/(and low I guess a bit) If you come at me or my stuff there are things you can do back to the people attacking, were as Empire it's just a 1-15sec gank
Salvos Rhoska
#52 - 2017-02-08 13:33:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Jenn aSide wrote:
So please CCP. Do as these numbskulls wish, let them see what large groups (that have Large IT departments and can make EULA compliant intel Apps and use listening post alts) get a local free sov null sec. Like Dominion, it's the only way to prove people like this wrong, so lets do it.


Again, the sentiment that:

"We are larger, more powerful and experienced. We will use any and all changes to our benefit more than smaller, less powerful entities. So, sorry, but you cant change anytning. We are just looking out for the interests of the little idiots who dont know how things work and that we, as larger powers, will crush them if changes are made."

Its solipsistic, disingenuous and projection of ones own interests.

Its a strategy for preventing any change to the status quo, unless it is rubber-stamped by larger entities in their own interest:
A) As not detrimental to themselves. (or rather IS advantageous to themselves)
B) Doesnt increase their opportunity to crush smaller entities, under the false auspice of protecting those little idiots from themselves.

Result:
-Larger entities hold a Damoclean Sword over smaller entities and CCP.
-They threaten to crush smaller entities if changes are made, whilst duplicitously claiming its for the protection of the idiot little guys.



The onus, was to remove Local from Player Sov.

"let them see what large groups (that have Large IT departments and can make EULA compliant intel Apps and use listening post alts) get a local free sov null sec"

Perhaps those then also should be curtailed and restricted.
How would you like that?

You claim and identify this is an impediment. Then lets remove it.
Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners
Already Replaced.
#53 - 2017-02-08 13:43:58 UTC
Tappits wrote:
It's true,
I hate going to highsec because if someone comes and attacks me there is little I or my friends can do to punish them back. Were as in null/(and low I guess a bit) If you come at me or my stuff there are things you can do back to the people attacking, were as Empire it's just a 1-15sec gank



It's funny to see a PL guy say that, as a few months ago it was a PL dude who dropped a NYX on my freaking VNI, killed it and was warping off not ever 12 seconds later...

I actually just made another post about this very topic. People get this false sense that null is safer than high not because it is (it's provably and measurably less safe in null, the place were CONCORD doesn't spawn), but because in null they don't feel powerless.

I once read a study that shows the same thing IRL. People "feel" safer driving (or even just riding in) a car than riding in an airplane, unless they are flying the plane themselves, at which point their relative self reported feelings of safety match that of the car driver.

Showing a person all the statistics that prove that flying in planes is safer than driving (even accounting for the differences in frequency, people drive way mroe than fly) doesn't do anything to change how they actually feel. Just like all the years of providing CCP sourced facts about how all of the (non-high sec) rest of EVE is more dangerous than high sec hasn't been able to kill the outrageous lie about relative safety.

That's why people always say "well in null at least I can see it coming"...
Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners
Already Replaced.
#54 - 2017-02-08 13:51:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


The onus, was to remove Local from Player Sov.

"let them see what large groups (that have Large IT departments and can make EULA compliant intel Apps and use listening post alts) get a local free sov null sec"

Perhaps those then also should be curtailed and restricted.
How would you like that?

You claim and identify this is an impediment. Then lets remove it.


Sure, go ahead. And large groups will find yet another way. EVERY single time people have advocated stuff for small groups, they got "Malcanis Law'd" to death, because they don't understand the supreme advantages of strength, numbers and wealth.

And yea that happens IRL too. People advcate some law that is supposed to 'help the little guy'. Law passes, and then not only does it not help the little guy, but the rich guys found yet another way to use that law and it's consequences to make even more money. Too bad the forum rules say I can't talk RL politics here, I've seen hundreds of pertinent examples. Maybe that will change some with the new forum, but probably not.

I know your type, the "idea person", they type who thinks that outcomes can be engineered. They really can't , human nature (in this case, the human ability to group together for advantage and to use those advantages to keep other groups 'down') will beat any wizkid style game design ideas. It's why CCPs EVERY attempt to "open up null to small groups" has either failed or under performed.

I don't expect you to actually understand this idea though, my experience with 'bright idea' people is that they are optimistic to a fault.
Salvos Rhoska
#55 - 2017-02-08 14:12:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Jenn aSide wrote:
I don't expect you to actually understand this idea though, my experience with 'bright idea' people is that they are optimistic to a fault.


Jenn, you are presenting an impossible impasse.

1) We can agree, that a larger, more experienced and organized entity will always benefit more from ANY change, than a smaller, less experienced and less organized entity, right?

2) We can agree, this is not because of the change itself, but because of the assets/potential of a larger, more experienced and organized entity to exploit the difference, as compared to smaller, less experienced and less organized entities, right?

3) We can agree, that larger entities are vetoing change proposals,with the statement "If you implement this, we will use it to destroy smaller entities", right?

4) Can we agree this constitutes a Sword of Damocles situation, where larger entities restrict change in the interest of anyone except themselves, under the premise that if it does not fit their agenda, they will drop the sword, and if it benefits smaller entities, they will drop the sword?

PS: Please drop the persona characterizations. This is about the topic at hand. Not about who or what "type" either of us is. Ive tried to be respectful and deal with you on issues, not persona. Ive given you due credit as a Combat PvE expert in another thread and your contributions, and a great deal of patience to ignore your frequent other personal characterizations of me. You dont know me. If you want to discuss in voice about who and what "type" we are, I am available. But it is not relevant to this topic.
Scialt
Universal Sanitation Corporation
#56 - 2017-02-08 15:01:51 UTC
I have no idea if not having local is safer or not for smaller corps/solo players.

But I prefer to do what I do in sparsely populated Null in cloakable ships as opposed to wormholes because I can TELL when I'm alone. Removing local won't make me feel safer... rather I'll have the same paranoia I have in wormhole space.

I'm trespassing. I get that. But you have to remember that local works both ways... they know I'm trespassing... and I know when they're not home.

Having just a few seconds on seeing combat probes or an enemy ship in d-scan to react doesn't feel like a benefit to me. I guess it does make null sec less safe... but it feels like it makes it less safe for smaller groups and solo players who don't have the infrastructure in an area as opposed to large, well organized alliances.
Salvos Rhoska
#57 - 2017-02-08 15:28:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Scialt wrote:
I have no idea if not having local is safer or not for smaller corps/solo players.

But I prefer to do what I do in sparsely populated Null in cloakable ships as opposed to wormholes because I can TELL when I'm alone. Removing local won't make me feel safer... rather I'll have the same paranoia I have in wormhole space.

I'm trespassing. I get that. But you have to remember that local works both ways... they know I'm trespassing... and I know when they're not home.

Having just a few seconds on seeing combat probes or an enemy ship in d-scan to react doesn't feel like a benefit to me. I guess it does make null sec less safe... but it feels like it makes it less safe for smaller groups and solo players who don't have the infrastructure in an area as opposed to large, well organized alliances.


Excellent post.

Local ID makes it less safe for you in enemy space.
The locals know who belongs, and who does not.
Local ID also makes the locals safer, cos they hide whilst a non-blue is in system.

Locals benefit from Local ID far more than you, in both intercepting you, and in hiding from you.

Without Local ID, both you and the locals, have to constantly check their D-scan, and combat probe, equally.
They are as at risk, as you are, regardless of how much force you have brought with you, or they are currently fielding.



In a cloaked ship, as in your activities, you are safe anyways. They can't find you.
The locals are far more afraid of you, than you are of them, when they see you popup on Local ID.

Without Local ID, neither of you would be aware of each other, unless actively scanning/probing, equally.
This puts the advantage on the side of the interloper, even in player owned space, especially in regards to cloaked ships.
(Albeit the locals may also be flying cloaked ships there too for defense.)

TLDR:
With Local ID, locals are safer than you.
Without Local ID, neither of you are safe. Locals however have the benefit of home turf/assets.
Scialt
Universal Sanitation Corporation
#58 - 2017-02-08 16:34:42 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Scialt wrote:
I have no idea if not having local is safer or not for smaller corps/solo players.

But I prefer to do what I do in sparsely populated Null in cloakable ships as opposed to wormholes because I can TELL when I'm alone. Removing local won't make me feel safer... rather I'll have the same paranoia I have in wormhole space.

I'm trespassing. I get that. But you have to remember that local works both ways... they know I'm trespassing... and I know when they're not home.

Having just a few seconds on seeing combat probes or an enemy ship in d-scan to react doesn't feel like a benefit to me. I guess it does make null sec less safe... but it feels like it makes it less safe for smaller groups and solo players who don't have the infrastructure in an area as opposed to large, well organized alliances.


Excellent post.

Local ID makes it less safe for you in enemy space.
The locals know who belongs, and who does not.
Local ID also makes the locals safer, cos they hide whilst a non-blue is in system.

Locals benefit from Local ID far more than you, in both intercepting you, and in hiding from you.

Without Local ID, both you and the locals, have to constantly check their D-scan, and combat probe, equally.
They are as at risk, as you are, regardless of how much force you have brought with you, or they are currently fielding.



In a cloaked ship, as in your activities, you are safe anyways. They can't find you.
The locals are far more afraid of you, than you are of them, when they see you popup on Local ID.

Without Local ID, neither of you would be aware of each other, unless actively scanning/probing, equally.
This puts the advantage on the side of the interloper, even in player owned space, especially in regards to cloaked ships.
(Albeit the locals may also be flying cloaked ships there too for defense.)

TLDR:
With Local ID, locals are safer than you.
Without Local ID, neither of you are safe. Locals however have the benefit of home turf/assets.


The difference is that there are many of them and one of me... and that makes a big difference.

If you have 20 players in system on an intel channel and each is hitting d-scan covering a different area (wherever they happen to be operating) once a minute... I'm not going to stay hidden for long if I start to run a site. I'd expect a stratios or tengu to pop me within minutes of uncloaking if I'm in a populated system that I didn't realize was populated.

Yes... I'm safe while cloaked... but to run a combat/relic/data site I have to uncloak. And that's when my focus is most divided (hacking/shooting rats as well as monitoring d-scan).

The reason I'm not safer without local is that with local I can safely run sites while local is empty... then warp out to a safe spot and cloak up when it's not. I have to really screw up to get popped. You're working under the impression that I'm running sites while the locals are home. I'm not. I wait until they leave to rob their house.

That intel can be gained from D-scan (sort of)... but it's MUCH easier for a group with more players to do that than for a solo player. Locals will be less likely to know I'm there than they are with Local... but I'll be MUCH less likely to know who's there. And that seems worse for me as the interloper.
Salvos Rhoska
#59 - 2017-02-08 16:52:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Scialt wrote:
The difference is that there are many of them and one of me... and that makes a big difference.

If you have 20 players in system on an intel channel and each is hitting d-scan covering a different area (wherever they happen to be operating) once a minute... I'm not going to stay hidden for long if I start to run a site. I'd expect a stratios or tengu to pop me within minutes of uncloaking if I'm in a populated system that I didn't realize was populated.

Yes... I'm safe while cloaked... but to run a combat/relic/data site I have to uncloak. And that's when my focus is most divided (hacking/shooting rats as well as monitoring d-scan).

The reason I'm not safer without local is that with local I can safely run sites while local is empty... then warp out to a safe spot and cloak up when it's not. I have to really screw up to get popped. You're working under the impression that I'm running sites while the locals are home. I'm not. I wait until they leave to rob their house.

That intel can be gained from D-scan (sort of)... but it's MUCH easier for a group with more players to do that than for a solo player. Locals will be less likely to know I'm there than they are with Local... but I'll be MUCH less likely to know who's there. And that seems worse for me as the interloper.


1) You are operating solo. You will always be outnumbered.

2) Especially when cloaked, the locals dont know what you are. They will hide and suspend all their activities whilst you are there.They are far more afraid of you, than you are of them.

3) Without Local ID, they wont know you are there, without d-scanning/probing. If cloaked, they still wont know. Yes, you will still have risk when running a site, but so do they if they run a site. If they are combat probing in a populated system, they dont know which one is you, and which is a local.

4) Im my proposal, NPC Sov will retain Local ID.
Scialt
Universal Sanitation Corporation
#60 - 2017-02-08 17:34:40 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Scialt wrote:
The difference is that there are many of them and one of me... and that makes a big difference.

If you have 20 players in system on an intel channel and each is hitting d-scan covering a different area (wherever they happen to be operating) once a minute... I'm not going to stay hidden for long if I start to run a site. I'd expect a stratios or tengu to pop me within minutes of uncloaking if I'm in a populated system that I didn't realize was populated.

Yes... I'm safe while cloaked... but to run a combat/relic/data site I have to uncloak. And that's when my focus is most divided (hacking/shooting rats as well as monitoring d-scan).

The reason I'm not safer without local is that with local I can safely run sites while local is empty... then warp out to a safe spot and cloak up when it's not. I have to really screw up to get popped. You're working under the impression that I'm running sites while the locals are home. I'm not. I wait until they leave to rob their house.

That intel can be gained from D-scan (sort of)... but it's MUCH easier for a group with more players to do that than for a solo player. Locals will be less likely to know I'm there than they are with Local... but I'll be MUCH less likely to know who's there. And that seems worse for me as the interloper.


1) You are operating solo. You will always be outnumbered.

2) Especially when cloaked, the locals dont know what you are. They will hide and suspend all their activities whilst you are there.They are far more afraid of you, than you are of them.

3) Without Local ID, they wont know you are there, without d-scanning/probing. If cloaked, they still wont know. Yes, you will still have risk when running a site, but so do they if they run a site. If they are combat probing in a populated system, they dont know which one is you, and which is a local.

4) Im my proposal, NPC Sov will retain Local ID.


1. Of course. But I think removing local would make the fact I'm outnumbered more damaging to my operations. Don't get me wrong... I'd adapt... but it feels like in the end I'd be getting the short end compared to them... because they have numbers in their home system so some of which can be scouting for intruders while others do whatever they're doing.

2. That's good. I understand that if I was looking to gank someone instead of steal their stuff that would be a bad thing... but for me them running for their stations lets me pass on to the next system looking for a clear local easier. I love that behavior.

3. True... but the organized alliances will have people/alts d-scanning and probing periodically. Their intel channels would be updated with ship types and location as new locals entered so they know what ships are supposed to be there. Will it be more effective than local? Of course not... but it will be better than what I can manage solo and thus they'll lose much less due to losing local than I will.

4. I'm using wormholes as entrances into null... so where I end up is pretty random.

I could see organized small fleets (such as the wormhole raiders) doing well with no local. Particularly in the parts of null that aren't mostly single alliance (say like Providence). But overall by taking away "easy" intel like local, you make it so the groups that can get intel through more difficult methods have an advantage.

And that's the larger, well organized alliances in general.