Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 30 40 .. 40 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
1768
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 12:15:00 -
[541] - Quote
Kane Alvo wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:Kane Alvo wrote:*insanity* Say goodbye to any T2 in highsec then. As it needs moongoo. which means, pretty much, nullsec. Wait. You mean that no one area of space can have everything? Is it possible that they're in some way dependent on each other as part of a bigger picture? That interaction between the two is a necessity by design? Say it ain't so. It isn't so.
With your idea it would just mean wormhole dwellers would charge you 10 times as much We all thought CSM 6 was a war crime with it's massive Null Presence CSM7 topped it by selling out our Council to CCP, don't let it happen again. Vote or next time Incarna is your fault Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Shockwave Sovereign Industries
35
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 13:06:00 -
[542] - Quote
Kane Alvo wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:Kane Alvo wrote:*insanity* Say goodbye to any T2 in highsec then. As it needs moongoo. which means, pretty much, nullsec. Wait. You mean that no one area of space can have everything? Is it possible that they're in some way dependent on each other as part of a bigger picture? That interaction between the two is a necessity by design?Say it ain't so.
shuush you!! No one is supposed to think like that. ;) |
Goldnut Sachs
4
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 13:11:00 -
[543] - Quote
http://themittani.com/features/sov-problems-why-no-new-blood while not exactly newbies, it is also important for fledgling alliances to have enough incentive to carve out a foothold in nullsec. while most constellation may lack tech moons, the proposed improvements to industry may be the ticket, as an accessible source of income for line members who actually use the space actively as intended. |
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
1050
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 13:36:00 -
[544] - Quote
Even if you insane highsec bears don't think nullsec should have industry that is better than highsec, it's pretty unarguable that the current industry capabilities in nullsec are a joke and need a big boost. Even if it were brought up to say 75% of that of highsec, nullsec would be a much more vibrant place |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
3919
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 13:47:00 -
[545] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote:Even if you insane highsec bears don't think nullsec should have industry that is better than highsec, it's pretty unarguable that the current industry capabilities in nullsec are a joke and need a big boost. Even if it were brought up to say 75% of that of highsec, nullsec would be a much more vibrant place
There's no reason to keep null sec industry below 100% of hi sec. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
March rabbit
No Name No Pain
585
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 13:57:00 -
[546] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote:Even if you insane highsec bears don't think nullsec should have industry that is better than highsec, it's pretty unarguable that the current industry capabilities in nullsec are a joke and need a big boost. Even if it were brought up to say 75% of that of highsec, nullsec would be a much more vibrant place you are saying it like anyone from high-sec would care about how vibrant is 0.0
the main problem here is: this rebalance can't be done without nerfing high-sec. NERFING HIGH-SEC BECAUSE OF SOME WHINY 0.0-SECCERS. That's why you will not see enough support from high-seccers. |
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
1051
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 13:59:00 -
[547] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:TheGunslinger42 wrote:Even if you insane highsec bears don't think nullsec should have industry that is better than highsec, it's pretty unarguable that the current industry capabilities in nullsec are a joke and need a big boost. Even if it were brought up to say 75% of that of highsec, nullsec would be a much more vibrant place There's no reason to keep null sec industry below 100% of hi sec.
I think highsec industry needs heavily nerfed, and nullsec brought up to above that of the new highsec level.
Though I guess some people would say "no nullsec needs to be worse, so there's some reliance on highsec, you can't have one bit of eve that does everything the best!" or whatever - but even if you allow that as a possible argument, the current level is just ridiculous |
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
1051
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 14:00:00 -
[548] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:TheGunslinger42 wrote:Even if you insane highsec bears don't think nullsec should have industry that is better than highsec, it's pretty unarguable that the current industry capabilities in nullsec are a joke and need a big boost. Even if it were brought up to say 75% of that of highsec, nullsec would be a much more vibrant place you are saying it like anyone from high-sec would care about how vibrant is 0.0 the main problem here is: this rebalance can't be done without nerfing high-sec. NERFING HIGH-SEC BECAUSE OF SOME WHINY 0.0-SECCERS. That's why you will not see enough support from high-seccers.
High seccers not caring about balance and just wanting more and more boosts for themselves? I'm shocked. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
1469
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 14:00:00 -
[549] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:TheGunslinger42 wrote:Even if you insane highsec bears don't think nullsec should have industry that is better than highsec, it's pretty unarguable that the current industry capabilities in nullsec are a joke and need a big boost. Even if it were brought up to say 75% of that of highsec, nullsec would be a much more vibrant place you are saying it like anyone from high-sec would care about how vibrant is 0.0 the main problem here is: this rebalance can't be done without nerfing high-sec. NERFING HIGH-SEC BECAUSE OF SOME WHINY 0.0-SECCERS. That's why you will not see enough support from high-seccers.
Good thing we don't needs your support, since your kind can't be bothered to so much as click a louse to vote for csm lol.
|
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
1768
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 14:02:00 -
[550] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:TheGunslinger42 wrote:Even if you insane highsec bears don't think nullsec should have industry that is better than highsec, it's pretty unarguable that the current industry capabilities in nullsec are a joke and need a big boost. Even if it were brought up to say 75% of that of highsec, nullsec would be a much more vibrant place you are saying it like anyone from high-sec would care about how vibrant is 0.0 the main problem here is: this rebalance can't be done without nerfing high-sec. NERFING HIGH-SEC BECAUSE OF SOME WHINY 0.0-SECCERS. That's why you will not see enough support from high-seccers. What nerf specifically are you refering too? We all thought CSM 6 was a war crime with it's massive Null Presence CSM7 topped it by selling out our Council to CCP, don't let it happen again. Vote or next time Incarna is your fault Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 |
|
flakeys
Arkham Innovations Paper Tiger Coalition
882
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 14:15:00 -
[551] - Quote
Industry in reality will allways be done there where it is safest ....
We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
3920
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 14:18:00 -
[552] - Quote
flakeys wrote:Industry in reality will allways be done there where it is safest ....
I tried saying that so many times but no.
For some reason they are strongly convinced that manufacturing high tech stuff in the middle of a Somalian battlefield is the most natural thing ever and HAS to be vastly more $$$ rewarding than doing it in China. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8048
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 14:24:00 -
[553] - Quote
Again, you are arguing the ontological fallacy: "because things are this way, that's the way they must be."
Since I have explained this to you at least twice, at this stage you're just trolling.
The tl;dr is that the "Nullsec = Somalia" is nothing more or less than a giant assumption that you're asserting without any evidence or analysis of why that might be other than HURR DURR NULLBEARS R ALL BIG DUMBO GANKERS DURR HURR stereotyping.
Frankly, it's beneath you, but on the other hand it does encourage me in my campaign, since if you had an argument with a shred of intellectual consistency, you'd be using that. And you're not. Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
Buzzy Warstl
The Strontium Asylum
507
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 14:30:00 -
[554] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Again, you are arguing the ontological fallacy: "because things are this way, that's the way they must be."
Since I have explained this to you at least twice, at this stage you're just trolling.
The tl;dr is that the "Nullsec = Somalia" is nothing more or less than a giant assumption that you're asserting without any evidence or analysis of why that might be other than HURR DURR NULLBEARS R ALL BIG DUMBO GANKERS DURR HURR stereotyping.
Frankly, it's beneath you, but on the other hand it does encourage me in my campaign, since if you had an argument with a shred of intellectual consistency, you'd be using that. And you're not. To get what you want WRT industry, sovereignty rules need to change first.
You can't have the benefits of exclusivity and inclusivity at the same time, among other reasons because it's bad game design. http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs |
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
1051
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 14:31:00 -
[555] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:flakeys wrote:Industry in reality will allways be done there where it is safest .... I tried saying that so many times but no. For some reason they are strongly convinced that manufacturing high tech stuff in the middle of a Somalian battlefield is the most natural thing ever and HAS to be vastly more $$$ rewarding than doing it in China.
You haven't provided any convincing arguments that industrial endeavours would never be undertaken in null other than saying "SOMALIA! BATTLEFIELD!!!111" nonsense. The reason it doesn't happen at the moment is because how easy and cheap it is in highsec is ridiculous. It's not because omg somalia battlefield, it's because of how pitiful the capabilities are - as has been discussed before, there's more slots in sobaseki than there are in entire nullsec REGIONS - and how there's at the moment no downside to using highsec instead. If the capabilities were buffed, and if there were some downside (say for example a 5% tax on slots in highsec) then I very easily see a lot more people doing their work in null. |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1045
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 14:42:00 -
[556] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Mr Kidd wrote:They only need invest in, build and protect the facilities. It is "their" space. They went out there to own it. They just don't want to pay the bill for it.
It is a non-existent problem. Let me ask you honestly: If killing sleeper rats netted you about 10 mil/hour on average in a C5 or C6 with an optimal fleet comp and tactics, but still required the same fleet compositions, effort, risk, infrastructure, etc. to kill them, would you begrudge wormhole dwellers for going to highsec to run lvl 4 missions or incursions to get a reasonable income? Would you consider their requests to buff w-space PVE reasonable? Or would you tell them to HTFU and get a bigger and more expensive fleet composition?
I understand what you're saying. I even understand why null wants better industry. So understand what I'm about to tell you. Nullsec has the best of almost everything everything in the game. It's rats, second only to w-space. But since we don't get bpc or mod drops worth billions, the loot froom for our sleepers might barely make up for it over time. You have Sov, no other space has that ability. You have outposts that belong to the space holding alliance. No other space has that. You have the best DED & cosmos sites in the game. You have the best incursions. You have the best ore and the best ice. You have the best PI. You have supercaps that you can cyno around. Try that in w-space: cant have supercaps cant cyno. And on top of all that you have moon-goo to net you billions of isk per month for doing nothing.
Null has not spent its time building bridges to the rest of the game. It has, instead, spent it telling CCP why it should have everything and everyone else nothing.
So, as a member of the rest of the game, your cries of disproportionate distribution of something else in the game that doesn't vastly slant the game in null's favor yet again is falling on my deaf ears especially what you're talking about wanting to do could be done if only you take that moon-goo and invest it in pos production infrastructure. As far as I'm concerned, it appears to me you just don't want to make that investment. Instead, what you want is a vast industrial complex that is immune to destruction. Oh sure, they can change hands but there is no lost investment. And in a mostly blue null, you haven't really lost anything. HTFU!...for the children! |
Notorious Fellon
Republic University Minmatar Republic
16
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 14:47:00 -
[557] - Quote
Seems everyone is avoiding the elephant in the room.
If it were harder to move the goods from Null to Jita, then manufacturing and trade would *need* to move to where it is needed (back to null). We would once again see large hauling caravans complete with escort when trade between regions was absolutely needed.
I only say this because it is the very same argument as those who want to nerf the hell out of hisec.
Given that nerfing hisec into oblivion will also have the side effect of making new players less likely to hang onto the game long enough to see null/wh/whatever, I know which option I would prefer.
It all comes down to the same argument regarding "Power projection". This is simply "Commerce Projection".
"Jumping" made the universe too small. |
Josef Djugashvilis
Acme Mining Corporation
1056
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 14:50:00 -
[558] - Quote
Just give the null-sec zealots everything they want; and a bit extra for luck.
This is not a signature. |
March rabbit
No Name No Pain
585
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 14:53:00 -
[559] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:March rabbit wrote:TheGunslinger42 wrote:Even if you insane highsec bears don't think nullsec should have industry that is better than highsec, it's pretty unarguable that the current industry capabilities in nullsec are a joke and need a big boost. Even if it were brought up to say 75% of that of highsec, nullsec would be a much more vibrant place you are saying it like anyone from high-sec would care about how vibrant is 0.0 the main problem here is: this rebalance can't be done without nerfing high-sec. NERFING HIGH-SEC BECAUSE OF SOME WHINY 0.0-SECCERS. That's why you will not see enough support from high-seccers. Good thing we don't needs your support, since your kind can't be bothered to so much as click a louse to vote for csm lol. yea, because CSM decides what CCP will do |
March rabbit
No Name No Pain
585
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 14:54:00 -
[560] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote:March rabbit wrote:TheGunslinger42 wrote:Even if you insane highsec bears don't think nullsec should have industry that is better than highsec, it's pretty unarguable that the current industry capabilities in nullsec are a joke and need a big boost. Even if it were brought up to say 75% of that of highsec, nullsec would be a much more vibrant place you are saying it like anyone from high-sec would care about how vibrant is 0.0 the main problem here is: this rebalance can't be done without nerfing high-sec. NERFING HIGH-SEC BECAUSE OF SOME WHINY 0.0-SECCERS. That's why you will not see enough support from high-seccers. High seccers not caring about balance and just wanting more and more boosts for themselves? I'm shocked. show me one thread where high-seccer industrials requests "more boosts" |
|
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
192
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 15:06:00 -
[561] - Quote
Null sec/WH>Low Sec> High Sec.
High sec isk should be deplorable, there is zero reason to lose a single ship in high sec and ISK should reflect this. It should be imposible to plex an account in high sec via missions, industry and mining to encourage people to leave. High sec faction space should be seperated low sec so as to create and island of high between all factions. Market PVP is excused as high should remain the focus for trade. Kugutsumen - My signature insures that my post is always read by an ISD or Dev, does yours? |
flakeys
Arkham Innovations Paper Tiger Coalition
882
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 15:13:00 -
[562] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:flakeys wrote:Industry in reality will allways be done there where it is safest .... I tried saying that so many times but no. For some reason they are strongly convinced that manufacturing high tech stuff in the middle of a Somalian battlefield is the most natural thing ever and HAS to be vastly more $$$ rewarding than doing it in China. You haven't provided any convincing arguments that industrial endeavours would never be undertaken in null other than saying "SOMALIA! BATTLEFIELD!!!111" nonsense. The reason it doesn't happen at the moment is because how easy and cheap it is in highsec is ridiculous. It's not because omg somalia battlefield, it's because of how pitiful the capabilities are - as has been discussed before, there's more slots in sobaseki than there are in entire nullsec REGIONS - and how there's at the moment no downside to using highsec instead. If the capabilities were buffed, and if there were some downside (say for example a 5% tax on slots in highsec) then I very easily see a lot more people doing their work in null.
Owk in simple:
Null is less safe then empire? Null has less inhabitants then empire? Null has less miners then empire?
Answer to all 3 is yes , enlighten me why null should have more industry focus then empire?Industry concentrates on volumes bought/safetyness of building/close to it's resources.
I get it you want null to be far more better because you think of your own pockets like 99% of eve unfortunatly but i see no reason why null should have equal or more industry options then eve.I DO agree it needs more though , but still less then empire.
Better minerals/ratting etc is what null should have that i agree on.
We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
|
Notorious Fellon
Republic University Minmatar Republic
16
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 15:15:00 -
[563] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote:Null sec/WH>Low Sec> High Sec.
High sec isk should be deplorable, there is zero reason to lose a single ship in high sec and ISK should reflect this. It should be imposible to plex an account in high sec via missions, industry and mining to encourage people to leave. High sec faction space should be seperated low sec so as to create and island of high between all factions. Market PVP is excused as high should remain the focus for trade.
"there is zero reason to lose a single ship in high sec"
What? How blind you are to the reality of new players? New players learning this game will lose ships to belt rats, lose ships on early missions and will without a doubt lose ships during wardecs and lose a hauler trying to move their entire life supply to greener pastures. Oh, and they will lose a ship or two to suicide ganking or baiting.
Seriously, you are blind to just how difficult this game is to learn in the early days. The average player will lose a lot. And when their income (today) in hisec is slave level survival wages, it hurts to lose what little they have.
Cutting down hisec opportunities will only curb game growth. I would rather see more "reason" to move on to low/null/wh space. Buff them--don't nerf the terrible excuse for an early game experience. |
flakeys
Arkham Innovations Paper Tiger Coalition
882
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 15:25:00 -
[564] - Quote
Brewlar Kuvakei wrote: High sec isk should be deplorable, there is zero reason to lose a single ship in high sec and ISK should reflect this..
Eve-killl brewlar:
March 1 kill :1 in empire February 4 kills : 2 in empire January 7 kills : 7 in empire
We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
|
baltec1
Bat Country
5539
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 15:25:00 -
[565] - Quote
flakeys wrote:TheGunslinger42 wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:flakeys wrote:Industry in reality will allways be done there where it is safest .... I tried saying that so many times but no. For some reason they are strongly convinced that manufacturing high tech stuff in the middle of a Somalian battlefield is the most natural thing ever and HAS to be vastly more $$$ rewarding than doing it in China. You haven't provided any convincing arguments that industrial endeavours would never be undertaken in null other than saying "SOMALIA! BATTLEFIELD!!!111" nonsense. The reason it doesn't happen at the moment is because how easy and cheap it is in highsec is ridiculous. It's not because omg somalia battlefield, it's because of how pitiful the capabilities are - as has been discussed before, there's more slots in sobaseki than there are in entire nullsec REGIONS - and how there's at the moment no downside to using highsec instead. If the capabilities were buffed, and if there were some downside (say for example a 5% tax on slots in highsec) then I very easily see a lot more people doing their work in null. Owk in simple: 7 Null is less safe then empire? Null has less inhabitants then empire? Null has less miners then empire? Answer to all 3 is yes , enlighten me why null should have more industry focus then empire?Industry concentrates on volumes bought/safetyness of building/close to it's resources. I get it you want null to be far more better because you think of your own pockets like 99% of eve unfortunatly but i see no reason why null should have equal or more industry options then eve.I DO agree it needs more though , but still less then empire. Better minerals/ratting etc is what null should have that i agree on.
|
flakeys
Arkham Innovations Paper Tiger Coalition
882
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 15:37:00 -
[566] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:flakeys wrote:TheGunslinger42 wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:flakeys wrote:Industry in reality will allways be done there where it is safest .... I tried saying that so many times but no. For some reason they are strongly convinced that manufacturing high tech stuff in the middle of a Somalian battlefield is the most natural thing ever and HAS to be vastly more $$$ rewarding than doing it in China. You haven't provided any convincing arguments that industrial endeavours would never be undertaken in null other than saying "SOMALIA! BATTLEFIELD!!!111" nonsense. The reason it doesn't happen at the moment is because how easy and cheap it is in highsec is ridiculous. It's not because omg somalia battlefield, it's because of how pitiful the capabilities are - as has been discussed before, there's more slots in sobaseki than there are in entire nullsec REGIONS - and how there's at the moment no downside to using highsec instead. If the capabilities were buffed, and if there were some downside (say for example a 5% tax on slots in highsec) then I very easily see a lot more people doing their work in null. Owk in simple: 7 Null is less safe then empire? Null has less inhabitants then empire? Null has less miners then empire? Answer to all 3 is yes , enlighten me why null should have more industry focus then empire?Industry concentrates on volumes bought/safetyness of building/close to it's resources. I get it you want null to be far more better because you think of your own pockets like 99% of eve unfortunatly but i see no reason why null should have equal or more industry options then eve.I DO agree it needs more though , but still less then empire. Better minerals/ratting etc is what null should have that i agree on. The idea behind more risk is more reward.
And i just said that should be the case .Beter minerals , better ratting , plexes , building your titans and offcourse that o so precious technetium.Null reward should be bigger and that should be obvious.
So , that cleared up and keeping in mind what i said above that industry works as explained , why should null have bigger industry then empire?Or is it just simply the ' We wanna have it all on our side of the sandbox' mentality?Because as usuall that impression is pounding hard on the door at the moment.
We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
|
March rabbit
No Name No Pain
585
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 15:42:00 -
[567] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:The idea behind more risk is more reward. this is just great idea. Nothing more.
Just say me: should i get bigger payout from regular lvl4 if i will not tank my carebear mobile and increase my risk to lose it? Nope.
So this great idea can't be used as-is.
|
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
1046
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 15:50:00 -
[568] - Quote
Null-sec shouldn't just hand out greater rewards. Methods of establishing structures that provide the increased rewards should be implemented. So if you put some effort in creating infrastructure and protecting it from destruction you should be able to get more slots, more rats, more ores of the kind you want, more ISK, more everything. If you can create it and if you can defend it.
Though considering the state of F&I and how quickly and thoroughly any thread about 0.0 is derailed and spammed over, I highly doubt there will ever be any coordinated attempt to develop ideas on how such mechanics could be implemented. Mining Overhaul Nothing changed since 2008. |
Buzzy Warstl
The Strontium Asylum
508
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 15:51:00 -
[569] - Quote
baltec1 wrote: The idea behind more risk is more reward.
Sometimes the risk is too high to be balanced by quantity rewards and only quality rewards will do.
Nullsec industry is already better in that you can do things with it that you cannot do in highsec. People do those things because they value them enough for the risk to be worthwhile.
Adding more things that you can only do with nullsec industry is something that can work, and something that I expect to see in the future.
Trying to make nullsec "better highsec than highsec" just isn't in the cards, and I doubt the people lobbying for nullsec industry to be better at basic production than highsec industry would really be happy with the results if they got what they are asking for. http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs |
baltec1
Bat Country
5539
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 15:54:00 -
[570] - Quote
Why do you lot hate industrial players?
You are literally arguing the case for industrial player to be limited to high sec and punishing them for wanting to move outto the more dangerous areas of space. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 30 40 .. 40 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |