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) |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
3905
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 08:03:00 -
[151] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote: General Discussion sure reaches its potential for ******** arguments. In fact I think it's growing in terms of ability to be ********. Like, literally, you're retarding the progress of EVE Online by such displays of stupidity.
If you don't like GD, then stop posting and reading it. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
3905
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 08:16:00 -
[152] - Quote
Domina Trix wrote:I think nullsec industry should be better than high sec because it might attract more players and corporations into those areas.
Low sec comes with as many slots as high sec, as many stations. It even got harvestable moons (some good ones) and high ends in some systems. As Baltec1 said for the similar NPC nullsec players with the usual sniffy remark: "Just because you sucked at securing your NPC space doesn't mean my corp and many others didn't manage it." so basing to his statement, those low sec players have no excuse due to their inability to claim sov.
But guess what? Low sec is still an utter desert industry speaking.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
baltec1
Bat Country
5500
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 08:21:00 -
[153] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:Primary Me wrote:
A factor or question that has come up a number of times, but then lost in the depths of economic arguments, is whether nullsec should be on par or better than hisec for industry, which, thinking about it, is a question that needs to be answered first, before discussing any balancing that might need to be done.
Null industry has the potential to be as good as, or better, than high sec right now. No changes are needed. The problem is not with the mechanics. It's with the people who choose to live there. They are just not the type that want to settle in and actually set up an industrial base. They want to shoot stuff. If they insist on whining that it is somehow easier in high sec then they should move there and stop flooding the forum with tears. For a bunch of elite PVP Gods, they sure spend a lot of time crying over having to make something of themselves in the area of the game that does nothing to hold their hands. Null is what you make it guys. If you can't make it, then move back to high sec and stop your bellyaching. Mr Epeen
It is currently impossible to make null sec industry competable with high sec. |
baltec1
Bat Country
5500
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 08:30:00 -
[154] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Domina Trix wrote:I think nullsec industry should be better than high sec because it might attract more players and corporations into those areas. Low sec comes with as many slots as high sec, as many stations. It even got harvestable moons (some good ones) and high ends in some systems. As Baltec1 said for the similar NPC nullsec players with the usual sniffy remark: "Just because you sucked at securing your NPC space doesn't mean my corp and many others didn't manage it." so basing to his statement, those low sec players have no excuse due to their inability to claim sov. But guess what? Low sec is still an utter desert industry speaking.
The moons are all taken as are the POCOs. Just about all carriers and dreads are built in low. For normal subcap and module construction however there are no reasons to build them in low sec over high sec. If there are no advantages to building these things in low sec then why take the added risk. |
Rek Seven
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Exhale.
628
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 08:30:00 -
[155] - Quote
Not just in null sec but all non high sec space (null, low and wormholes) should have an advantage over high sec industry.
Industrialists should be encouraged to take their operations out of high sec where they should potentially be able to get a better retire for there time than they would in HS. Is my bitter vet membership card in the mail? |
Arronicus
Vintas Industries Mistakes Were Made.
290
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 09:17:00 -
[156] - Quote
When you say EQUAL, are you taking into account all factors? Because of logistics and access to market, which ARE key components of industry, equalizing nullsec industry with highsec is only doable via penalizing other features of highsec industry. Tradeoffs. More mineral waste in highsec, in exchange for direct access to good markets, etc. |
Caitlyn Tufy
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
200
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 09:23:00 -
[157] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Mr Epeen wrote:Primary Me wrote:
A factor or question that has come up a number of times, but then lost in the depths of economic arguments, is whether nullsec should be on par or better than hisec for industry, which, thinking about it, is a question that needs to be answered first, before discussing any balancing that might need to be done.
Null industry has the potential to be as good as, or better, than high sec right now. No changes are needed. No it doesn't.There. Aren't. The. Slots.
^ What Malcanis said. We have our share of disagreements, but I absolutely 100% agree with him when he states that null sec industry isn't what it should be - and it's not just a question of the number of slots. |
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
1033
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 09:46:00 -
[158] - Quote
In my opinion, and what I understand as part of the spirit of 0.0, the null-sec industry shouldn't simply be boosted, but the alliances should get the tools (toys) made available to shape null-sec the way they desire it. And it should come with options, choices, consequences, advantages and curtailments. Like ship fitting. It should have a resource and you should have to decide where to put it for your best advantage.
I am playing around with the concept of population as the base resource, deadspace areas as system slots, types of deadspace colonies as sub-systems and colony enhancements as modules. I think it would be better and more enjoyable than a bland grind based mechanic. May take a while until I have something more substantial put together that I can post up for discussion and development. Mining Overhaul Nothing changed since 2008. |
Rico Minali
The Straw Men Dark Therapy
1257
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 10:08:00 -
[159] - Quote
I think marginally better, not alot but a little better to reflect the increased risk. Anyone who talks about nullsec being safe simply doesnt know enough to use that argument.
It should only be marginal though so that hisec players are still getting a good deal with it. Trust me, I almost know what I'm doing. |
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
4721
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 10:17:00 -
[160] - Quote
Rico Minali wrote:I think marginally better, not alot but a little better to reflect the increased risk. Anyone who talks about nullsec being safe simply doesnt know enough to use that argument.
It should only be marginal though so that hisec players are still getting a good deal with it. The advantage should either be configurable or simply different in different areas of space. I think we have seen a pure tier system being lackluster in every area of the game it has been used. It's simply better and more interesting to try to give good reasons to use all the options available for something important, then it is to offer a tiered system where some options are clearly inferior or superior in all cases excluding some minor niches. |
|
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
1743
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 10:26:00 -
[161] - Quote
I find it very telling about the mindsets of people playing this game when the question "Should Null sec Industry be as good as high sec" is asked
It really speaks of deep problems in the game that the question even needs to be asked, and even then the fact that it was not just a "How much better than Hi-sec should it be?"
It does speak of a cancer in this game where people are punished for risk, punished for capital investment and lets face it just punished because they do not want to sit in Hi-sec making no better money than anyone else with the base skills.
Now EvE is far from dying but the biggest question is, is it changing into something that will kill us all of boredom? Even mining in Hi-sec can get boring after time and missions are boring from the time you press accept.
EvE has always been about people striking out into space whether that be Sov space, NPC, lo-sec,Worm holes and so very much more.
But now things are changing and it has gotten to the point that people even have to ask the question of whether risk=reward or whether reward should be directly opposite the risks taken.
It is a very sad state of affairs
And don't get me started on the CSM voting system (well more like a torture system) oops to late I already started. EvE players have no voice. Just don't bother voting for the CSM, really its not worth the energy.
|
Goldnut Sachs
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 10:33:00 -
[162] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:I find it very telling about the mindsets of people playing this game when the question "Should Null sec Industry be as good as high sec" is asked It really speaks of deep problems in the game that the question even needs to be asked, and even then the fact that it was not just a "How much better than Hi-sec should it be?" It does speak of a cancer in this game where people are punished for risk, punished for capital investment and lets face it just punished because they do not want to sit in Hi-sec making no better money than anyone else with the base skills. Now EvE is far from dying but the biggest question is, is it changing into something that will kill us all of boredom? Even mining in Hi-sec can get boring after time and missions are boring from the time you press accept. EvE has always been about people striking out into space whether that be Sov space, NPC, lo-sec,Worm holes and so very much more. But now things are changing and it has gotten to the point that people even have to ask the question of whether risk=reward or whether reward should be directly opposite the risks taken. It is a very sad state of affairs And don't get me started on the CSM voting system (well more like a torture system) oops to late I already started. tl;dr don't nerf high sec or see eve die?
|
baltec1
Bat Country
5502
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 10:37:00 -
[163] - Quote
Goldnut Sachs wrote: tl;dr don't nerf high sec or see eve die?
The opposite |
Goldnut Sachs
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 10:38:00 -
[164] - Quote
oops, but he did support Issler
Issler |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
1743
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 10:41:00 -
[165] - Quote
Goldnut Sachs wrote:oops, but he did support Issler
Issler Ok so while issler was in CSM 7 we got the mining barge buff.
who did you vote for and what did they achieve? Unless the answer is Two step or Hans then you are screwed. EvE players have no voice. Just don't bother voting for the CSM, really its not worth the energy.
|
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
1743
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 10:42:00 -
[166] - Quote
Goldnut Sachs wrote:Frying Doom wrote:I find it very telling about the mindsets of people playing this game when the question "Should Null sec Industry be as good as high sec" is asked It really speaks of deep problems in the game that the question even needs to be asked, and even then the fact that it was not just a "How much better than Hi-sec should it be?" It does speak of a cancer in this game where people are punished for risk, punished for capital investment and lets face it just punished because they do not want to sit in Hi-sec making no better money than anyone else with the base skills. Now EvE is far from dying but the biggest question is, is it changing into something that will kill us all of boredom? Even mining in Hi-sec can get boring after time and missions are boring from the time you press accept. EvE has always been about people striking out into space whether that be Sov space, NPC, lo-sec,Worm holes and so very much more. But now things are changing and it has gotten to the point that people even have to ask the question of whether risk=reward or whether reward should be directly opposite the risks taken. It is a very sad state of affairs And don't get me started on the CSM voting system (well more like a torture system) oops to late I already started. tl;dr don't nerf high sec or see eve die? I just noticed this one
You really should read more of the forums before you open your mouth or even the post you tl;dr. EvE players have no voice. Just don't bother voting for the CSM, really its not worth the energy.
|
Fearghaz Tiwas
ZOMBIEBEACHPARTYPATROL Circle-Of-Two
8
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 10:44:00 -
[167] - Quote
Dark Reignz wrote:baltec1 wrote:Dark Reignz wrote:Good god, how many more frickin NERF HIGH SEC threads do we need. The fat isk rich blobs in null already have the best of everything while their mining/ ratting remains on par risk wise to high sec and ganking.
Face up to the fact you have everything. The real point behind all of these kind of threads is the same. The poor null bears are bored ratting, mining slurping moon goo and want force all high seccers un-willingly into "there territory" so they have something else to do.... "Shoot things" because they are so fck-in lame that they wont go shooting rivals all because they want to protect the fat isk machine.
Null Sec today is far safer than low-sec and that's not what was intended. So all the risk adverse alliances larding it up in null, carry on making it safer and more boring but you can't expect Hi Sec population to be punished for that.
There are even comments saying how Null and Hi should be balanced accordingly. I agree, High Seccers want tech moons (yielding less tech over time than null moons do) and the ability to use and build up to, not exceeding carriers, possibly supers . Eventually both populations get what they want. More risk avoiding production of caps and in time Hi Sec Entities will be more tempted to launch attacks on null for space on epic proportions.
How about that ?
No ?
Well HSFU with Hi Sec nerfage / Null buffing A single system in caldari high sec has more industry slots than entire regions of 0.0 That doesn't sound broken to you? Lookidat map - active users in the last 30 mins : http://oi46.tinypic.com/2r5dtvb.jpgIn a word....... NO Edit: On the flip side, and coincidentally, there are more people in one Caldari high sec system than there are in MOST OF null sec brah.
And you don't see why this is an issue? Really?
|
Goldnut Sachs
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 10:45:00 -
[168] - Quote
looking forward to your campaign this year for issler |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
1743
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 10:48:00 -
[169] - Quote
removed EvE players have no voice. Just don't bother voting for the CSM, really its not worth the energy.
|
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
1743
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 10:51:00 -
[170] - Quote
Goldnut Sachs wrote:looking forward to your campaign this year for issler Yes completely. I am so glad you keep up with current events in EvE and that you can hassle someone who did vote when you cannot even name who you voted for
Oh and Trebor is the only CSM 7 member running in the CSM 8 election. EvE players have no voice. Just don't bother voting for the CSM, really its not worth the energy.
|
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
7984
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 10:51:00 -
[171] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Domina Trix wrote:I think nullsec industry should be better than high sec because it might attract more players and corporations into those areas. Low sec comes with as many slots as high sec, as many stations. It even got harvestable moons (some good ones) and high ends in some systems. As Baltec1 said for the similar NPC nullsec players with the usual sniffy remark: "Just because you sucked at securing your NPC space doesn't mean my corp and many others didn't manage it." so basing to his statement, those low sec players have no excuse due to their inability to claim sov. But guess what? Low sec is still an utter desert industry speaking.
Gosh, it's almost as if having CONCORD to provide free deterrence 24/7 is actually a very significant subsidy to hi-sec industry that will have to be taken into account when the much needed rebalance takes place.
Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
7984
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 10:56:00 -
[172] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Goldnut Sachs wrote:looking forward to your campaign this year for issler Yes completely. I am so glad you keep up with current events in EvE and that you can hassle someone who did vote when you cannot even name who you voted for Oh and Trebor is the only CSM 7 member running in the CSM 8 election.
Speaking of which, is your sig some kind of ironic reverse troll or something? Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
1194
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 10:58:00 -
[173] - Quote
The main thing I'd suggest for highsec changes for industry:
Adjust times, not costs.
Adjusting costs means that someone just starting out in highsec may be priced out of the market completely.
Adjusting times means that they can still make a reasonable margin on invested isk. It's just over a longer period, dropping the isk/hr
I /think/ this avoids Malcanis's Law. FuzzWork Enterprises http://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/ Blueprint calculator, invention chance calculator, isk/m3 Ore chart-á and other 'useful' utilities.As well as mysql and CSV/XLS conversions of the Static Data Extract. |
Fearghaz Tiwas
ZOMBIEBEACHPARTYPATROL Circle-Of-Two
9
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 11:00:00 -
[174] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:Domina Trix wrote:I think nullsec industry should be better than high sec because it might attract more players and corporations into those areas. Sugartits, if better ore, better ice, better pi, better rats, better bounties, better drops and moon goo hasn't done it do you really think better industry will do it? I can't speak for everyone in the game, but you know, a lot of people in the game come home from a job where their boss tells them what to do, when to do it and how to do it. Maybe, just maybe they don't want to play a game where they have to put up with the same BS? Fact is when your alliance overlords can kick you out at a moment's notice or a massive enemy fleet shows up destroying everything you've invested in your production infrastructure, no amount of better is going to make it moar better than hisec. Besides, the only way to allow for the scale of production that occurs in hisec but in nullsec is to turn nullsec into hisec and hisec into nullsec because there's no way you're going to move that much material through without losing significant percentages of it first. Then you'll be whining about the non-stop ganks and how ccp needs to make nullsec safer.....oh damn, where have I heard this before?
This is your view. There will be plenty of industrialists, that when they see a new opportunity to make isk, will take it. It's them that this change would help. I was a Hi-seccer for a bloody long time. In fact, probably about 4 years of active time. I stayed there because I was scared of Null, and I had little incentive to leave high. Now I have, best thing I've done. People just need a bit of a push and hopefully they'll realise there's more to EVE than Jita |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
1744
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 11:04:00 -
[175] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Frying Doom wrote:Goldnut Sachs wrote:looking forward to your campaign this year for issler Yes completely. I am so glad you keep up with current events in EvE and that you can hassle someone who did vote when you cannot even name who you voted for Oh and Trebor is the only CSM 7 member running in the CSM 8 election. Speaking of which, is your sig some kind of ironic reverse troll or something? Sort of ironic. A protest at CCP over their stupid voting system and so far lack of player education and the clock is really ticking now. People will ignore ads that appear just for a short period. If this discussion and so many like it have taught us anything it is that ideas need to be repeated time and again before they sink in.
I changed it and haven't thought of a good one yet.
Thinking something along the lines of
"CSM7 was the year of the CCP butt kissers, Don't let it happen again. Vote" Followed by a list of candidates in an appropriate order.
or Maybe
"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" EvE players have no voice. Just don't bother voting for the CSM, really its not worth the energy.
|
Goldnut Sachs
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 11:11:00 -
[176] - Quote
I voted for the emperor of space, my dear supreme leader, and learned that a grown man can be bullied in a computer game. |
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1047
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 11:51:00 -
[177] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Ok so while issler was in CSM 7 we got the mining barge buff.
If there was any one change that purely encouraged the "**** it, just stay in highsec forever" mentality, it was the barge buff. At best, anyone who supports the buff they got is as FYGM as it gets, and at worst they're dumber than mud. "Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread[" |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
3905
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 13:35:00 -
[178] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Domina Trix wrote:I think nullsec industry should be better than high sec because it might attract more players and corporations into those areas. Low sec comes with as many slots as high sec, as many stations. It even got harvestable moons (some good ones) and high ends in some systems. As Baltec1 said for the similar NPC nullsec players with the usual sniffy remark: "Just because you sucked at securing your NPC space doesn't mean my corp and many others didn't manage it." so basing to his statement, those low sec players have no excuse due to their inability to claim sov. But guess what? Low sec is still an utter desert industry speaking. Gosh, it's almost as if having CONCORD to provide free deterrence 24/7 is actually a very significant subsidy to hi-sec industry that will have to be taken into account when the much needed rebalance takes place.
Good to see you commenting apples with oranges.
I have yet to see *one*, just *one* sov null seccer calling for a rebalance involving the most needing regions first (low sec and NPC null sec and then WHs, all riskier choices) before applying a further improvement to their area. Why? Because they won't look beyond their only and one turf. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Fearghaz Tiwas
ZOMBIEBEACHPARTYPATROL Circle-Of-Two
9
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 13:40:00 -
[179] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Malcanis wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Domina Trix wrote:I think nullsec industry should be better than high sec because it might attract more players and corporations into those areas. Low sec comes with as many slots as high sec, as many stations. It even got harvestable moons (some good ones) and high ends in some systems. As Baltec1 said for the similar NPC nullsec players with the usual sniffy remark: "Just because you sucked at securing your NPC space doesn't mean my corp and many others didn't manage it." so basing to his statement, those low sec players have no excuse due to their inability to claim sov. But guess what? Low sec is still an utter desert industry speaking. Gosh, it's almost as if having CONCORD to provide free deterrence 24/7 is actually a very significant subsidy to hi-sec industry that will have to be taken into account when the much needed rebalance takes place. Good to see you commenting apples with oranges. I have yet to see *one*, just *one* sov null seccer calling for a rebalance involving the most needing regions first (low sec and NPC null sec) before applying a further improvement to their area. Why? Because they won't look beyond their only and one turf.
Actually, you have. What I suggested would help all areas outside of trade hubs. Probably most benefiting Hi sec, followed by low. Admittedly, it might not help NPC null as much as Sov, but it would help. Highsec should pay for protection in the form of taxes on the buying and selling of items, at higher rates depending on the sec status.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
7984
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 13:51:00 -
[180] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Malcanis wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Domina Trix wrote:I think nullsec industry should be better than high sec because it might attract more players and corporations into those areas. Low sec comes with as many slots as high sec, as many stations. It even got harvestable moons (some good ones) and high ends in some systems. As Baltec1 said for the similar NPC nullsec players with the usual sniffy remark: "Just because you sucked at securing your NPC space doesn't mean my corp and many others didn't manage it." so basing to his statement, those low sec players have no excuse due to their inability to claim sov. But guess what? Low sec is still an utter desert industry speaking. Gosh, it's almost as if having CONCORD to provide free deterrence 24/7 is actually a very significant subsidy to hi-sec industry that will have to be taken into account when the much needed rebalance takes place. Good to see you commenting apples with oranges. I have yet to see *one*, just *one* sov null seccer calling for a rebalance involving the most needing regions first (low sec and NPC null sec and then WHs, all riskier choices) before applying a further improvement to their area. Why? Because they won't look beyond their only and one turf.
Apples to Oranges? Apart from CONCORD, what's the difference between lo-sec and hi-sec so far as an industrialist is concerned? Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
|
|
|
|
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 |