|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
597
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 10:42:00 -
[1] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
Because PVE ships are well known for their pvp capabilities, especially in the age of interdiction nullified cyno interceptors.
You are also happily still ignoring the fact that you do not get great drops one after another every single time to do sigs and the very big issue that you cannot support tens of thousands of people on these things. They will barely support 100.
Except the statistics quite clearly show that Null does make better income than High. Trying to go on about how lvl 4 missions make more than null is laughable. Especially since NPC Null has better Lvl 4 agents/payouts. And the same is true with incursions.
Now obviously risk is higher, and the reality is that most people who live in null don't want any risk with their income gathering activities either. nothing to do with possible profit, but they are just as risk adverse as any 'High Sec Carebear' that you like to bash.
Could Null use improvement? Sure, but it's not in total profit possible for an individual, it's in the number of things per system to support high densities of players even in the not perfect -1.0 truesec systems. Could High use a change? Probably, but it's not in nerfing the income. The individual income is fine. Infinite numbers of players supported on a single lvl 4 agent? That's probably not so fine.
Best way to do both. Create Anomalies with multiple objectives. Not just 'Destroy all the enemy ships'. But include things like hacking towers, research facilities. EWar on certain things. Multiple spread out locations you can destroy to affect the battlefield. Then there is a reason to bring a small gang to do a site. And people may even co-operate mid site rather than shoot each other on site sometimes.
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
600
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 22:29:00 -
[2] - Quote
Bwaahahahaha. Yea.... I love all the Nullbears trying to get high sec destroyed in here. Every unbiased non propaganda analysis clearly shows Null Sec makes more absolute income than high sec per person. You can blather on about risk all you want, but those that take the risk normally make significantly more.
And by continually trying to pretend high sec income is being buffed while null is being nerfed continually, you are loosing any support you might have.
Focus on the real issue. Density problems. Null does have a limit 'per system'. Though that limit only holds true if every system is at that limit. And Lvl 4 Agents have infinite density capability.
Both of these are problems, as is the current design of anomalies & missions (& even incursion sites really) which do not encourage a diverse fleet but simple F1 approaches to kill all the red crosses. With a single end condition. Rather than 6 simultaneous objectives that can all be achieved in different ways, giving a group a reason to work together, even if you aren't all in the same corp. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
607
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 06:25:00 -
[3] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:E-2C Hawkeye wrote:
This is how the forum trolls feed. When they see they are not or cant counter facts, or a topic they don't like, they start a feeding frenzy to lock the topic.
Three questionable screenshots taken over the span of 2 months vs hard numbers from CCP themselves. Which is the more believable? Except the hard numbers from CCP actually support the idea that null earns more isk per person. Especially since the hard numbers I am aware of are isk faucets while some of the biggest income sources in Null are not isk faucets, i.e. Moon Goo. But keep throwing it around and maybe you will convince a few more nullbears they are doing it wrong and would make 500 mil/hr in high sec.
Risk vs Reward you can argue, though like everything in EVE I believe it's in a moderately good place as it is, because it's not meant to be a linear scale of risk vs reward, but for 10% reward increase vastly more risk. But trying to pretend that those who actually do bother with the risk in Null and mitigate it appropriately don't make more than a high sec player is a joke. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
608
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 07:23:00 -
[4] - Quote
Like I said, keep bleating the lie. If you want to pull out the 160 Mil/hr SoE figure (Something I seriously doubt even the average pirate BS on SoE missions makes), lets pull out the 250/hr Ratting Carrier. They exist also. It just weakens your support for the area's you do need a buff in, namely the number per system that can be supported. Because you are seen to be trying to destroy highsec. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
608
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 07:39:00 -
[5] - Quote
BWAHAHAAHHA! Yea, keep pushing the line, I'm sure some people believe you. Having sat there and watched the 250 mil/hr carrier rat away, I know they are real. Also I know 160 Mil/hr is not the normal SoE agent income. If you blitz in officer fit pirate ships and have one in every possible destination system and use an interceptor to warp between systems to save time I suppose it's possible.
Now stop trying to use the biggest edge case you can possibly come up with where SoE income has taken a temporary hike due to new items being released, and basic market forces will act on it to correct it, when you continually refuse to accept any ones actual achievements in Null as valid, dismissing them as 'random, pure luck, and in no way repeatable' or 'never existed' just because you can't/don't do it yourself despite the fact a number of people have achieved such things.
Especially since that edge case IS STILL LOWER INCOME THAN NULL.
And go complain about your actual issue which is system density. Or you will just keep more and more people not wanting to play in null because you guys throw your toys out of the cot all the time over things that aren't even true. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
608
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 07:58:00 -
[6] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
SOE has always had very good income thanks to the sisters probes/launcher and the implants. And no, ratting carriers haven't been a thing for years now, hell, most of us don't even use battleships. Bury your head in the sand if you want but we will keep on pointing out game imbalances and with CCP driving ahead with big balance passes chances are they will be coming down on high sec income when they come around to fixing null secs problems.
If they do, enjoy your even deader null sec, because you will simply drive people out of the game by trying to fix a problem that doesn't actually exist in the first place.
Sure, SoE is good income, I never denied that, I'm even prepared to accept that a single person out there managed 160 mil/hr on SoE missions using the current temporary (Read the dictionary for the meaning of that word) inflation of value on SoE LP that won't last forever. It's already down to only around 2,900/lp for the Stratios. Depending exactly how cheap you get your minerals. And still dropping slowly. But just because you don't do something, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Ratting carriers are obviously still a thing since people still hunt them. They might not be a thing that 'everyone' does, but that doesn't make them non existent. Nor worthless.
Like I said, stop trying to kill two birds with one stone. Stop whining about how much high sec makes when you can make isk in Null. Instead deal with the serious complaint which is that null simply can't support many people per system (assuming all systems get equally used & assuming we ignore NPC Null space since that blows SoE away quite happily). |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
608
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 08:07:00 -
[7] - Quote
Awww, Poor Goonies, does it hurt actually having facts in front of you. I mean, it's not like you control the space around the sanctuary corp which would get you more profit per hour than any SoE mission running ever can. So any SoE prices you could beat.....
But seriously, I get the issues with null sec population density. But whining over high sec income at the same time just isn't going to win you any support and it makes you all look like you have a bad case of sour grapes. Because Null income is fine for that density level currently achievable. You just need to be able to achieve a higher density WITHOUT (& this is the key part) making the current density able to achieve silly high levels of income. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
608
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 08:18:00 -
[8] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:I get that you think it doesn't matter how much ISK you make in highsec and that it doesn't affect the game, yada yada, but it does. When people in highsec print the massive amounts of ISK that they do it causes inflation. The money supply increases, purchasing power goes down. Nerfing highsec levels of income is the only way to buff nullsec income without causing greater inflation which is worse for everybody. Except making more people able to rat/anom/sig per Null System would not significantly increase the overall amounts of isk. (Also note that a lot of isk printing happens in Null Ratting also, it's not just a high sec thing, as previous CCP figures have shown as well.). If anything it might even lower the isk coming into the game, since High Sec income is almost all based in isk & LP (Though LP removes Isk out of the game also) while Null Sec income includes significant amounts of rare loot, which while it has an isk value doesn't add isk into the overall economy.
So even though Nulls overall income is higher, the pure isk part of the income doesn't have to be.
Also CCP's figures have shown that inflation on most items has been directly tied to the mineral market and the changes they have made to mineral availability & requirements for BPO's, not the overall isk on the market. Only a few items break that mould which doesn't make for overall market inflation as a result. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
608
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 08:24:00 -
[9] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote: Also CCP's figures have shown that inflation on most items has been directly tied to the mineral market and the changes they have made to mineral availability & requirements for BPO's, not the overall isk on the market. Only a few items break that mould which doesn't make for overall market inflation as a result.
The runaway inflation only stopped when CCP nerfed incursions hard. The 'runaway inflation' only existed in your mind. Possibly it was having impact on the plex market also. But not on general day to day items most pilots need. Same as the null income being lower is only in your mind.
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
608
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 08:38:00 -
[10] - Quote
Yet it was subsequently shown that the prices doubling was due to changes on the mineral market directly, which still left miners as one of the lowest paid occupations in EVE despite the fact miners make the world go around. And half the ships on the market currently sell at UNDER cost to manufacture price. |
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
608
|
Posted - 2013.12.22 09:04:00 -
[11] - Quote
Other than the small aspect that miners are still paid sweat shop wages in EVE. So saying 'Runaway inflation' when they went from dirt poor to still dirt poor levels of income really isn't true. And the drone poo nerf/gun mining nerf had a much bigger impact on the minerals market than any incursion income ever did. If you can even separate them, the market certainly showed no signs of the incursion income changes. |
|
|
|