| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Topic |
Count Triton
    |
Posted - 2008.08.07 14:35:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: Ruze
Security is fine. But security should be traded for freedom.
Originally by: Benjamin Franklin
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Sorry, couldn't resist.  |
Ruze
Amarr
No Applicable Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 14:36:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Count Triton
Originally by: Ruze
Security is fine. But security should be traded for freedom.
Originally by: Benjamin Franklin
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Sorry, couldn't resist.
I'm so glad someone saw that 
I wonder how many others don't know correlation, though?
So you want security? That's perfectly alright.
But you should be willing to trade freedom and profit for that security. |
Marcus Atredies
Minmatar
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 14:57:00 -
[33]
Part of me likes the idea of pvp and part of me likes the idea of just running missions. Depends on the day. But one thing that I would not like is to be forced to pvp. I'd probably quit and find another game that let me choose.
But one of the main reasons that I don't like going to low-sec or 0.0 space is because I'm fairly broke, I have low skill points compared to 0.0 junkies and I don't like not having a f'ing chance on a gate camp.
So it comes down to, I want to pvp some so I need cash. I run missions building my cash and learning new skills. Unfortunately, so do the people in 0.0 and low-sec, so because I came into this game late, I'm always going to be worse then those who came before me. Of course I know that skill sets people apart but still. I spend say 3-4 months training up battleships and other fighting skills. During that time I am running missions for cash. Now I'm supposed to head down to 0.0 and low-sec and let some 2-3 year old vet blow the **** out of me so that I can go back and make more money to afford losing the next bs that I get.
It's a hardcore/carebear arguement. The Hardcore are the vocal minority and the carebears are the quiet majority. Hardcore Eve gamers, read 0.0 peeps, want more targets, aka carebears, and it seems the only way your trying to get more targets is to remove the very reason carebears play this game. Your ideas all focus on removing money flow from the carebears so that they have to move to low-sec/0.0 space to make money, but still need large amounts of money to afford the ships is takes to at least see the name of the pirate blowing up your new ship. So in your eyes, I get a little isk, move to low-sec to make lots of isk as long as I don't get blown up and have to go back to high-sec and grind out more money to get back and try and make it in low-sec. I don't think I would play that game.
O and to your little quote thingy at the bottom, Capitalism allows for maximum security and profit. What kind of crap government are you from?
|
Ruze
Amarr
No Applicable Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 15:09:00 -
[34]
Hahaha ... capitalism doesn't allow for maximum security or profit. The more secure you make a business transaction, the less profitable you make it.
That's Benjamin Franklin, talking about the need for any government, specifically an American government, to balance the security of the people with the freedom of said people. As you make people more secure (i.e. Patriot Act), you in turn take away their freedoms. Governments throughout history have gone to extremes in one way or another. Complete security would be represented by a communist government, whereas no producer is threatened by 'unfair' business practices of others, competition is strictly monitored by the government, prices constantly regulated, and people are kept under observation.
Same should work in the game. As people become more secure in hisec, they should have less freedom. Less opportunities to make massive profits, more taxes, and more restrictions on the ships they may fly.
On the other hand is the barbarian countries or anarchy. Complete freedom of the people, where scams and murder are as much implements of inacting said freedoms as anything else. That is what EvE has always represented, at least in my opinion. Complete freedom. That is what 0.0 is about. So maybe it's time that hisec represented the opposing end, since players want enough security to not be threatened by other players?
So you want security? That's perfectly alright.
But you should be willing to trade freedom and profit for that security. |
Marcus Atredies
Minmatar
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 15:41:00 -
[35]
It's funny though that you would try to remove the freedom/profit that high-sec has to balance what you see in the real world when the real world wants what has been provided in Eve.
Capitalism does allow for large amount of profit. Now that's not all the profit there could be since the government (Concord) does not allow me to pirate which would be the rest of the profit margin. That's my freedom that has been taken to allow for my security and higher profit. Of course, I have also in a sense lost security because I am not in low-sec where the high level meta items are that would protect my ships further.
You want to reduce the high-sec freedom more so what are you going to provide in return?
In a sense, the current Eve format is a Utopia of sorts in high-sec, not the perfect one mind you. Large amounts of security, and large amounts of Isk. You would disrupt that to further your enjoyment of the game. I mean, it's a system that works. A steady rate of around 20,000 - 25,000 people playing everyday.
I think I'm just arguing the point now. I do want to go to 0.0 and low-sec. Heck, I'm trying to find a corp to do just that. My problem is that I feel, contrary to anything you could ever say, I don't have enough skill points to wander around there moderately safely. There's this mentality that you don't wave and move on in low-sec. You blow the f'ker up. I'm supposed to move to low-sec/0.0 and risk all my isk and ships in an environment where no-one says hello, they just say die.
Anyways, I'll see what you have to say and add more later.
|
Johann Jeneau
Gallente
Cricas Portuguese Korp
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 15:50:00 -
[36]
I've been playing for almost 2 years, i never feel safe in low-sec/0.0, when you feel safe you die, this is eve and i hope it's kept this way.
You have enough SP to go there, all you need to be safer (not totally safe) is numbers (friends), but really if you are into making money and feeling safe then there is no reason to leave high-sec, really there isn't, i make all my money in high-sec with alts, my main is in 0.0/low-sec when i can play, just looking for trouble.
I dont think this is balanced but i really dont believe it will ever change, actually it will probably become even more unbalanced.
I like my steaks bloody as hell |
Fallorn
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 15:51:00 -
[37]
Put all lvl 4 missions in 0.0 all lvl 3 missions in low sec and all lvl two missions in .7 sec or lower. The higher the sec status the lower levels of missions because that is were the easy jobs are and the harder jobs are closer to the border of an empires space or going out of their space to do missions for them. This would help fix the balance for risk/reward. Also change the size of empire roids so that they pop from one or two cycles of a strip miner, and limit how much ice spawns on roids in empire saying that the country in charge mines so much of it off. Size of roids increases as you move to lower sec status areas.
Sig removed. If you would like further details please mail mods@ccpgames.com with a link to your signature. - Elmo Pug
|
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |