EVE Search - OK, let's try and work this out.

Search EVE-Online forums for:

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

OK, let's try and work this out.

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 :: one page

Author	Topic
Malcanis Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.08.29 06:28:00 - [91] Originally by: Johncrab Edited by: Johncrab on 29/08/2008 00:26:02 Originally by: Malcanis All of this coming from a char in a npc corp is, to say the least, a contradiction. Oh, and 0.0 is full of farming carebears. How do 0.0 alliances fund their super capitals...? From looting in pvp it isn't that's for sure Um, I've been in an NPC corp for about 2 days. As soon as I decide which offer to accept I'll be in a 0.0 corp again. My employment history is there for anyone to read. As for there being 'carebears' in 0.0, you have completely missed the point. I'm not against people doing PvE, or industry/invention. I just want to interact with such people in a player environment, not where one side has invincible omnipotent NPC buddies. I'm not asking for a nerf to hi-sec - I'm asking to be able to not care about hi-sec. If there's anything you dislike about that, then let's hear it. CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.
Malcanis Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.08.29 06:29:00 - [92] Originally by: Opertone the industry is backed by carebears and industrialists, local economy can't exist without them Correct indeed, but not all of them require hi-sec to operate. CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.
Malcanis Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.08.29 06:31:00 - [93] Originally by: Empyre Oh look. Yet another L4 mission nerf whine. Just how do L4 mission runners effect the price of faction goods, pray tell? Are you serious? You really can't understand how faction/officer/deadspace mod prices are affected by mission runners? Hint: they don't produce any but they buy a lot of them CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.
Malcanis Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.08.29 06:38:00 - [94] Originally by: Dharmic Vision Personally, I would welcome these changes, but only if any rare mineral moons were added at the ass-end of the new regions, to make them a challenge for a single entity to control. Right now, my understanding is that these are the targets of war-- which is great, gives market incentive to fight, but the short distances quoted by Malcanis make it too easy to establish and maintain control of them. For NPC goods such as Robotics, why not add an upgrade platform available for Outposts to allow production of these goods? Hell, you could add this as a rare BPC drop from exploration plexes or officers or something. You could add another outpost upgrade drop that allows for limited skill production-- remember, these aren't actually books but things you stick into your capsuleer implants and passively absorb. Someone's gonna crack this system and figure out how to create bootleg copies. But only a certain number per day, or one category at a time, or both. Would help ease the need to hop back and forth and make Outpost upgrades meaningful. One thing to keep in mind is that expanding Eve in this way would inevitably affect mineral and component availability throughout New Eden. If a significant proportion of players moves out to take advantage of the new regions, removing them from the local economy will have its impact on highsec. The challenges of populating such an area would particularly bleed off people interested in logistical challenges, perhaps impacting the ability of more local organizations to maintain their own moon mining operations. If you separate the markets by distance, there WOULD be other effects just from the exodus of people. I get the impression that not too many people have memories stretching back past the last couple of weeks. What I'm reading here isn't a response to the CONCORD changes and stuff, it is an extension of concepts that Malcanis has posted on before in light of those changes. To the guy accusing him of being in an npc corp, look at his employment record, lots of deep space and lowsec alliance work. He's in between employers now. I've often enjoyed reading his posts, they are usually well thought out. Such lovely compliments ♥ To clarify: this thread doesn't have much in it that I haven't proposed before. It's more that the motivation to ask for it has increased because of the proposed changes (and others like it). On a side note it's interesting to note the amusing responses from those who are unable to process the complex concept of "OK fine keep your missions". What's the problem here? They don't just want L4 missions, they want us to watch them doing them? All I'm really asking is an area of EvE where we can play the game much as it used to be when I started. If it's far enough away that I won't care what's going on in empire, then it should be far enough away that those in empire won't care what's going on out there. Why would anyone object to that? CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.
Malcanis Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.08.29 06:46:00 - [95] Originally by: Mara Rinn Edited by: Mara Rinn on 29/08/2008 01:54:50 Originally by: Malcanis The core issue is that when someone is grinding L4s in this way, they're not leaving me alone. They're driving up the price of fancy faction items I want to buy. They're driving down the price of minerals and salvage I want to sell. They're funding pirates who want to gank my blockade runner. They're supporting alliances I want to crush beneath my heel. And worst of all, they're trashing the price of LP store goods that I want to sell after I run missions. To paraphrase: nerf everyone else's playstyle because it cramps my own. Another point missed. I'm not arguing that people shouldn't have the right to try and gank my blockade runner or fight my alliance or whatever. I'm just tired of people who think it's their right to have free NPC protection to help them compete. It's like trying to have a boxing match with a guy who has the police arrest you when you throw a punch. And rather than argue against such people any more, I'm proposing a way (and asking for other, better proposals) for people like me to be able to play without being troubled by those who demand to be subsidised by such competitive advantages. Let them carry on as they are, I say. Just give me & mine a space where we can make people adapt to us instead of constantly adapting to more pro-carebear changes. In short: We'll leave them alone if they leave us alone... CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.
Clair Bear Coalition of Nations Free Trade Zone.	Posted - 2008.08.29 06:50:00 - [96] Edited by: Clair Bear on 29/08/2008 06:52:05 Originally by: Malcanis Correct indeed, but not all of them require hi-sec to operate. Lion's share of R&D agents is in highsec. A portion of NPC goods required to manufacture warp bubbles and t2 (including fuel for POS operation) come from highsec. Massive amounts of low ends and ice come from AFK miners in highsec. At the moment all of eve is tied at the hip to high sec. You only need to look at market prices in 0.0 to see how well carebears function out here -- it took literally a WEEK for a manufacturing corp to turn into 100% ratters.
Malcanis Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.08.29 06:53:00 - [97] Originally by: Clair Bear Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Opertone Correct indeed, but not all of them require hi-sec to operate. Lion's share of R&D agents is in highsec. A portion of NPC goods required to manufacture warp bubbles and t2 (including fuel for POS operation) come from highsec. Massive amounts of low ends and ice come from AFK miners in highsec. At the moment all of eve is tied at the hip to high sec. You only need to look at market prices in 0.0 to see how well carebears function out here -- it took literally a WEEK for a manufacturing corp to turn into 100% ratters. You'll perhaps note that my proposal included lo-sec islands to supply NPC only goods like skillbooks. In any case, the "lots more 0.0" proposal was not the main point of my post. The request for better proposals was. CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.
Tuleingel	Posted - 2008.08.29 06:53:00 - [98] Interesting idea. Especially that long distances lightyears wise to the 'deep regions'. Might actually work out even, say, if you add into each region one NPC controlled consellation (it does not need to be lo sec) with stations selling skillbooks and NPC POS fuels, altho it would actually work out without that also. You see, seeding those NPC goods in 0.0 would go against current model, where main hardship of holding 0.0 space is logistical. Anyway, whatever way it would be implemented new regions would soon be dominated by already exsisting well organized entities with rather nice jump bridge chains running all the way up to empire/their current power bases. What we actually would need would be possibility of getting agents in 0.0 stations. Whatever way it would be implemented. Say - to get agent into your station it would need to allow everyone dock and your alliance would need to declare support for one empire faction. That empire would then dispatch some agents from one special corp to that station. In ideal world 'declaring support' would not be limited to empire factions but would actually involve also pirate and minor factions and station you want to have agents in would go into possession of said 'special' corp (so you can't just lock out 'other people' by one click) with proper timers in place should the sov entitiy want to take station back (say a week, if they are kicking the declared faction out, taking significant standings hit or month for 'peaceful' reclaiming of station without standings hit).
Malcanis Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.08.29 07:10:00 - [99] Originally by: Tuleingel Interesting idea. Especially that long distances lightyears wise to the 'deep regions'. Might actually work out even, say, if you add into each region one NPC controlled consellation (it does not need to be lo sec) with stations selling skillbooks and NPC POS fuels, altho it would actually work out without that also. You see, seeding those NPC goods in 0.0 would go against current model, where main hardship of holding 0.0 space is logistical. Anyway, whatever way it would be implemented new regions would soon be dominated by already exsisting well organized entities with rather nice jump bridge chains running all the way up to empire/their current power bases. What we actually would need would be possibility of getting agents in 0.0 stations. Whatever way it would be implemented. Say - to get agent into your station it would need to allow everyone dock and your alliance would need to declare support for one empire faction. That empire would then dispatch some agents from one special corp to that station. In ideal world 'declaring support' would not be limited to empire factions but would actually involve also pirate and minor factions and station you want to have agents in would go into possession of said 'special' corp (so you can't just lock out 'other people' by one click) with proper timers in place should the sov entitiy want to take station back (say a week, if they are kicking the declared faction out, taking significant standings hit or month for 'peaceful' reclaiming of station without standings hit). For reasons you can probably infer, I'm a little gun-shy of introducing agents into the new space proposal. I'd far rather have a higher density of exploration sites. CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.
Tuleingel	Posted - 2008.08.29 07:19:00 - [100] Originally by: Malcanis For reasons you can probably infer, I'm a little gun-shy of introducing agents into the new space proposal. I'd far rather have a higher density of exploration sites. We would not need any new space if it would be possible to get agents in already exsisting no sec space. It would work even if one would need to actually build some special station for 'allied' NPC entity to get agents. Say, 100 bil for 'special' station and turning one system over to NPC's sov. Permanently. Would work as standard NPC station. If idea of having ability to 'summon' agents to station going temporarily into NPC ownership seems too radical.

Malcanis Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.08.29 07:22:00 - [101] Originally by: Tuleingel Originally by: Malcanis For reasons you can probably infer, I'm a little gun-shy of introducing agents into the new space proposal. I'd far rather have a higher density of exploration sites. We would not need any new space if it would be possible to get agents in already exsisting no sec space. It would work even if one would need to actually build some special station for 'allied' NPC entity to get agents. Say, 100 bil for 'special' station and turning one system over to NPC's sov. Permanently. Would work as standard NPC station. If idea of having ability to 'summon' agents to station going temporarily into NPC ownership seems too radical. The simplest way would be to introduce a new type of outpost upgrade, in 3 tiers like the other types; Tier 1 for level 1 to +0 level 2 agents, Tier 2 for +1 level 2s to level 3 agents, Tier 3 for level 4 agents. CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.
Tuleingel	Posted - 2008.08.29 07:46:00 - [102] Originally by: Malcanis We would not need any new space if it would be possible to get agents in already exsisting no sec space. It would work even if one would need to actually build some special station for 'allied' NPC entity to get agents. Say, 100 bil for 'special' station and turning one system over to NPC's sov. Permanently. Would work as standard NPC station. If idea of having ability to 'summon' agents to station going temporarily into NPC ownership seems too radical. The simplest way would be to introduce a new type of outpost upgrade, in 3 tiers like the other types; Tier 1 for level 1 to +0 level 2 agents, Tier 2 for +1 level 2s to level 3 agents, Tier 3 for level 4 agents. That is actually quite elegant proposal. However, there is reason why my proposal contained clausel of turning the station over to the corporation of the agents being there. ALL agents currently are available to ALL players in game atm and in my opinion it would be balancing 'downside' of having unlimited resource in area. It would make the area too safe if 'others' could not dock in there and thus make lo sec agents outright pointless. It's no big secret that alliance controlled no sec areas are already safer than most lo sec areas. At least thats my experience, other pilots mileage may differentiate. Problem with outpost upgrades is, that after not owning a station anymore it's not possible to upgrade it any futher. Some new mechaniks could be implemented ofc to make it possible. Also, tier 3 upgrade might introduce both lev 4 and lev 5 agents. Second reason why station where agents operate should belong to agent's mothercorp is RP one. They would need a reason to actually care about area to distapch agents there who are offering quite significant rewards for the destruction of that mothercorp enemies. Why should they care about that in area that does not belong to them. If it would be to help out player alliance they are allied with it would make sense if that player alliance would pay for the job, not some NPC agent. EVE entities are not out there on charity missions (except sisters of EVE, but I find highly unlikely that they would offer any kind of combat missions).
Daelin Blackleaf Aliastra	Posted - 2008.08.29 08:06:00 - [103] I can see the jump freighter trade caravans bringing hi-sec devaluation of your efforts already. Moving the tumor to your big toe will not get rid of the cancer.
Hegbard	Posted - 2008.08.29 08:14:00 - [104] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Hegbard Separate currency. Not spendable in empire, only exchangeable through direct contact between players in stations. For an added bonus: allow players to start their own currencies backed any way they want (although that would require a bit more work from CCP). A separate currency would decouple the markets. While not making it completely impossible to trade between empire and 0.0, it would make it harder enough to encourage local markets. And it would be interesting too. AKA LPs. Not really. LPs are not tradeable and you can exchange them to ISK only through a lot of hassle. I mean that there would be normal markets in 0.0, but instead of using ISK they would be using NISK (Null ISK or whatever). So on all markets in 0.0 you could buy and sell stuff for NISK, but not for ISK. And the only way to exchange NISK to ISK would be to personally meet with someone and trade face-to-face or do normal money transfers that you can do today, but then you'd have to trust the person. Could even make it interesting and set up automatic currency trading stations only in lowsec. Or one currency per region. Or as I mentioned earlier: player run currencies, with all the drama, collapsing banks and scams it would bring (and huge profits for some). When there is one currency, there is no way to separate the markets, even long and dangerous trade routes wouldn't change much. But imagine what would happen if people in nullsec suddenly didn't need ISK at all and all the interesting minerals from nullsec were suddenly traded in NISK.
Sheriff Jones Amarr Clinical Experiment	Posted - 2008.08.29 08:39:00 - [105] Originally by: Malcanis I'm not asking for a nerf to hi-sec - I'm asking to be able to not care about hi-sec. If there's anything you dislike about that, then let's hear it. Well, mainly, that when i said "i'm not saying i dn't want player interaction, but i want the choice to do missions in peace", i think your answer was in the boundries of "go to wow". My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit.
Gamesguy Amarr Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.08.29 08:44:00 - [106] Originally by: Hegbard Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Hegbard Separate currency. Not spendable in empire, only exchangeable through direct contact between players in stations. For an added bonus: allow players to start their own currencies backed any way they want (although that would require a bit more work from CCP). A separate currency would decouple the markets. While not making it completely impossible to trade between empire and 0.0, it would make it harder enough to encourage local markets. And it would be interesting too. AKA LPs. Not really. LPs are not tradeable and you can exchange them to ISK only through a lot of hassle. I mean that there would be normal markets in 0.0, but instead of using ISK they would be using NISK (Null ISK or whatever). So on all markets in 0.0 you could buy and sell stuff for NISK, but not for ISK. And the only way to exchange NISK to ISK would be to personally meet with someone and trade face-to-face or do normal money transfers that you can do today, but then you'd have to trust the person. Could even make it interesting and set up automatic currency trading stations only in lowsec. Or one currency per region. Or as I mentioned earlier: player run currencies, with all the drama, collapsing banks and scams it would bring (and huge profits for some). When there is one currency, there is no way to separate the markets, even long and dangerous trade routes wouldn't change much. But imagine what would happen if people in nullsec suddenly didn't need ISK at all and all the interesting minerals from nullsec were suddenly traded in NISK. Not possible, people would just use a mineral as a unit of exchange, like we did historically with precious metals, ie gold and silver. The only way a non-backed currency would work is if there is enormous confidence in the government. 0.0 is soo volatile in eve that it makes Somalia look stable, currency in this kind of climate would be worthless, only tangible materials like gold, bushels of wheat, pigs, whatever would have value. So in eve, this would mean people would trade with ships minerals etc.
Malak Synn Minmatar Pator Tech School	Posted - 2008.08.29 09:35:00 - [107] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Hegbard Separate currency. Not spendable in empire, only exchangeable through direct contact between players in stations. For an added bonus: allow players to start their own currencies backed any way they want (although that would require a bit more work from CCP). A separate currency would decouple the markets. While not making it completely impossible to trade between empire and 0.0, it would make it harder enough to encourage local markets. And it would be interesting too. AKA LPs. What might be conducive to this is a bit of a leap, but... Seperate 0.0 Market. Would that not fit the bill for this issue? Quote: *... Are You Watching Closely?*
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2008.08.29 09:53:00 - [108] Originally by: Sheriff Jones Originally by: Malcanis I'm not asking for a nerf to hi-sec - I'm asking to be able to not care about hi-sec. If there's anything you dislike about that, then let's hear it. Well, mainly, that when i said "i'm not saying i dn't want player interaction, but i want the choice to do missions in peace", i think your answer was in the boundries of "go to wow". You are trying to equate asking for pure PvP and pure PvP. I think you will find that these requests are in fact diametrically opposed. The option to engage in pure PvE, an option which does not truly exist at present, goes against EVE. The option to engage in pure PvP does not. - DesuSigs
Reven Cordelle Caldari School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2008.08.29 09:55:00 - [109] I'm all for moar low-null sec, providing it has content in it, like exploration sites and shit. Not just empty space. Obviously its pretty empty but.. you know. The biggest issue I've seen when listening on Corp is that its not Low Sec thats the problem, its getting into it. Gatecamps kinda **** up the whole Low/Null transition... Perhaps just let us have some kinda cyno to just jump into any random part of low sec without a gate... charge isk to do it. At least then I can jump out there and fly BACK to the gate and have a chance at killing someone, rather than jumping into what i think is low sec, and ending up back in my high sec clonebay. I'm not saying "nerf gatecamps". Camps are fine, its just a bit of a shit for anyone just trying to get out there for the first time.
Eomar Veto Corp	Posted - 2008.08.29 10:32:00 - [110] Originally by: Reven Cordelle I'm not saying "nerf gatecamps". Camps are fine, its just a bit of a shit for anyone just trying to get out there for the first time. What the op is suggesting is gonna make those gate camps utterly irrelevant to those people in deep space. You wont be travelling back and forth on any kind of regular basis, and on those occasions when you do it'd be as part of a full on expedition. I truly like the idea, VAST tracts of unclaimed space way out of the reach of all but the most hardened explorers. Currently the 0.0 we have is still, essentially, the fringes of empire, the market demands, supply and whatnot are all largely controlled by the demands of either empire dwellers, 0.0 dwellers empire alts, or the other fringe factions. I would like to see REAL deep space, pockets of it, maybe 4 to 5 DAYS travel, as fast as you can, and with distances so vast that you cant take a capital ship across it other than via a circituitous route costing more time and a lot more fuel. basically make it so that anyone moving out there would have to start from the ground up. But heres the swinger, after a certain distance out from empire, gates and beacons gradually stop appearing on the overview, theyre ancient things after all, relics from eras long forgotten, they have to be scanned down repaired if neccessary powered up (remote cap tx anyone) same goes for stations, old abandoned NPC outposts, powered down and damaged by eons of neglect, some with services that can be restarted and so on. Obviously players would encounter pockets of npcs, with thier own economys, small groups of people with whom standings could be gained allowing access to thier research facilities, for bpos and whatnot. Archaeology and hacking would come into play, for the production of t2 components, as none of the moons would have more than the basic commodities. why? to stop it becoming a draw for the empire builders. essentially this space would draw those who want to build small communities in 0.0 possibly would draw some of the empire crowd into it too, given that theey wont have to fight all the time, but will still be required to defend thier space. ...in accordance with the prophecy

Hegbard	Posted - 2008.08.29 10:34:00 - [111] Originally by: Gamesguy Not possible, people would just use a mineral as a unit of exchange, like we did historically with precious metals, ie gold and silver. The only way a non-backed currency would work is if there is enormous confidence in the government. 0.0 is soo volatile in eve that it makes Somalia look stable, currency in this kind of climate would be worthless, only tangible materials like gold, bushels of wheat, pigs, whatever would have value. So in eve, this would mean people would trade with ships minerals etc. Well, actually, using a backed currency wouldn't be that stupid. The way to set up a currency (I doubt anyone would trust a fiat currency in EVE, since loans don't work) would be to set up a trading post and set up static prices for items and let it grow. Although what I primarily suggested, since I know that player controlled currencies would require a lot of design and careful work, was to just split up the market. Let rats in 0.0 give NISK and let only NISK be used for the regional markets in 0.0. That would split up the market nicely and loosen the dependency between empire and 0.0, which is what the OP wanted (and which I would find very interesting). (Yes, NISK is just a random name, it could be called whatever, the name is not important)
FlameGlow Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.29 10:35:00 - [112] Originally by: Reven Cordelle I'm not saying "nerf gatecamps". Camps are fine, its just a bit of a shit for anyone just trying to get out there for the first time. No, gatecamps are OP in low since HIC introduction. In 0.0 it's probably OP since cynojammers. Blockade runner supposedly made to run through camps yet it's warpstab bonus is utterly useless in most cases and it has to rely on great agility only. _____________ I don't care what is nerfed, as long as it's not my "undock" button.
Gamesguy Amarr Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.08.29 11:08:00 - [113] Originally by: FlameGlow Originally by: Reven Cordelle I'm not saying "nerf gatecamps". Camps are fine, its just a bit of a shit for anyone just trying to get out there for the first time. No, gatecamps are OP in low since HIC introduction. In 0.0 it's probably OP since cynojammers. Blockade runner supposedly made to run through camps yet it's warpstab bonus is utterly useless in most cases and it has to rely on great agility only. Ironically, blockade runners are going to be utterly useless with the nano-nerf. They're very good now, but post nano-nerf theyre just far too slow.
PhalHell Minmatar Pastry Coalition	Posted - 2008.08.29 12:18:00 - [114] I like the idea of a "dessert". Hard to live in, nothing there (no Gates, stations or whatsoever), everything changes (wormholes etc...) on a regular base. You can't claim it. It should be an area of great reward, where you need to explore every move. The fact that no sov-claim can be made or any regularity is there will eliminate blobs too. In that area nothing would show on your overview neither etc.... The opinions expressed herein are not necessarily those of my corps, not necessarily mine, and probably not necessary.
Maximillian Bayonette White Lion Manufacture and Salvage	Posted - 2008.08.29 12:28:00 - [115] Edited by: Maximillian Bayonette on 29/08/2008 12:28:08 Originally by: PhalHell I like the idea of a "dessert". Hard to live in, nothing there (no Gates, stations or whatsoever), everything changes (wormholes etc...) on a regular base. You can't claim it. It should be an area of great reward, where you need to explore every move. The fact that no sov-claim can be made or any regularity is there will eliminate blobs too. In that area nothing would show on your overview neither etc.... Dessert? Hahaha Pastry Coalition? HahahahaHAHAHAHAH Man, that's just too good!
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2008.08.29 12:41:00 - [116] Edited by: Crumplecorn on 29/08/2008 12:40:52 Findable gates.... "Yeah, I'll join you in <insert system> in a while, I just need to find a way out of <current system>" drops more probes - DesuSigs
Marc deBourgogne	Posted - 2008.08.29 13:02:00 - [117] Edited by: Marc deBourgogne on 29/08/2008 13:02:41 Originally by: Maximillian Bayonette Edited by: Maximillian Bayonette on 29/08/2008 12:28:08 Originally by: PhalHell I like the idea of a "dessert". Hard to live in, nothing there (no Gates, stations or whatsoever), everything changes (wormholes etc...) on a regular base. You can't claim it. It should be an area of great reward, where you need to explore every move. The fact that no sov-claim can be made or any regularity is there will eliminate blobs too. In that area nothing would show on your overview neither etc.... Dessert? Hahaha Pastry Coalition? HahahahaHAHAHAHAH Man, that's just too good! Idea's are born naked... Don't see the point of your reaction.
Malcanis Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.08.29 14:20:00 - [118] Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf I can see the jump freighter trade caravans bringing hi-sec devaluation of your efforts already. Moving the tumor to your big toe will not get rid of the cancer. I think long range (15+ cyno) jump freighter caravans would be awesome. The logistics and overhead involved would make them a far from casual thing though. if it takes, say, 6 or 7 players 1-2 play sessions to run the caravan, then the margin involved must be high enough to pay them all enough to bother. Plus the risk of doing so would be very high. That's a pretty significant degree of insulation. CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.
Sheriff Jones Amarr Clinical Experiment	Posted - 2008.08.29 14:24:00 - [119] Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 29/08/2008 14:23:52 Originally by: Crumplecorn Originally by: Sheriff Jones Originally by: Malcanis I'm not asking for a nerf to hi-sec - I'm asking to be able to not care about hi-sec. If there's anything you dislike about that, then let's hear it. Well, mainly, that when i said "i'm not saying i dn't want player interaction, but i want the choice to do missions in peace", i think your answer was in the boundries of "go to wow". You are trying to equate asking for pure PvP and pure PvP. I think you will find that these requests are in fact diametrically opposed. The option to engage in pure PvE, an option which does not truly exist at present, goes against EVE. The option to engage in pure PvP does not. I'm not asking for riskfree, no possibility of player intervention, PVE, just that i can do it in "moderate peace". As is with highsec missions now. What he's asking, as i understood it, is to "not care for highsec", when most things said to me when i said about L4-missions was that "everything you do effects others, ratting, pirates, everything". So, no, you can't have it either/or way. You have to care about highsec, or atleast ackonledge that what goes on in 0.0 effects highsec players, and as such, pirating ways effects even the missionrunners. You know? My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit.
Malcanis Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.08.29 14:25:00 - [120] Originally by: Hegbard Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Hegbard Separate currency. Not spendable in empire, only exchangeable through direct contact between players in stations. For an added bonus: allow players to start their own currencies backed any way they want (although that would require a bit more work from CCP). A separate currency would decouple the markets. While not making it completely impossible to trade between empire and 0.0, it would make it harder enough to encourage local markets. And it would be interesting too. AKA LPs. Not really. LPs are not tradeable and you can exchange them to ISK only through a lot of hassle. I mean that there would be normal markets in 0.0, but instead of using ISK they would be using NISK (Null ISK or whatever). So on all markets in 0.0 you could buy and sell stuff for NISK, but not for ISK. And the only way to exchange NISK to ISK would be to personally meet with someone and trade face-to-face or do normal money transfers that you can do today, but then you'd have to trust the person. Could even make it interesting and set up automatic currency trading stations only in lowsec. Or one currency per region. Or as I mentioned earlier: player run currencies, with all the drama, collapsing banks and scams it would bring (and huge profits for some). When there is one currency, there is no way to separate the markets, even long and dangerous trade routes wouldn't change much. But imagine what would happen if people in nullsec suddenly didn't need ISK at all and all the interesting minerals from nullsec were suddenly traded in NISK. Wouldn't work tbh. CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.