|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 36 post(s) |
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 04:18:00 -
[1]
Level 4's are better. Either make the 0.0 isk gain far more or its simply not worth it. Unless you change this very simple problem anything you do wont amount a damn thing. Whatever changes you plan just ask yourself, "am i better off running level 4's" then you will know if it is a stupid idea or not.
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 09:06:00 -
[2]
If these upgrades were added to the game right now without any sovereignty or upkeep costs, except for the complex one, no one would really be excited. These things barely make systems as things are now better, cram 50 more people in all of them and it would be a nightmare.
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 19:42:00 -
[3]
So why exactly do i want to run anomalies in 0.0 instead of level 4s? Whatever change you make unless it makes someone running level 4s go "wow man i need to head out to 0.0 and get me some of that!" its pointless. All these stupid ass changes make me do is go "wow i need to go out to motsu and get me some of that!"
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:35:00 -
[4]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Originally by: Tomas Russell Edited by: Tomas Russell on 07/11/2009 20:04:33
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Originally by: Nyphur
5) Why is 0.0 not more profitable than level 4 missions, even after the upgrades?
Always because the jump between 0 and 1 is the largest in cost and effort of each activity beyond that. We are acutely aware of this issue and the related issue of agents in sovereign space. Ideally we will tackle both issues with brand new content specifically designed for social groups and adequately rewarding.
Do you realise that this is not even close to being an answer to his question? And that it reads like a cross between the autistic kid that eats glue in grade 3b and a marketing executive?
"Gnargle gnarf blurf, square root of seventy three, incentivize the synergy of your human resource, burble".
No offense meant, if you are actually the autistic kid who eats glue in grade 3b, or a CCP marketing executive. Or both.
Plain text answer for those who don't get the reference (sorry).
- The jump between no risk and any risk is the most significant step, the same as no cost and some cost. The difference in mathematical terms is small but economically large. In short, it takes a disproportionate amount of reward to offset a smaller amount of risk or additional effort.
- We are looking at introducing social group content as Soundwave mentions of sufficient reward to compel you either as someone who runs missions in empire to fund their pvp in null sec or as an empire dweller looking to make the leap to join up with others and seek to upgrade your solar systems to unlock these sites. These will act to both minimise the number of signatures as a whole within the solar system and to let you play together than alone.
- yes we are very aware of the 'level four missions' issue in relative activity income potentials to everything else.
Why cant you just increase bounties on rats 100%, and remove all non faction pirates under battleship size. Why cant you just increase anomaly reward ABOVE level 4s. Tell me why you cant just right now give 0.0 above empire income. These changes are not far fetched at all. You alreayd have agents floating in space giving out missions in 0.0, why cant you add more of those? Why would you even think saying these new upgrades will put you on par with motsu is even acceptable?
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 21:11:00 -
[5]
Why not put some upgrades that Decrease respawn time, Increase bounty, or increase Spawn quality. Oh and seriously try to justify anomalies being equal to motsu. tell me why anyone should be ok with that.
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 23:12:00 -
[6]
Originally by: SXYGeeK Edited by: SXYGeeK on 07/11/2009 23:03:59 -42- checking in on page 42.... (edit: ack, i took to long typing, its 43 now, my oppertunity for greatness has passed, :( )
wow, this is a fast growing thread.
I just want to say thanks to Soundwave and Chronitis for sticking in here with us, taking our feedback, and feeding us more info. Enjoy some of your weekend guys! (though you likely somehow enjoy this...)
I think that we shall certainly see a reduction in the footprint of 0.0 alliances to "meet the budget" as it where for sov maintanance bills.
I'm excited by the prospect of the "Guaronteed" anomolies and mining sites, with respawn instantly elsewhere in the system.
with a fully upgraded system having the rewards of the anomolies to be on par with LVL4 mission running and there will be 10 anomolie sites at all times.
think about it, with belt rattin we just warp around hoping something will be there to kill, and if we are lucky we get a faction or maybe even an officer.
now we will warp around between anomolies and be Guaronteed something will be there, and if we are lucky it will escalate... not only this, but we dont have to wait for them to respawn, as soon as we kill them off another one respowns.
we could put several gangs of 3 or so pilots together to go rage through anomolies, the faster you do them, the more you get...
and this will all strike true for mining as well, practicaly limitless ore in your favored system.
How awesome guaranteed level 4 income!!!! All you have to do is invest lots of resources and time a month and you too can be assured level 4 income. Dont worry about the potential to be ganked!. Surely ccp has factored in scan time. The fact that l4 income is mainly LP gain, we know for sure they factored that in. The current anomalies blow, no chance the future oens will not blow. We can all rest assured youll never waste time warping to a site, finding someone there and having to warp off. Dont mind that corp taxes will increase. The hordes of empire shall flow in to null sec to battle over the ability to make nearly the same ammount of cash as they made in empire. Yes i cannot freaking wait for this patch. The best way to increase null sec is to make it not at all more lucrative. CCP are genius.
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 23:33:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Innominate
Originally by: Static Kinetics YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 01:18:00 -
[8]
YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 01:36:00 -
[9]
Is there any alliance or corp that has seen this change and is now super excited to leave for 0.0? And what exactly makes any space worth fighting over now that's different before. With moons gone i see even less reason to fight over territory.
Oh.
YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 03:06:00 -
[10]
YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
You have to answer this at some point.
|
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 03:25:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Destrim
Originally by: Vadinho
Originally by: Aralis Edited by: Aralis on 08/11/2009 02:56:25 Supporters of this patch are coming out with bizarre dribble.
"You should cooperate more.." "You shouldn't hog so much space and let others in.." "You'll have to stop living off all that R64 moon goo.."
If these are the problems - why are we (the CVA) to whom none of these statements apply - the alliance getting shafted the worst by this patch?
its really tragic that the alliances this is supposed to be helping (like yourself) are the ones getting hit the hardest while the ones its supposed to be hurting (like myself) will just need to make minor adjustments to keep on living like we already do
True. So, what changes would you propose to reverse the situation? Certainly, there needs to be more incentive for people to hold only a few systems, and invest time in those systems, besides penalizing them.
Personally, I have little issue with the penalties... I just think the rewards are too weak.
So, again, what would you propose for better infrastructure hub upgrades?
Just offer more upgrades.
3 Rat upgrades, bounty, respawn speed, and spawn quality(removing not faction sub battleship spawns.
Make anomaly isk/hr above level 4's with lp factored in.
Add planetary spawns.
This would increase 0.0 attractiveness a great deal and allow a great deal more density of players per system.
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 05:24:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Tesal I am going to gank Goons in Motsu.
Delete all systems except for motsu. Run level 4s and gank each other all day. This is it. This is the sandbox.
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 18:56:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Pointfive Honestly i was hoping to see upgrades more along these lines. i always though of 0.0 as being like the wild west. Where you venture out to dangerous lands to get shot at, control some territory make money, and occasionaly find gold.
Concord Bounty Hunter Angent Relay - Allows LP gain for killing pirates in nullsec, create a pvp geared concord lp store
Bounty increase - High activity in your system has driven away all but the most dangerous pirates. 15% bonus to pirate bounty per level
Respawn Speed - High activity in this region has increased pirate activity in the system. 10% bonus to pirate respawn speed per level.
Pirate hideout Locator - Each level increases the chance of locating rare hidden pirate hideout anomalies. These danger pirates do not drop faction items but have significantly increased bounty.
Ship quality increase - Having Faced larger ships constantly, pirates begin to only appear in more difficult ships. Each level reduces the chance of a non battleship spawn by 20%
Give me these changes, not some ****ty level 4 quality anomalies that wont actually be level quality income due to, comeptition, rat quality, scan time, warping around, hostiles in system shutting down income, etc etc
YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 06:59:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Scouty McScoutersen Edited by: Scouty McScoutersen on 09/11/2009 06:55:54 the obvious answer is they don't want to increase 0.0 isk and cause inflation, or decrease empire isk and cause carebear (ie most of the people playing this game) ragequits.
nullseccers are screwed and the only way to stay viable is to have an alt running missions in empire, oh well
Yes oh well. Dont bother trying to fix it scouty mcsoutersen has declared it impossible. Some inflation in the game would not be that harmfull as eve currently seems to be in a deflation and will be more so with the current sov prices. Empire dweller spending power goes down, null sec spending power goes up, hooray!
YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 07:07:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Scouty McScoutersen
Originally by: ep1k
Yes oh well. Dont bother trying to fix it scouty mcsoutersen has declared it impossible. [/b]
why bother since the current system is working fine and hasn't caused ragequits OR inflation ? get a mission running alt, problem solved
ofc after the expansion will be different because non NPC 0.0 will become uninhabited desert with these proposed changes
Because its a terrible system that noone wants. put the rewards where the risks are. They want more people in dangerous space, put more income there. And you talk like inflation is 100% a terrible thing. Its not, and deflation is a much worse thing.
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 02:12:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Quesa I'd argue that the original implementation of nullsec was flawed. The tool they used to determine a system worth was Truesec. It's how this Truesec value was given to the systems throughout nullsec, which is illogical at best, and leaves the greatest portion of New Eden worthless to utilize. Now, in the beginning, most nullsec was profitable and even more so when they introduced moon mining and the start of the T2 production chain. When you start to see how moons are distributed throughout New Eden, you again see flawed implementation - albeit they might have been thinking these high valued moons might be the catalyst for nullsec conflict - but they never thought twice about dumping 30+ r64's into single regions. Whatever.
I still think the most dominant issue with nullsec is how worthless most of it is. While it WASN'T worthless when people first started colonizing nullsec, CCP just hasn't updated the profitability to that of much safer, more remedial activities in empire.
Most of the people on the EveO forums think the nullsec alliances are full of greedy no gooders who only want their moon-goo. This couldn't be further from the truth and unfortunately that's what the debate has started to digress too. What we DO want is for nullsec to be the gold mine that it SHOULD have been. Nullsec is where you go to risk it all for riches and glory, at least that's the impression I got when reading one of EveO's descriptions of lawless space when I started. YES, it was the place where you could find these riches and glory but we are working with a dynamic, player driven economy and inflation has caught up to us.
Dominion was supposed to be the answer. It was supposed to alleviate the need to control 3 regions because the upgrades to our core systems would allow dozens of pilots to make money in each system while the Alliance drastically reduced it's dependency on moon-goo to keep the engine running. This is where things went wrong. We were given a bill of goods, which nearly EVERYONE liked (yes, even the part about no jammers and sov4 protections) but it ended up being a system where we would be forced to drop sov in the majority of our systems and the ability to remove the 250 sov towers we have deployed to hold the space. That's about all this is doing for us, that's it. The promise of being able to cut back to 2-3 constellations and rid ourselves from holding 3 regions is gone. The prospect of increased isk-density in systems suddenly morphed into this instant re-spawn anom thing - which CCP is ******ed because this will get abused to hell and back. Our hopes and dreams of nullsec mining becoming something that is profitable are quashed. The prayers of mining Veld in nullsec would finally be more efficient than buying 20k citadel torps and repro-ing them in your refinery station are dashed.
Again, the only thing that will change is the visual on the Sov map. Atlas will still control and defend the 3 regions it holds so we still have the 15~ish decent systems to rat in so our members can make money.
Agreeing with the atlas poster here, what a weird thing to say.
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 03:07:00 -
[17]
Edited by: ep1k on 10/11/2009 03:09:36 I sure wish a ccp dev was on that top poster list.
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 20:12:00 -
[18]
Dont increase 0.0 income because i want my level 4 alt to make me money forever. I am also a big baby who has never been in a large 0.0 alliance and thinks the average player get nonstop free money from moons.
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 22:23:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Orthaen
For the nine hundredth time, if you want to stay in empire running level 4s, nothing CCP will do can change your mind. The game is yours to play how you choose.
They could increase the isk rewards in null sec. That pretty much what this thread boils down too. People want to go to nullsec and make money, but people arent dumb. They dont want to risk dying to make equal or less money. Even if anomalies are the exact same income as level 4s you wont make the exact same money. Youll be taxed to pay upkeep, your ship will get blown up losing you money, and losing you time to replace it, which could be used to be making money, meaning you lose even more money.
If people thought they could make double or triple what they make doing level 4s they would flock to try to get to that. They would fight to try to get it, and this expansion would be a success. Sure not everyone would come, but many would.
You say nullsec ores are better. Sure some of them are sometimes. But then that ore just dosent turn into minerals when you look at it. Hauling refining and risk are all issues. Even when alliances want to take advantage of them. It only takes one ganker in a system to prevent that. Also the level 4 problem isnt just that it gives you more money than mining would Level 4 loot being refined into minerals is a very huge source of them. Running a level 4 is essentially mining with missiles.
Increase the null sec income potentials, drive people out to it. Make them want to stop running level 4s. Then there will be a gap where there loot was giving you minerals. Now maybe people will have a reason to mine.
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 22:50:00 -
[20]
Edited by: ep1k on 10/11/2009 22:52:36
Originally by: Kepakh
Originally by: ep1k
They could increase the isk rewards in null sec. That pretty much what this thread boils down too. People want to go to nullsec and make money, but people arent dumb. They dont want to risk dying to make equal or less money. Even if anomalies are the exact same income as level 4s you wont make the exact same money. Youll be taxed to pay upkeep, your ship will get blown up losing you money, and losing you time to replace it, which could be used to be making money, meaning you lose even more money.
If people thought they could make double or triple what they make doing level 4s they would flock to try to get to that. They would fight to try to get it, and this expansion would be a success. Sure not everyone would come, but many would.
You say nullsec ores are better. Sure some of them are sometimes. But then that ore just dosent turn into minerals when you look at it. Hauling refining and risk are all issues. Even when alliances want to take advantage of them. It only takes one ganker in a system to prevent that. Also the level 4 problem isnt just that it gives you more money than mining would Level 4 loot being refined into minerals is a very huge source of them. Running a level 4 is essentially mining with missiles.
Increase the null sec income potentials, drive people out to it. Make them want to stop running level 4s. Then there will be a gap where there loot was giving you minerals. Now maybe people will have a reason to mine.
Stop this crap already.
If anyone wants to live in 0.0, he's are already there and fund himself by missions/whatever flies your boat. Increasing ratting rewards won't make anyone coming to 0.0, it will only make more ISK to current 0.0 inhabitans.
In fact, more profitable ratting means more PVP resulting in: 1) less profitable ratting 2) static 0.0 because everyone is ratting 2) static 0.0 because anyone who is not ratting is protecting the ratters leaving no aggresors
(half-serious on this one)
I never even mentioned ratting. Make the ore a bigger step above veld. Make anomalies not on par with level 4 but double. Give rewards that you want to fight to keep. Make it so making your income has risk and large payoffs. Noone here wants free isk. They want large isk that you die for. Would this cause more pvp? Yes it would. And your statement of wah wah we already make money doing level 4s is just idiotic. Thats the problem. You cant fight someone to hurt their income because its in motsu. You have no reason to take over someones space and gain thier previous rewards, because their rewards are in motsu. Tye high isk gain to owning space. Reduce the space you can control. Then we will have an interesting null sec. I am all for having less space for large alliances.
|
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 23:20:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Kepakh
Originally by: ep1k
I never even mentioned ratting. Make the ore a bigger step above veld. Make anomalies not on par with level 4 but double. Give rewards that you want to fight to keep. Make it so making your income has risk and large payoffs. Noone here wants free isk. They want large isk that you die for. Would this cause more pvp? Yes it would. And your statement of wah wah we already make money doing level 4s is just idiotic. Thats the problem. You cant fight someone to hurt their income because its in motsu. You have no reason to take over someones space and gain thier previous rewards, because their rewards are in motsu. Tye high isk gain to owning space. Reduce the space you can control. Then we will have an interesting null sec. I am all for having less space for large alliances.
Ratting, anomalies, roids, w/e is all the same and making it more rewarding does not make anyone who is not already living in 0.0 to live there.
Risk vs Reward is just nonsense. According to this logic you should be paid more for as you expose yourself to higher risk. If that is the case, you are just stupid and deserve to get podded.
So all the posts of people saying they were planning to bring their alliance out to 0.0 then when they saw the upgrades decided not to. They were disspointed that nullsec still wasnt that great of income.. If you seriously cant figure out that isk income is important for people deciding where to go and amke money, you are a fool. By you logic if you increased 00. income 500x noone would move there. If you cut level 4 income down to 10% noone would move to 0.0. Isk drives everything, and its the reason people arent happy with this patch.
If you want people to move to nullsec, you increase the reward. And according to everythign ccp has said they do. Im telling you this is not enough. The small alliances are telling them its not enough. You admit you dotn want more people in nullsec, adn that you dont care.
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 23:41:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Kepakh
You can make silly ISK in wormholes by sleeper gridning, still the space is dead empty.
Stop doing things the way it doesn't work.
There are several people in this thread saying they currently make good money in wormhole space and wanted to move their corps to 0.0. But the isk income is not enticing enough for them to do it. they want to do something. but wont do something that actually hurts them. People dont want to make less money to take longer to do what they enjoy. so yes, iw oudl say income does alter these peoples positions. You can keep ignoring the point of this expansion all you want, and you will continue to miss the point.
This was supposed to drive people to nullsec, and it wont untill there are increased incentives.
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 23:54:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Tesal
Originally by: ep1k
Originally by: Kepakh
You can make silly ISK in wormholes by sleeper gridning, still the space is dead empty.
Stop doing things the way it doesn't work.
There are several people in this thread saying they currently make good money in wormhole space and wanted to move their corps to 0.0. But the isk income is not enticing enough for them to do it. they want to do something. but wont do something that actually hurts them. People dont want to make less money to take longer to do what they enjoy. so yes, iw oudl say income does alter these peoples positions. You can keep ignoring the point of this expansion all you want, and you will continue to miss the point.
This was supposed to drive people to nullsec, and it wont untill there are increased incentives.
No this was supposed to fix Sov and get rid of afk empires. This is not the patch for the carebears to rise up from Jita and fly into 0.0.
Given that EVE was designed to be a sandbox where the players can establish and topple each other's empires in nullsec, what kind of problems do you see with the sovereignty system as it exists today?
The thing is that sovereignty hasn't evolved much since we introduced it, so we're seeing a lot of flaws coming out over time that we want to address. It's also that we want to allow much more build up and infrastructure and also enable more people to live out there. So what we're looking at long term is that an alliance can control a region and create treaties with other corporations and license them to get in, and there's actually an infrastructure where you can have a relationship where both sides benefit from it. It's not a free form thing anymore. What we'd like to see are more ways to establish and defend sovereignty, but also at the same time have more opportunities to really build up your own space and harness its resources - and become an empire.
Sov needs fixing, and thats fine. Every single large alliance wants less space. You are so mad at them you cant see this but ok. No small corp is going to start paying to use the space. They aret going to pay sov tax, then tax to alliance to earn level 4 income. And the current upgrades do not turn your space into a super empire.
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 00:58:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Cailais
Originally by: Trent Nichols Edited by: Trent Nichols on 11/11/2009 00:35:22
Originally by: Cailais
The incentive is simple: to have their name on the map. That's the only incentive, perhaps the only real reason to be in .0 fighting for sov. It's an epeen, kudos thing.
Currently the large Alliances have taken all of that space. The current mechanics make it very hard to capture any of it which de-incentivizes (sic) fledgling alliances from even trying.
In stark terms this is a 0.0 're-set'.
C.
No it isn't. If anything, the cost of setting up shop in Dominion 0.0 will ensure that no new colors arrive on the map to challenge the old anytime soon.
To be clear about us in the existing 0.0 alliances wanting to see new people out in 0.0 - We don't want this because we care about the small alliances themselves. We care about having more people to fight, closer to home. We also would like to fight some different people from time to time.
Dominion 0.0 will be a ghost town. No reason to fight our old enemies and no new enemies to fill the void. The biggest problem with Dominion isn't the weak upgrades or the insane costs but what it all adds up to - boredom.
Ive emphasised the critical bit here:
remembering the base question
"Ask yourself this question: why do you fight for sovereignty?
Answer - to make more ISK, to gain more sov".
So the dilemma here is whether the ISK cost of getting sov is worth getting your name 'on the map'.
The basic costs (not including cyno jammers, jump bridges et al) aren't that high. A sov .0 system (and the surrounding unclaimed systems) will probably cover the cost of holding sov in the first place. If you're lucky a Alliance might even make a small profit.
It will be a significant challenge. Id expect quite a lot of 'fledgling alliances' to try, and fail but then that's all part of the process. A bit like starting up a small business I guess.
Growth is a increased challenge as an Alliance will need to match its player base against its extent of sovereign space. Grow too fast and an Alliance will out strip its ability to maintain and cultivate that space. Too slowly and its surrounding area will become saturated.
Should be interesting to see how corps and alliances approach that balancing act.
C.
And i will argue that the people willing to fight for the sake of a name or to fight are already doing so. If their goal of growing 0.0 is to be met new goals need to be established. More isk would be a compelling one for many people. And if done right could encourage eve more fighting to control the rewards. not just fighting because what the hell else am i going to do.
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 02:29:00 -
[25]
Originally by: gambrinous
Originally by: KeratinBoy What if, along with these changes, CCP decided to charge players through the nose for, well, the same experience?
The updated patch notes now state that they are trying to reduce empire alt sprawl, you know, condense empire carebears into fewer, more lucrative alts. As a result you will have to pay 7 mill a day for any character that logs on in empire. To make things more lucrative, there are now 10 more lvl 3 agents in every system.
Pretty much this. Making people pay more and giving them less isnt how you charge up the player base.
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 04:59:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Sidus Sarmiang
Originally by: Marlona Sky
Originally by: Honest Smedley Top Forum Warriors In Thread -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 87 - Kepakh 81 - Korodan - GoonFleet, GoonSwarm 77 - Qlanth - Merch Industrial, GoonSwarm 59 - Vivian Azure 58 - EdFromHumanResources - GoonFleet, GoonSwarm 50 - Tesal 46 - Hertford - Ars ex Discordia, GoonSwarm 45 - gambrinous 45 - Vadinho - GoonFleet, GoonSwarm 43 - Zahorite
Most Posts By Corporations -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1035 - Unknown 545 - GoonFleet, GoonSwarm 121 - Merch Industrial, GoonSwarm 70 - Ars ex Discordia, GoonSwarm 63 - Di-Tron Heavy Industries, Atlas Alliance 41 - Koshaku 31 - GoonFleet (had Alliance ticker suppressed) 29 - Arcana Imperii Ltd., Atlas Alliance 25 - Unknown, Atlas Alliance (had Corp ticker suppressed) 24 - Danke fuer den Fisch
Most Posts By Alliances -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1604 - Unallied/Unknown 828 - GoonSwarm 161 - Atlas Alliance 51 - Morsus Mihi 50 - Curatores Veritatis Alliance 32 - Against ALL Authorities 27 - Triumvirate. 24 - Wildly Inappropriate. 22 - Pandemic Legion 21 - Vertigo Coalition
Like I have been saying...
27 Triumvirate posts? I would've thought it'd be closer to 19.7.
Large alliance full of people from a message board. I am shocked they post the most.
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.17 23:14:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Ranger 1 Edited by: Ranger 1 on 17/11/2009 23:03:00
Originally by: Shawna Gray Edited by: Shawna Gray on 17/11/2009 22:50:01
Originally by: Cearain But in game the leadership of the different alliances should be lead by different people if they want the lower costs. If itĘs the same people then the costs of each system should go up.
You cant control that.
Originally by: Ranger 1
I could also swear that pretty much everyone in this thread is either smiling or screaming over the fact that the current sov sprawl is unsustainable under Dominion.
You dont need sov to claim a system, and with the low value of the upgrades alliances will just not put down a sov marker but will control it anyway. There are only about 110 pages of posts explaining this in this thread. If they cant manage to get into 0.0 now they wont do it after dominion.
I'm just going to put out some very simple numbers, you can make of it what you will.
One fully upgraded anomaly is purported to bring in level 4 mission income, lets use 40mil per hour as a figure to work with.
If your alliance membership can manage to keep 1 anomaly busy 23/7 that is a total of 644 hours in a 28 day (2 fortnights) period.
If your corps charge a standard 10% tax (4 mil per hour) that one anomaly generates 2,576,000,000 isk in that 28 day period... in tax alone.
The other 23,184,000,000 goes into the pockets of your alliance members.
This is 1 anomaly out of the 10 generated by your upgrades. This does not include any naturally occuring anomalies. This does not include any escalations. This does not include any of the other 4 upgradeable income types. This does not include the normal income generating assets in the system (ratting, moons, Cap ship production, etc.).
Oh yes, those upgrades are totally useless.
Engage your brain and think for yourself, stop mouthing platitudes without actually looking at the numbers.
And I will say this one more time, slowly. Keep telling yourself that 0.0 alliances have nothing to worry about... that if they keep saying 0.0 will be worthless then everyone will believe it and not start hammering at the cracks which will develop. You should find December very, very entertaining.
Cost is not the issue large alliances will control all the space they want whether or not they claim sov or not. You seem to have a fantasy where all these smalls guys will finally be able to make out it out to 0.0 and challenge the big guys. They could do that now if they wanted, and they do not.
Its all about motivation, having a reason to live in the space. Level four income is not a good reason. No small corps are going to come out and try to fight, take loses and get attacked daily just they can earn level 4 income. Thats pretty silly.
Explain to me why they will be coming out to nullsec to fight? What does this expansion offer them they didnt have before.
|
|
|
|