| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 41 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Malphilos
State War Academy
Caldari State
112
   |
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:09:00 -
[661] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:
my goal is for people to finance their nullsec lives where they live: nullsec
Without getting into why that matters to you: You're not able to do that?
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
3580
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:11:00 -
[662] - Quote
Malphilos wrote:Weaselior wrote:
my goal is for people to finance their nullsec lives where they live: nullsec
Without getting into why that matters to you: You're not able to do that?
why it matters to me is critically important and has been posted in this very thread in the last few pages
i have elaborated on all relevant points feel free to quote the ones you disagree with or do not understand |
Adelphie
Paradox Collective
Choke Point
58
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:11:00 -
[663] - Quote
Malphilos wrote:Weaselior wrote:
my goal is for people to finance their nullsec lives where they live: nullsec
Without getting into why that matters to you: You're not able to do that?
Many people are, but an equal number use empire for all their purchasing, and even lvl4 alts. |
Delen Ormand
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:12:00 -
[664] - Quote
Aryth wrote:Delen Ormand wrote:Xen Solarus wrote:Ban Bindy wrote:
The current cult of shooting non-combatants in high sec provides easy kills for those who live and die by the billboard.
These are the factors I think have killed null sec play.
^ This. Make High-Sec more secure, and force all the lazy people that claim to be doing PVP (by killing defenceless targets) to actually go and do PVP (Where the targets actually shoot back). I've not lived in null for a long whiles now. Has everyone become best friends now? Can't someone just..... start a war or something?  From what I see, which admittedly is in large part from the hisec perspective, I kind've agree and disagree with what's above. I think Ban is right but not because of the killings themselves. I think it's the killings along with the attitude that we see from a lot of PvPers towards hisec dwellers that puts people off null (and low). Rightly or wrongly, they feel victimised by that kind of play. I'm sure miners will correct me if I'm wrong, but I actually don't think many miners would have too much of an issue with the occasional loss of a ship (though they might feel annoyed at the time), but it's the sheer volume of killings that are happening now (not just because of Hulkageddon). It feels like griefing, even if it's within the game rules. Suicide ganking also feels cheap - like running up to someone and punching them really hard in the balls, plus the result is almost a foregone conclusion. And then have the person laugh at you with all their friends, especially if you say anything in public about it (come to think of it, there's some parallels with bullying there) Because it is economic terrorism. The whole point is to inflict terror and market changes. Yes, it is a punch to the balls, that is what makes it effective. Welcome to the new EVE. Gameplay has evolved to include null sec alliances waging market warfare at the galaxy wide scale. Dead miners are the means to an end. Hopefully CCP doesn't go too far trying to squash this type of gameplay. I don't think we have tested the limits of it quite yet.
I don't know that people are terrified, what with it being a game and all. I mean, have you ever played a game called Thief:Deadly Shadows? Sucked for the most part, but The Cradle - that level was some scary ****. I'm guessing that when people have their hulks blown up, there's more pissed-offness involved than actual terror.
Anyway, whatever your reasons are, if it's having the effect you want then hey, have fun. I'm off to listen to that Weaselior guy instead, he's saying some more interesting stuff ;P |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
3580
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:13:00 -
[665] - Quote
i don't finance myself in nullsec anymore only because what i do now (patch speculation, market manipulation) can't be done in null, but i got my start in null
but that's because i'm a goon and went to null immediately, and lived there: goonswarm is relatively unique in never exposing its newbies to empire so we have far less l4 alts than most people |
Lord Zim
866
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:14:00 -
[666] - Quote
Malphilos wrote:Without getting into why that matters to you: You're not able to do that?
Imagine this scenario:
a) You're in nullsec, and you have to look at local all the time, and you make 60-70m/hour. You can expect to get ganked at least once in a while because you didn't pay close enough attention to local.
b) You're in hisec, and you can do L4s and barely pay attention to the client past telling it to shoot the next rat, and make 40m/hour or so.
What do you think happens? |
Tarryn Nightstorm
Hellstar Towing and Recovery
425
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:14:00 -
[667] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:I have this great news for you: null sec is the apex of player generated, emergent content.
Make your player generated content less sh!tty and maybe you'll convince someone to go there.
As long as we get forum poasters belating and bashing on anyone who don't conform to The One An Only Intended Way for the "free" sandbox everybody will just think null sec is full of douches and to steer well clear off it.
You know what? A year or 2 ago there was a guy who went to nullsec alone, established his little base and from there called newbies in a very friendly and humble way. Surprise, he got people to join him. Surprise, he asked kindly and was not a total asshat.
^^This.^^
Zerosec is not the problem.
It's the tw*ts who own half of it.
Sorry, but I don't want my gameplay informed by the self-important delusions of douchebags and their douchey little mentality, and their douchey little metagaming drama crap.
All over non-real achievements in a video-game?
Get an effin' grip, people.
I play video-games to escape from that IRL, why the Hell would I want aspects of a second job, working for/taking it from the same kinds of assholes, in the same kind of ways as in my actual RL job, only in this case it's something I pay to do, supposedly for fun?
In irae, veritas. |
Kimmi Chan
Illuminatus Reforged
The Revenant Order
141
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:14:00 -
[668] - Quote
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:Lord Zim wrote:But if we buff null or lowsec, we get eve's economist slitting his wrist over the rampant inflation, and if we nerf L4s we get people like Malphilos saying that the idea something needs to be nerfed is a symptom of a base and mean intellect.
Simple solution is to increase highsec taxes. People who want to play with the lower risk that comes from concord, faction police and sentry guns should be paying for it. There should be _no_ tax-free refining or trading in a stations guarded by police bots, and highsec customs offices should have a base tax rate above Interbus offices ones in riskier areas. The obvious problem with inflation in this game is that no one is really paying the NPCs for the services they provide. Those feature rich NPC stations should have fees to match. Those concord owned and concord protected customs offices should have higher taxes than the Interbus ones that have no protection and can be shot down.
I would actually go a little further than this. As a High Sec mission runner I actually feel that I, in fact, make a lot of ISK for grinding missions over and over. it's isn't a ton but enough not to quit doing it.
The risk in ganking me is a CONCORD response but how much am I paying in taxes to live with 5-0 in my system?
Nothing.
I might suggest a tax imposed on systems where CONCORD has a presence. Perhaps a tax that corporations have to pay or it could be assessed on an individual basis. It is just an idea and needs some fleshing out but I think that is reasonable. My taxes IRL are used to pay police, miltary, and other programs. Why am I not paying taxes for CONCORD - how else are CHiPs in Space going to get paid?
On the subject of jump bridges/capital bridges. I could care less about SOV holding alliances jumping fleets all over null sec. They have worked hard and I can see why not being able to do that for day to day operations and logistics would be a nightmare. But limit the range of it to anywhere within Null. I think that if large alliances are actually gate jumping through low sec on their way to High Sec market hubs you create an environment where small scale PvP can occur. I may be mistaken and if so please let me know.
On the subject of null industry. It makes absolutely no ****ing sense to me why Null Sec Alliances should be penalized for putting up infrastructure for refining and manufacturing. I think slots should scale with refining and manufacturing efficiency. Correct me if I am wrong but aren't there varying levels of sov? Like Sov Level 1-5? The higher Sov level the more slots and less waste with L5 being comparable to High Sec stations. Not sure how many slots your manufacturing or research addons provide but how many do you think would be appropriate. I am not sure an alliance would need as many as a high sec Empire station.
These are my thoughts as of page 28-ish. I am thrilled at a lot of the engaging discussion and hope it can continue. I have seen a lot of douchbaggery as well including some edited post and would again encourage everyone to keep this discussion constructive. We all play the same game regardless of how we choose to play. None of us is an island.
-á"Miners mine so I don't have to." ~Metal Icarus |
Malphilos
State War Academy
Caldari State
112
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:15:00 -
[669] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Malphilos wrote:Weaselior wrote:
my goal is for people to finance their nullsec lives where they live: nullsec
Without getting into why that matters to you: You're not able to do that? why it matters to me is critically important and has been posted in this very thread in the last few pages i have elaborated on all relevant points feel free to quote the ones you disagree with or do not understand
As you say, that's ground already covered. I'll ask again:
You're not able to do that?
I suspect the answer is obvious, which pretty much makes a hash of your other arguments.
|
Malphilos
State War Academy
Caldari State
112
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:16:00 -
[670] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:
What do you think happens?
How many hours do I have?
|
Rer Eirikr
SniggWaffe
110
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:17:00 -
[671] - Quote
Malph either read the goddamn thread or STFU. Now I'm getting irritated because you're just putting us off track for no reason. |
Lord Zim
866
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:17:00 -
[672] - Quote
Malphilos wrote:Lord Zim wrote:
What do you think happens?
How many hours do I have?
Whatever passes for "normal jew time" in your neck of the woods. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power.
Cascade Imminent
1304
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:23:00 -
[673] - Quote
Malphilos wrote:Weaselior wrote:
my goal is for people to finance their nullsec lives where they live: nullsec
Without getting into why that matters to you: You're not able to do that?
You can, but overall you forego isk compared to living in highsec, once you factor in time spent defending and securing the space you're using (assuming you're even on an alliance ship reimbursement program when doing so), scaling down investment in your PVE ship, lack of access to secondary and tertiary economy, or paying rent; the idea that nullsec is much more profitable is certainly questionable. This isn't even going into the days of pre-nerf highsec incursions, where most 0.0 players just used highsec incursion alts and space was empty. |
Malphilos
State War Academy
Caldari State
112
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:24:00 -
[674] - Quote
Rer Eirikr wrote:Malph either read the goddamn thread or STFU. Now I'm getting irritated because you're just putting us off track for no reason.
Sorry, I'm less than impressed by "lets make the alternative suck so we can have more low level targets" as an important discussion.
And that's been the point all along.
|
Aryth
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
109
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:26:00 -
[675] - Quote
Delen Ormand wrote:
Anyway, whatever your reasons are, if it's having the effect you want then hey, have fun. I'm off to listen to that Weaselior guy instead, he's saying some more interesting stuff ;P
He's good cop |
Rer Eirikr
SniggWaffe
111
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:26:00 -
[676] - Quote
Malphilos wrote:Rer Eirikr wrote:Malph either read the goddamn thread or STFU. Now I'm getting irritated because you're just putting us off track for no reason. Sorry, I'm less than impressed by "lets make the alternative suck so we can have more low level targets" as an important discussion. And that's been the point all along.
I refer you to the now 10s of pages where we discuss the importance of changing Null Sec Industry to promote a more active Industrial Core thus fueling the "Farms and Fields" mentality. The thought process behind nerfing L4s is to make NullSec pilots come back to Null to make their ISK, rather than the extremely easy process of setting up a L4 alt and just letting the cash roll in with no PvP environment being fostered. |
Large Collidable Object
morons.
1587
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:32:00 -
[677] - Quote
Adelphie wrote:Large Collidable Object wrote:Oh - and on the stealing moongoo idea - I proposed that a lot during recent years as that is what I want to do: Current established nullsec alliances are established empires for the most part - kinda like states.
I don't want to hold space and be a farmer, I want to raid and **** the current farmers - unfortunatley, there's nothing except popping a ratter every now and then - everything else is protected by EHP and timers, so the blob has plenty of time to ove in.
Enable me to raid Lindisfarne and I'll be all around again. IT's funny how a game made by probable descendants of Vikings is all supportive of a blob of peasants rather than raiders. Thinking back - It was a thread made by you where I saw the moon goo stealing idea. Props. I like the farm analogy - The problem is that CCP sometimes think take it too literally, and think that to make a field more fertile you have to spread it with ****.
IMHO - that's the entire problem - a tech moon can be controled by an AFK-Empire - be it PL or CFC and there's nothing you can do about it except forming a bigger/better blob and become the same way they are - i.e. putting up your own goo-farming pos and be able to defend that if you either have a couple of thousand members to get people for fleets or relatively huge numbers of skill-demanding fleet concepts that have an edge on current CFC concepts.
They'll all be noticed days in advance, spread it around jabber and log in if the need arises.
Vulnerable nullsec would raise the demand in actually populated nullsec to defend against the constant threat from raiders and would be an incentive for alliances to just hold as much space as they're currently able to control actively instead of relying on an AFK empire only waking up on a jabber ping.
You know... morons. |
dontbanmebro
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
28
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:35:00 -
[678] - Quote
Large Collidable Object wrote:IMHO - that's the entire problem.
yup, yup, and more yup
|
Adelphie
Paradox Collective
Choke Point
62
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:36:00 -
[679] - Quote
Large Collidable Object wrote:Adelphie wrote:Large Collidable Object wrote:Oh - and on the stealing moongoo idea - I proposed that a lot during recent years as that is what I want to do: Current established nullsec alliances are established empires for the most part - kinda like states.
I don't want to hold space and be a farmer, I want to raid and **** the current farmers - unfortunatley, there's nothing except popping a ratter every now and then - everything else is protected by EHP and timers, so the blob has plenty of time to ove in.
Enable me to raid Lindisfarne and I'll be all around again. IT's funny how a game made by probable descendants of Vikings is all supportive of a blob of peasants rather than raiders. Thinking back - It was a thread made by you where I saw the moon goo stealing idea. Props. I like the farm analogy - The problem is that CCP sometimes think take it too literally, and think that to make a field more fertile you have to spread it with ****. IMHO - that's the entire problem - a tech moon can be controled by an AFK-Empire - be it PL or CFC and there's nothing you can do about it except forming a bigger/better blob and become the same way they are - i.e. putting up your own goo-farming pos and be able to defend that if you either have a couple of thousand members to get people for fleets or relatively huge numbers of skill-demanding fleet concepts that have an edge on current CFC concepts. They'll all be noticed days in advance, spread it around jabber and log in if the need arises. Vulnerable nullsec would raise the demand in actually populated nullsec to defend against the constant threat from raiders and would be an incentive for alliances to just hold as much space as they're currently able to control actively instead of relying on an AFK empire only waking up on a jabber ping.
It's a shame that this isn't on page 1.
|
Oisin Sandovar
Don't Die Interstellar Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:38:00 -
[680] - Quote
Rer Eirikr wrote:
I refer you to the now 10s of pages where we discuss the importance of changing Null Sec Industry to promote a more active Industrial Core thus fueling the "Farms and Fields" mentality. The thought process behind nerfing L4s is to make NullSec pilots come back to Null to make their ISK, rather than the extremely easy process of setting up a L4 alt and just letting the cash roll in with no PvP environment being fostered.
That and some missioning capabilities. Weaselior had mentioned that some pages back.
It seems that somehow the owning corp/alliance could get a message, say from a pirate who is threatening the area. They could then setup a contract (mission) to have someone go take care of the issues.
Seems like this would be a new system, but Eve would generate the mission and the corp/alliance would issue it and pay for it.
Just a thought. It would need more fleshing out. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power.
Cascade Imminent
1306
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:39:00 -
[681] - Quote
Large Collidable Object wrote:IMHO - that's the entire problem - a tech moon can be controled by an AFK-Empire - be it PL or CFC and there's nothing you can do about it except forming a bigger/better blob and become the same way they are - i.e. putting up your own goo-farming pos and be able to defend that if you either have a couple of thousand members to get people for fleets or relatively huge numbers of skill-demanding fleet concepts that have an edge on current CFC concepts.
They'll all be noticed days in advance, spread it around jabber and log in if the need arises.
Vulnerable nullsec would raise the demand in actually populated nullsec to defend against the constant threat from raiders and would be an incentive for alliances to just hold as much space as they're currently available to instead of relying on an AFK empire only wkes up on a jabber ping.
That's not your problem. 70-80% of null doesn't even have tech moons. The problem is the reason why you don't want to move to any of the non-tech space.
Now I've argued on the Jita Speakers Forum that sov levels should move from just million+ EHP structures and time to include level of activity within the system as a factor for military sov ie: the less used a system is, the easier it is to take, maybe the resists of the TCU drop even. Add planetary control (DUST mercs) and POCO holding as factors as well, and do away with sov bills in exchange for this increase in maintenance. Roaming gangs, cloakers and DUST merc contracts could significantly soften up a target system (system could no longer support cynojammers, jump bridges) before even having to shoot a single structure. |
Lord Zim
866
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:39:00 -
[682] - Quote
Malphilos wrote:Rer Eirikr wrote:Malph either read the goddamn thread or STFU. Now I'm getting irritated because you're just putting us off track for no reason. Sorry, I'm less than impressed by "lets make the alternative suck so we can have more low level targets" as an important discussion. And that's been the point all along.
Let's presume you've got 2 hours a day you can dedicate to moneymaking, and that you're a coward so you choose L4s. You choose a sufficiently usable ship for L4s, and you reliably make, say, 70-80m/day for no effort and no risk.
Let's presume you have the same 2 hours a day you can dedicate to moneymaking, and you're not quite the coward, so you choose to make your money in nullsec. You choose a sufficiently usable ship for the most lucrative sanctum, and you try to run them. However, one day you get interrupted by 2-3 roaming gangs, and the next 3-4 days some blackops/bombers gang has decided to camp 4-5 different systems, yours amongst them. The first two days you just don't do anything, the third you start to get impatient because you haven't made much isk this week, and on the fourth you say **** it and run sanctums anyways. And you get popped. And you're now left having to buy a new ship and mods, which may or may not need to be imported from hisec, which may take a day or two to arrange. And after all this is said and done, you're now left with less isk than you started with, whereas the guy who just went for L4s are now +400m.
So, you've done the nullsec ratting for 10 days and are left with less money than you started. What do you do? |
Rer Eirikr
SniggWaffe
111
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:39:00 -
[683] - Quote
Adelphie wrote:It's a shame that this isn't on page 1.
Its your thread...  You could even post highlight pages. |
Adelphie
Paradox Collective
Choke Point
62
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:40:00 -
[684] - Quote
Oisin Sandovar wrote:Rer Eirikr wrote:
I refer you to the now 10s of pages where we discuss the importance of changing Null Sec Industry to promote a more active Industrial Core thus fueling the "Farms and Fields" mentality. The thought process behind nerfing L4s is to make NullSec pilots come back to Null to make their ISK, rather than the extremely easy process of setting up a L4 alt and just letting the cash roll in with no PvP environment being fostered.
That and some missioning capabilities. Weaselior had mentioned that some pages back. It seems that somehow the owning corp/alliance could get a message, say from a pirate who is threatening the area. They could then setup a contract (mission) to have someone go take care of the issues. Seems like this would be a new system, but Eve would generate the mission and the corp/alliance would issue it and pay for it. Just a thought. It would need more fleshing out.
Sounds like the existing bounty system to me, |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
3586
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:40:00 -
[685] - Quote
Malphilos wrote:
As you say, that's ground already covered. I'll ask again:
You're not able to do that?
I suspect the answer is obvious, which pretty much makes a hash of your other arguments.
the answer to this has been explained before, if you wish to make stupid arguments you will make them yourself rather than me making them for you |
Malphilos
State War Academy
Caldari State
112
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:41:00 -
[686] - Quote
Rer Eirikr wrote:Malphilos wrote:Rer Eirikr wrote:Malph either read the goddamn thread or STFU. Now I'm getting irritated because you're just putting us off track for no reason. Sorry, I'm less than impressed by "lets make the alternative suck so we can have more low level targets" as an important discussion. And that's been the point all along. I refer you to the now 10s of pages where we discuss the importance of changing Null Sec Industry to promote a more active Industrial Core thus fueling the "Farms and Fields" mentality. The thought process behind nerfing L4s is to make NullSec pilots come back to Null to make their ISK, rather than the extremely easy process of setting up a L4 alt and just letting the cash roll in with no PvP environment being fostered.
While I like the idea of encouraging industry, I'm still rather unimpressed with the mindset of making things suck more to move people around.
I asked earlier why people were in null if it sucked so much, the response was that the things people wanted to do were there. Combine that with the loudest complaint about nerfing jump bridges, and it seems to me that the issue isn't isk/hr, it's simply hr.
You can encourage a few people to drop their L4 alts by reducing the reward, but I'll bet all you really do is reduce the amount of PvP overall. A ship loss represents a greater investment of time than money. CCP sells iskies. Time is the only limited commodity.
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
3586
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:42:00 -
[687] - Quote
Malphilos wrote:Rer Eirikr wrote:Malph either read the goddamn thread or STFU. Now I'm getting irritated because you're just putting us off track for no reason. Sorry, I'm less than impressed by "lets make the alternative suck so we can have more low level targets" as an important discussion. And that's been the point all along.
i do not care what a guy who has been in an npc corp for nine years is "impressed with" and neither does anyone else of note
the reason we are forced to do this dance is you're not actually clever enough to even attempt to deconstruct the argument |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
3586
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:42:00 -
[688] - Quote
Malphilos wrote:
You can encourage a few people to drop their L4 alts by reducing the reward, but I'll bet all you really do is reduce the amount of PvP overall. A ship loss represents a greater investment of time than money. CCP sells iskies. Time is the only limited commodity.
none of this is remotely true, and evidences a complete lack of understanding of anything that has been discussed |
Oisin Sandovar
Don't Die Interstellar Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:43:00 -
[689] - Quote
Adelphie wrote:
Sounds like the existing bounty system to me,
I guess, except this wouldn't be against other players, but some random NPC. It could even be some Empire NPC.
Unless I'm misunderstanding the bounty system. |
Kimmi Chan
Illuminatus Reforged
The Revenant Order
141
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 00:44:00 -
[690] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:That's not your problem. 70-80% of null doesn't even have tech moons. The problem is the reason why you don't want to move to any of the non-tech space.
Now I've argued on the Jita Speakers Forum that sov levels should move from just million+ EHP structures and time to include level of activity within the system as a factor for military sov ie: the less used a system is, the easier it is to take, maybe the resists of the TCU drop even. Add planetary control (DUST mercs) and POCO holding as factors as well, and do away with sov bills in exchange for this increase in maintenance. Roaming gangs, cloakers and DUST merc contracts could significantly soften up a target system (system could no longer support cynojammers, jump bridges) before even having to shoot a single structure.
I like the forward thinking used to include Dust in this equation. Can you post a link to this thread that you are referencing? I wouldn't mind giving it a read.
Thanks Nic.
-á"Miners mine so I don't have to." ~Metal Icarus |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 41 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |