EVE Search - "equal value space makes this game boring"

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

"equal value space makes this game boring"

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
A Little Girl	Posted - 2011.03.17 08:20:00 - [1] Quote: òAs a part of the "equal value space makes this game boring" initiative, we've changed the way anomalies work. The quality of anomalies will depend on the systems truesec - the better the truesec, the better the spawns. CCP Greyscale is writing a blog on this exact change, coming soonTM What means this!!! Ahem. Please clarify what is meant by "the better the truesec" does that mean higher or lower? Don't you mean lower/worse?
m3rr	Posted - 2011.03.17 08:22:00 - [2] learn to negative the less the trusec the better it is
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2011.03.17 08:25:00 - [3] Example : -0.9 truesec will have more lucrative (better) anomalies compared to -0.1 truesec _ Make ISK\|\|Build\|\|React\|\|1k papercuts _
A Little Girl	Posted - 2011.03.17 08:26:00 - [4] Originally by: m3rr learn to negative No! Quote: the less the trusec the better it is Thanks
Qiwi'Lisolet Gallente Garoun Investment Bank	Posted - 2011.03.17 14:13:00 - [5] Edited by: Qiwi''Lisolet on 17/03/2011 14:13:34 Remember, zero both exists and doesnt exist at the same time. ;) So there is no truly 0.0, only 0.0000000^x1/x and 0.00000000^x1/-x.... sorry, had to. XTC - Qiwi
dexington Caldari Baconoration	Posted - 2011.03.17 14:37:00 - [6] Originally by: Akita T Example : -0.9 truesec will have more lucrative (better) anomalies compared to -0.1 truesec More lucrative in what way?, higher bounty on rats?, better chance of getting faction spawns?, better chance of faction drops from faction spawns?
Chaos Incarnate Faceless Logistics	Posted - 2011.03.17 14:42:00 - [7] Originally by: dexington Originally by: Akita T Example : -0.9 truesec will have more lucrative (better) anomalies compared to -0.1 truesec More lucrative in what way?, higher bounty on rats?, better chance of getting faction spawns?, better chance of faction drops from faction spawns? presumably more of the better sites spawned i don't think we'll know for sure until whatever new devblog comes out _____________________ Look down. Back up. Where are you? You're on a forum, with the alt your alt could post like.
ivar R'dhak Minmatar	Posted - 2011.03.17 14:51:00 - [8] Another great idea by CCP(tm). Make already valuable space even more valuable, so that the peeps who can¦t make as much as the ones already there want to invade it. Random question: Is there a way to lower truesec value with one of the "new" sovereignty structures? No? Hmm. ______________ Mal-¦Appears we got here just in a nick of time. What does that make us?¦ Zoe-`Big damn heroes, sir.` Mal-¦Aint we just.¦
mkmin	Posted - 2011.03.17 15:21:00 - [9] Originally by: ivar R'dhak Another great idea by CCP(tm). Make already valuable space even more valuable, so that the peeps who can¦t make as much as the ones already there want to invade it. Random question: Is there a way to lower truesec value with one of the "new" sovereignty structures? No? Hmm. Indeed. Having some space that is fortified and completely untake-able and making everything else absolutely worthless is a vast improvement. Nothing helps encourage conflict more than throwing more resources at people who already have it in limitless amounts.
Winters Chill Amarr Born-2-Kill 0ccupational Hazzard	Posted - 2011.03.17 15:36:00 - [10] Originally by: Qiwi'Lisolet Edited by: Qiwi''Lisolet on 17/03/2011 14:13:34 Remember, zero both exists and doesnt exist at the same time. ;) So there is no truly 0.0, only 0.0000000^x1/x and 0.00000000^x1/-x.... sorry, had to. Zero exists in certain contexts. Please stop showing off, its unseemly.
Leeroy McJenkins GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.03.17 15:41:00 - [11] Originally by: mkmin Originally by: ivar R'dhak Another great idea by CCP(tm). Make already valuable space even more valuable, so that the peeps who can¦t make as much as the ones already there want to invade it. Random question: Is there a way to lower truesec value with one of the "new" sovereignty structures? No? Hmm. Indeed. Having some space that is fortified and completely untake-able and making everything else absolutely worthless is a vast improvement. Nothing helps encourage conflict more than throwing more resources at people who already have it in limitless amounts. There is no space that is so fortified as to make it untakeable, indeed the take-ability of space depends wholly on the will of its inhabitants to defend it. If you can break an opponents resolve to grind and defend heavily fortified space then you have already won. (See IT Alliance and fortress Delve) Anything that might encourage more conflict is good, the death of empires is idle triggers. ---------------------------- GoonWaffe is recruiting.
mkmin	Posted - 2011.03.17 15:44:00 - [12] Originally by: Leeroy McJenkins Originally by: mkmin Originally by: ivar R'dhak Another great idea by CCP(tm). Make already valuable space even more valuable, so that the peeps who can¦t make as much as the ones already there want to invade it. Random question: Is there a way to lower truesec value with one of the "new" sovereignty structures? No? Hmm. Indeed. Having some space that is fortified and completely untake-able and making everything else absolutely worthless is a vast improvement. Nothing helps encourage conflict more than throwing more resources at people who already have it in limitless amounts. There is no space that is so fortified as to make it untakeable, indeed the take-ability of space depends wholly on the will of its inhabitants to defend it. If you can break an opponents resolve to grind and defend heavily fortified space then you have already won. (See IT Alliance and fortress Delve) Anything that might encourage more conflict is good, the death of empires is idle triggers. I argue that this isn't a change that will lead to the death of empires, but will fortify them. They can go ahead and stop protecting the worthless space except as a small buffer. Their opponents will have less ability to acquire the resources needed to play supercaps online. Conflict comes from the varying sides not only having a reason to fight, but the means.
Chaos Incarnate Faceless Logistics	Posted - 2011.03.17 15:48:00 - [13] Originally by: ivar R'dhak Another great idea by CCP(tm). Make already valuable space even more valuable, so that the peeps who can¦t make as much as the ones already there want to invade it. Random question: Is there a way to lower truesec value with one of the "new" sovereignty structures? No? Hmm. you don't even know the details of the change yet and you're already whining like an eight year old girl _____________________ Look down. Back up. Where are you? You're on a forum, with the alt your alt could post like.
Abrazzar	Posted - 2011.03.17 15:57:00 - [14] Didn't I read this thread last year some time already? Deja vu? --------
Leeroy McJenkins GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.03.17 16:10:00 - [15] Originally by: mkmin Originally by: Leeroy McJenkins Originally by: mkmin Originally by: ivar R'dhak Another great idea by CCP(tm). Make already valuable space even more valuable, so that the peeps who can¦t make as much as the ones already there want to invade it. Random question: Is there a way to lower truesec value with one of the "new" sovereignty structures? No? Hmm. Indeed. Having some space that is fortified and completely untake-able and making everything else absolutely worthless is a vast improvement. Nothing helps encourage conflict more than throwing more resources at people who already have it in limitless amounts. There is no space that is so fortified as to make it untakeable, indeed the take-ability of space depends wholly on the will of its inhabitants to defend it. If you can break an opponents resolve to grind and defend heavily fortified space then you have already won. (See IT Alliance and fortress Delve) Anything that might encourage more conflict is good, the death of empires is idle triggers. I argue that this isn't a change that will lead to the death of empires, but will fortify them. They can go ahead and stop protecting the worthless space except as a small buffer. Their opponents will have less ability to acquire the resources needed to play supercaps online. Conflict comes from the varying sides not only having a reason to fight, but the means. I am assuming you are referring specifically to smaller, newer alliances joining the sov war game. In that case I would say there are always routes to the means needed, established empires are always looking for new blood. Yesterday's renter and guest alliances can become tomorrows establishment. Empires like Razor and Morsus Mihi did not come established, they built up from scratch and filled a power vacuum when one presented itself. New alliances that prove their worth will naturally attract good corps from dying established alliances. This seems to have been the common method of rising for many of EVE's current and formerly established alliances. I suppose your specific objection is that small, new alliances usually have to join a pecking order to have a chance to become established somewhere down the line? ---------------------------- GoonWaffe is recruiting.
Myra2007 Millstone Industries	Posted - 2011.03.17 16:18:00 - [16] I would assume it means the best (=-1.0) systems will get what they do now and everyone else will get crappier rats. -- Originally by: Professor Slocombe I will only buy tickets if the prize is your stuff and you leave Eve. Forever. You irritating self obsessed cretin.
Aloe Cloveris The Greater Goon	Posted - 2011.03.17 16:22:00 - [17] So Syndicate will be even more rubbishy and unappealing to even the dumbest of ratters. This is dumb, hth. PS The JQV cluster in lower Syndicate has the best* truesec in the region. Somebody move in there already, thanks in advance. * if you understand "best" to mean "not quite as laughable as other constellations in Syndicate"
Eastman Color	Posted - 2011.03.17 16:29:00 - [18] 1) Stop forming 100 man alliance made up of 10 man corps? 2) ??? 3) Lamas
Annubis Lorna	Posted - 2011.03.17 16:36:00 - [19] well, seems to me like just one more case of CCP taking care of their in game friends. This game is going to hell in a handbasket because CCP cannot seem to separate the best interests of the game from the best interests of them and their "friends". Like was said earlier, the ones with rich space get richer space, the ones with OK spac e get crappier space. Nice job CCP, lets cheat a little more.
dexington Caldari Baconoration	Posted - 2011.03.17 16:36:00 - [20] Originally by: Myra2007 I would assume it means the best (=-1.0) systems will get what they do now and everyone else will get crappier rats. If you compare the relative value of the systems, then yes this is what is going to happen. I guess the only question is, are any systems going to be worth less then they are now?.
ivar R'dhak Minmatar	Posted - 2011.03.17 16:40:00 - [21] Originally by: Chaos Incarnate Originally by: ivar R'dhak Make already valuable space even more valuable, so that the peeps who can¦t make as much as the ones already there want to invade it. you don't even know the details of the change yet and you're already whining like an eight year old girl 100 fanboi points to you. Did you find your reading comprehension skills in the best buy basket? Quote: The quality of anomalies will depend on the systems truesec - the better the truesec, the better the spawns. is what this is about and my comment logically describes what it means. So critique based on logic outcome is now whining? K, got it. ______________ Mal-¦Appears we got here just in a nick of time. What does that make us?¦ Zoe-`Big damn heroes, sir.` Mal-¦Aint we just.¦
Diomedes Calypso	Posted - 2011.03.17 16:47:00 - [22] Originally by: Leeroy McJenkins Originally by: mkmin Originally by: ivar R'dhak Another great idea by CCP(tm). Make already valuable space even more valuable, so that the peeps who can¦t make as much as the ones already there want to invade it. Indeed. Having some space that is fortified and completely untake-able and making everything else absolutely worthless is a vast improvement. Nothing helps encourage conflict more than throwing more resources at people who already have it in limitless amounts. There is no space that is so fortified as to make it untakeable, indeed the take-ability of space depends wholly on the will of its inhabitants to defend it. If you can break an opponents resolve to grind and defend heavily fortified space then you have already won. (See IT Alliance and fortress Delve) Anything that might encourage more conflict is good, the death of empires is idle triggers. Even more important than encouraging large scale invasions into large coalistions space ~might~ be finding a way to sow dissension within the mega groups. I'm not sure that it is workable but more players thinking might develop alonge lines of : "heck, those guys show up half of what we do yet we're soaking up the best gravy .... maybe a little revolution is in order here" This game is about political and group intrigue as much as it is about the actual live battles (yes vying for position is pvp) Cold wars can be fought without many shots even fired (yet they do require actions by large numbers of players to make a threat of retalitory attack credible)... more scarcity leads to more conflict ... both hot and cold conflict
Xavier Isaacson Minmatar Surface Detail	Posted - 2011.03.17 16:51:00 - [23] WARNING! This thread contains levels of dumbassery lethal to Humans. For your own safety please exit this thread immediately and make your way to the nearest decontamination shower where your eyeballs and brain will be gently bathed in bleach. Originally by: Verone BBC Trust are a sack of arses.
Chaos Incarnate Faceless Logistics	Posted - 2011.03.17 17:11:00 - [24] Originally by: ivar R'dhak 100 fanboi points to you. oh good, only 900 more and i can turn it in for a free t-shirt Quote: Did you find your reading comprehension skills in the best buy basket? Irony overload incoming in 3...2...1... Quote: Quote: The quality of anomalies will depend on the systems truesec - the better the truesec, the better the spawns. is what this is about and my comment logically describes what it means. So critique based on logic outcome is now whining? K, got it. see, my point was you know one sentence's worth of material about the new system. You don't know how much more valuable those awesome -1.0 systems will be. You don't know how valuable modest truesec systems will be in comparison. You don't have anything to infer from apart from a general design goal. So yeah, I'm going to say that your 'criticism' is pretty much grade-A whining. Deal with it. _____________________ Look down. Back up. Where are you? You're on a forum, with the alt your alt could post like.
Aessoroz Nohbdy.	Posted - 2011.03.17 17:21:00 - [25] The only ones complaining are the russian renters while the rest of null is busy fighting for those rich systems.
ivar R'dhak Minmatar	Posted - 2011.03.17 17:26:00 - [26] The fanboi is strong in this one. Originally by: Chaos Incarnate You don't have anything to infer from apart from a general design goal. What does it take for you to get when CCP even pre-announces a nerf? Official mauve nerf-klaxon? By default any change of the status quo is a nerf. Either the spawns stay the same in "low value" 0.0, then the better systems need to get even better spawns. Or everybody gets nerfed but the current best truesecs, which has been CCP¦s modus operandi since M00 started dropping mines on gates. BTW, I¦m dealing great with it. I stay out of 0.0 for now. ______________ Mal-¦Appears we got here just in a nick of time. What does that make us?¦ Zoe-`Big damn heroes, sir.` Mal-¦Aint we just.¦
Leeroy McJenkins GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.03.17 17:27:00 - [27] Originally by: Diomedes Calypso Even more important than encouraging large scale invasions into large coalistions space ~might~ be finding a way to sow dissension within the mega groups. I'm not sure that it is workable but more players thinking might develop alonge lines of : "heck, those guys show up half of what we do yet we're soaking up the best gravy .... maybe a little revolution is in order here" This game is about political and group intrigue as much as it is about the actual live battles (yes vying for position is pvp) Cold wars can be fought without many shots even fired (yet they do require actions by large numbers of players to make a threat of retalitory attack credible)... more scarcity leads to more conflict ... both hot and cold conflict The threat of a break within a coalition or non-aggression pact is always present. There have been alliances that reset blues on the dime to attack them while they were weak so its not unheard of, whether or not it will happen depends on how strong your ties are with neighboring blues and the how capable they see you, if an attack on you risks their complete annihilation then it is unlikely they will break from their coalition or pact with you. The best deterrent against betrayal is strength or at the very least the image of strength. If you are leading a coalition you have to make it known to the alliances that follow that a break would be against their best interests. But you also have to act in their interests as well, this usually means helping them defend their space or granting them new space. If you are an alliance that follows then you have to show your continued usefulness to the leading alliances. This usually entails displaying some capability in beating back neutral or red incursions into the border space that vassal alliances are usually placed in to defend. As long as the coalition or pact is mutually beneficial then a break from within is unlikely. ---------------------------- GoonWaffe is recruiting.
Chaos Incarnate Faceless Logistics	Posted - 2011.03.17 17:59:00 - [28] Originally by: ivar R'dhak The fanboi is strong in this one. does that mean i can have more fanboy points? I really want that t-shirt Quote: What does it take for you to get when CCP even pre-announces a nerf? Official mauve nerf-klaxon? I prefer that actual details be released before you start whining. When you get those, feel free to cry your crazy little eyeballs out over it. Quote: By default any change of the status quo is a nerf. Either the spawns stay the same in "low value" 0.0, then the better systems need to get even better spawns. Or everybody gets nerfed but the current best truesecs, which has been CCP¦s modus operandi since M00 started dropping mines on gates. problem is, right now the current best truesecs are terrible. An upgraded -1.0 is the same isk/hr as that first nullsec out of empire, except you have two or three carrier jumps to market. Greater risk, but few if any benefits to make up for it. Quote: BTW, I¦m dealing great with it. I stay out of 0.0 for now. oh really? i couldn't even tell _____________________ Look down. Back up. Where are you? You're on a forum, with the alt your alt could post like.
El'Niaga Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2011.03.17 18:04:00 - [29] The historical trend is that what exists today will be the baseline for -1.0. Everything else would be nerfed. It is how they have approached every problem. They don't understand the problem though. No one who does not currently have the ability to either build supers, or buy supers will ever gain more than a token foothold in 0.0. If they did manage to take a system it would swiftly be dealt with once noticed. Changes to anomalies do not affect botters, it affects real players. Botters don't do anoms, they do belts. Belts already adjust by truesec. Botters prefer not to have to spend money on infrastructures and stuff since if caught and punished they can be banned losing what they had. At this time we don't really know what will happen. The only reason to prematurely release such a tidbit is because ultimately it is known it will be poor received so you hope to burn the fire out before it really manifests itself. If CCP realized how their game was played they'd realize that composition of systems has almost nothing to do with wars. Distance and logistical routes decide more where battles are than anything. That's why Geminate constantly changes hands over the years. It is a key logistical line to the North, and a key logistical line to the Drone Regions. Attacks spilling over into the surrounding areas are more feints and distractions than actual sov. grinding as both sides need to hold Geminate to launch any more serious assault (need it for Capital strikes into the enemy territory). They need to add more regions like the Drone Regions to the game, where they make more chokepoint regions like Geminate has become since the DR introduction from existing regions. That is what causes wars.
ivar R'dhak Minmatar	Posted - 2011.03.17 18:38:00 - [30] Originally by: Chaos Incarnate Originally by: ivar R'dhak The fanboi is strong in this one. does that mean i can have more fanboy points? I really want that t-shirt Oh, OKAY! Can¦t see a grown man begging like that. Here, I even have a trailer for you. Quote: Quote: BTW, I¦m dealing great with it. I stay out of 0.0 for now. oh really? i couldn't even tell See? Wasn¦t it nice of me to provide such an easy chance for a retort? ______________ Mal-¦Appears we got here just in a nick of time. What does that make us?¦ Zoe-`Big damn heroes, sir.` Mal-¦Aint we just.¦

Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.