posting in a stealth nerf lvl4 missions thread

CCP probably want people in high sec to earn enough isk to pay for plex. Some people feel high sec profits are too high, but those high sec profits are what keeps CCP in business.

Posting in a nerf everything Highsec related so i have more targets in lowsec thread

I know several nullsec people who rat there faces off to plex their accounts. I would say just as many people from nullsec PLEX tehir accounts than highsec. Especially when you can rat for just a few hours in nullsec and buy a PLEX and they do this for 2 or 3 accounts

CCP probably want people in high sec to earn enough isk to pay for plex. Some people feel high sec profits are too high, but those high sec profits are what keeps CCP in business.

It should be impossible to make enough isk for plex in hisec imo. Having the safest activities in game generate enough isk to plex your characters goes against the risk-vs-reward ethos of EVE Online.

Besides, it's a stupid goal anyway, because look what happened when incursionfaucets were introduced: Plex prices jumped.

Highsec income should be 3,000,000 ISK per day regardless of activity, and T2 hulls or anything larger than a cruiser should be banned.

It should be impossible to make enough isk for plex in hisec imo. Having the safest activities in game generate enough isk to plex your characters goes against the risk-vs-reward ethos of EVE Online.

Besides, it's a stupid goal anyway, because look what happened when incursionfaucets were introduced: Plex prices jumped.

Assuming 3 hours of game play in a day, what level of t2 fitted t1 hulls do you feel the following hi sec careers should earn isk wise? (basically wondering how much isk grinding do you think each career path should you have to do to cover in pvp expenses)

Average Level 4 mission runner (this means battleship, average skills)
Low skill retriever miner
High skill hulk/mac miner
Planet interaction specialist only (assume a full 24 hour planet cycle)
T1 manufacturer
T2 manufacturer
Incursion runner

In other word:
Average lvl 4 missioner: 2 t2 fitted cruisers in a day
Low skill miner: 1 t2 fitted frig
High skill miner: 1 t2 fitted cruiser
Pi: 1 t2 fitted frig
T1 manufacture: 1 t2 fitted frig every 2 days
T2 mod: 1 t2 fitted cruiser
Incursion runner: no clue.

Assuming 3 hours of game play in a day, what level of t2 fitted t1 hulls do you feel the following hi sec careers should earn isk wise? (basically wondering how much isk grinding do you think each career path should you have to do to cover in pvp expenses)

Average Level 4 mission runner (this means battleship, average skills)
Low skill retriever miner
High skill hulk/mac miner
Planet interaction specialist only (assume a full 24 hour planet cycle)
T1 manufacturer
T2 manufacturer
Incursion runner

In other word:
Average lvl 4 missioner: 2 t2 fitted cruisers in a day
Low skill miner: 1 t2 fitted frig
High skill miner: 1 t2 fitted cruiser
Pi: 1 t2 fitted frig
T1 manufacture: 1 t2 fitted frig every 2 days
T2 mod: 1 t2 fitted cruiser
Incursion runner: no clue.

It should be impossible to make enough isk for plex in hisec imo. Having the safest activities in game generate enough isk to plex your characters goes against the risk-vs-reward ethos of EVE Online.

Besides, it's a stupid goal anyway, because look what happened when incursionfaucets were introduced: Plex prices jumped.

It should be impossible to make enough isk for plex in hisec imo. Having the safest activities in game generate enough isk to plex your characters goes against the risk-vs-reward ethos of EVE Online.

Besides, it's a stupid goal anyway, because look what happened when incursionfaucets were introduced: Plex prices jumped.

That makes no sense. You should earn what you put in and essentially restricting the amount of isk one can earn per day would ruin the economy. I see this topic as a "nerf highsec income" thread but it seems to me like almost all "L33t" 0.0 PVPer have highsec alts for indy/trade stuff so nerfing highsec would indirectly hurt their income as awell.

If you want highsec to be brought in line with 0.0 income how about CCP fix the FW "exploit" or nerf 0.0 anoms to make them as profitable as L4. Yep that's right I said it. Easily making 60-90mil/hr running anoms in complete safety aka NAP fest 0.0 seems more carbearish to me than flying around highsec with all the "L33t 0.0 pvper" ganking industrials and mission boats.

How come ganking freighters in high sec isn't on the list? Isn't that a source of high sec income?

I can only speak for myself, but I make as much as the effort I put in. That is the way it should work, if someone can make 200 mil in that 3 hours, they deserve it. If someone makes 20 mil in that 3 hours, they deserve it.

Having a basic understanding of economy is apparantly not a requirement to play this game..

You don't control the market by limiting the available funds. What happens is that anything that can be used in High sec will plumit in price while the buying power will remain the same.

Nullsec players will get a cheap supply of ships though. LIke when a scandinavian travels to Africa and realise that his pocketchange is enough to buy a small village. Sounds fun right? Everything up to BS will have basically no value.

Only then will you realise that it isn't fun to shoot at stuff that doesn' t cry. Have fun

How come ganking freighters in high sec isn't on the list? Isn't that a source of high sec income?

And lol ratting in carriers or PIMP fit faction BS 24/7 in NAP fest 0.0 is very dangerous.

in terms of fitted ships lost per day, what do you think hi sec income shoukd cover?

[quote=Riot Girl]CCP probably want people in high sec to earn enough isk to pay for plex. Some people feel high sec profits are too high, but those high sec profits are what keeps CCP in business.

[quote=TheGunslinger42]If it was up to me, there would be NO griefing of ANY kind in Hi-Sec. No suiciding, no can flipping, no scamming - nothing. Hi-Sec isn't Hi-Sec enough IMHO. Going to Low-Sec or Null should be a concious decision, and I don't accept that the rewards in Hi-Sec should be poor just because there's less danger.

posting in a stealth nerf lvl4 missions thread

Luckily it is not up to you. That would be horrid.

Was that post aimed at me or are you just ranting to yourself? I don't get it... You quoted someone else's post but only the part where he was quoting me and then you went on a rant about something irrelevant.

Anyway in response to your rant, people get shot in busy city centres in broad daylight all the time. Making it illegal and having police on patrol doesn't stop it from happening and that is how it is in Eve.

What a stupid attitude. I really don't understand this ******** idea that Hi-Sec must be crap because it's safe. Why should they lose their ships to tard griefers who can't get their fun any other way?

If it was up to me, there would be NO griefing of ANY kind in Hi-Sec. No suiciding, no can flipping, no scamming - nothing. Hi-Sec isn't Hi-Sec enough IMHO.

Going to Low-Sec or Null should be a concious decision, and I don't accept that the rewards in Hi-Sec should be poor just because there's less danger.

[Good thing it isn't up to you then, isn't it?

There's less danger, there's less effort ... gee, I wonder why there needs to be some adjustment downwards of hisec ...

For you perhaps. Which tells me all I need to know about you.

What if the highest rewards were in low sec instead of null sec? This way anyone who wants the best rewards will be prey to the pirates.

I hope you're trolling. I really hope.

I don't like people calling ridiculous things like "make high sec bringing 0 isk/hour". But I don't like the idea of hisec being glorified game menu either.

If you want CCP game with consensual-only sandbox content, wait for WoD, because in EVE you express consent by installing the game. I'm not crying that people shoot me in Unreal while all I want to do is enjoy landscapes.

This whole thread is stupid in the extreme. Scaming in high sec pays out 100 times as much isk as any other legal activity does. And yet not one mention about scams in this thread. Now if you propose to limit scaming in high sec then you will really see an uproar of epic proportions. Which makes this whole thread null and void IMHO.

So in the end you get what ever you can earn in high sec or low or null.
Every player in EVE has the same choice and ability to play in any of these areas.
As such nobody is being restricted or singled out or prevented from their earning power.
Markets swing and change over time. The player has to swing with the times.
Failure to do so and expecting CCP to change the game to your particular favor is just wrong.

Adapt or do not and then the failure is of your own making.

You're hardly comparing like with like are you?

An uproar from players who can't get cash legitimately in Hi-Sec is not something I care about. Let them move to Low/Null and scam each other stupid.

It has nothing to do with adaptation.

Scamming is legit, but it's not something CCP can regulate. There is no way for CCP to control the amount of isk someone can earn through scamming.

There's nothing non-legimate about scamming. Refer to numerous CCP's commentaries.

You've got it twisted. Hi-Sec rewards are fine as it. Perhaps the rewards in Null need to be increased to reflect the risk?

Why limit earnings for legit trades when they can not or will not limit earnings for scams?

intervenes with NPC Police if the ripped off players tries to punch the scammer in the face

There is no limit on how much you can earn through legit trades in high-sec either.

CCP probably want people in high sec to earn enough isk to pay for plex. Some people feel high sec profits are too high, but those high sec profits are what keeps CCP in business.

Yes but the stupid people think it's all about null, they don't care that it's a business. They want to drive away customers until the game completely collapses. Short sighted idiots...

Oh look, another knee-jerk "eve is going to die" post, just because the words "nerf" and "hisec" was uttered in the same sentence.

Yes but the stupid people think it's all about null, they don't care that it's a business. They want to drive away customers until the game completely collapses. Short sighted idiots...

I don't see the word die anywhere. Besides it was a long held opinion, nothing knee jerk about it. No one will ever change anyones behavior in the game, push people and they will quit...

i must admit that lo sec rats and null bear tears do taste sweeter for some reason.

Assuming 3 hours of game play in a day, what level of t2 fitted t1 hulls do you feel the following hi sec careers should earn isk wise? (basically wondering how much isk grinding do you think each career path should you have to do to cover in pvp expenses)

Average Level 4 mission runner (this means battleship, average skills)
Low skill retriever miner
High skill hulk/mac miner
Planet interaction specialist only (assume a full 24 hour planet cycle)
T1 manufacturer
T2 manufacturer
Incursion runner

In other word:
Average lvl 4 missioner: 2 t2 fitted cruisers in a day
Low skill miner: 1 t2 fitted frig
High skill miner: 1 t2 fitted cruiser
Pi: 1 t2 fitted frig
T1 manufacture: 1 t2 fitted frig every 2 days
T2 mod: 1 t2 fitted cruiser
Incursion runner: no clue.

alienate the core audience who kept your game alive for a decade in the process

Please explain how people minding their own business in hi-sec, earning enough isk to get themselves established in the game while they train the skills they need to compete with 'the core audience who kept your game alive for a decade in the process' is somehow alienating 'the core audience who kept your game alive for a decade in the process'.

It seems to me, you have an elitist attitude which demands all new players suffer as much as possible so you can feel good about being an established player while the new players worship you for being so awesome.

As if a large majority of you will "compete with the core audience who kept your game alive for a decade in the process". What you're going to end up doing is, fart around in hisec for a few months, get bored, unsubscribe.

Pray tell, what has been proposed to make "all new players suffer as much as possible"?

I guess your crystal ball also showed you that reducing the available income in high-sec will prevent this from happening.

Posts suggesting that level 4s should give 3m isk/hour and other posts claiming that greedy high-sec carebears are killing EvE will all their money and they must be put in their place... in the poorhouse where they belong.

To do this, nullsec needs severe buffs in industry and convenience options, in addition to a complete revamp of how alliances make money, i.e. less dependency on moons and more dependencies of people actually doing things like PI, mining etc, while hisec needs to be nerfed to both provide incentives to move into low/nullsec.

Has CCP said this? Has anyone from the playerbase (who weren't trolling you) said this?

Of course, you're forgetting the most important thing which is PLEX. Allowing new players an income which allows them to pay for PLEX means CCP makes a profit from PLEX sales. If CCP stays profitable, EvE stays alive. If new players can't PLEX, they are far more likely to quit sooner which means less money for CCP, which in turn is reflected in the EvE universe. New players won't stay in the game, the population of the universe decreases, the universe becomes boring, more people quit.
.

You're actually arguing that new players should have enough isk to play for free? If the risk/reward structure for eve was correctly laid out, it should be the highsec players selling PLEX and the null/low players buying it.

I don't think those things need to happen. I just think nullsec needs to become more accessible to new players.

From browsing the recruitment forum, it seems most Alliances in sov space have SP requirements and don't seem to want new players in their corp. They don't seem to actively recruit new players either. The alliances that recruit new players are the small hi-sec alliances that need large numbers to try to move into nullsec.

No... people in this thread these things. I wasn't trying to imply it was a CCP statement and I would have no reason to as the discussion was about elitism in the playerbase, not about CCP.

4) The discussion about plexing is an interesting (and I think valid) one but I'd remind everyone that buffing rats in null-sec (or any kind of isk faucet in the game) WILL lead to higher plex prices. So if you buff null-sec rats, you are, in terms of plex/hour, nerfing hi-sec mission runners. I take no particular position on that issue but I'm pointing out the simple economics of it.

This is so ******** I don't even. You're actually arguing that new players should have enough isk to play for free? If the risk/reward structure for eve was correctly laid out, it should be the highsec players selling PLEX and the null/low players buying it.

The price of Plex does always seem to be steadily rising, but on the other hand, higher PLEX/isk values will encourage more people to buy PLEX with cash (theoretically) and keep the market injected with a healthy supply of PLEX to keep prices relatively stable. What I mean is, people would rather spend $20 on a PLEX that will sell for 600m ISK than spend $20 on a PLEX which will sell for only 200m.

Should a null-sec guy who plays 40 hours a month (2 hours per night, 5 nights per week) generally make more or less than the hi-sec industrialist care-bear who plays 80 hours per week?

I don't know. How do you factor in the passive income from those alliances with access to Tech (or Neo / Dysp)? Those are all difficult questions to answer. I'd be curious to see a goon / NC. / Solar CFO give a breakdown of Tech income vs. fleet ship reimbursement expenses. Is it net positive or net negative? I just don't know.

It doesn't matter how much High-sec income is reduced. Many miners and mission-runners will stay in High-sec because they don't want to risk being ganked every other minute.

It doesn't matter how much High-sec income is reduced. Many miners and mission-runners will stay in High-sec because they don't want to risk being ganked every other minute.

And non-high-sec IS dangerous for people that have to mandatory AFK at times beyond their control.

It's certainly not on the "every other minute" level, even solo. And ffs, if you have a small child and are PVEing in dangerous areas, make a safe before you start and fit a cloak. It's literally a no-brainer.

If null-sec had better industry (and other POS) tools, a lot of this crap would balance itself out.

And non-high-sec IS dangerous for people that have to mandatory AFK at times beyond their control.

Edit: Ah, right. The topic. High-sec should be able to facilitate deployment into other secs in a timely manner. So, a lot of frigates, many cruisers, some battlecruisers, or a few battleships from a few hours of "optimal grinding". Ya don't want people that get kicked back to high-sec leaving the game for the reason "can't be bothered getting stuff to go back out there".

@Op.

I would imagine that if playerA pays his/her monthly sub, same way playerB does, whether it's with ingame PLEX or with a credit card, both are entitled to the same usage and fun in this game, else you're just being close-minded about what "rights" you have as opposed to others who play this game.

By your statement, am I supposed to think that you do not pay to play this game because you earn PLEX and that the same facility should not be made available to those folks in Highsec ? That's basically what you're saying.

Big LOL.

-1

No one is saying they shouldn't have equal rights or possibilities, just that certain areas (hisec vs null vs low vs wh) may need balancing differently. Everyone would have the same "right" and opportunity to move into whichever type of space they like and reap the corresponding rewards, but if they choose hisec then that is choosing the much reduced reward (as a trade-off for the much reduced risk)

Well if we want to talk about risk/reward perhaps null sec needs some balancing to address the issue of ratting for 100mil/hour in a NAP fest

Well if we want to talk about risk/reward perhaps null sec needs some balancing to address the issue of ratting for 100mil/hour in a NAP fest

Carebear fallacy #3928: Nullsec is not dangerous (then why aren't YOU out ratting there, mr carebear?)

Nullbear fallacy #3929: High is not dangerous (then why are here so may killmails from there?)

You get out what you put in.


ISK/hr concept should be shot in the face.

So if it's so amazingly dangerous, why is it that I've autopiloted all over the hisec galaxy on my hisec char, sometimes with very, very expensive loads, and I've yet to be popped even once?

Well if you think about it, CCP just took a huge chunk of player wealth out of the game. Any Caldari ships owned just lost 90% of their value as they were nerfed into the ground. And Minmatar ships will be taking a similar plunge.

So in-effect they took ISK value out of high-sec.

Maybe you know when and where to travel?

Well if you think about it, CCP just took a huge chunk of player wealth out of the game. Any Caldari ships owned just lost 90% of their value as they were nerfed into the ground. And Minmatar ships will be taking a similar plunge.

So in-effect they took ISK value out of high-sec.

So wait are people actually arguing that High is more dangerous then Null?

Well if you think about it, CCP just took a huge chunk of player wealth out of the game. Any Caldari ships owned just lost 90% of their value as they were nerfed into the ground. And Minmatar ships will be taking a similar plunge.

So in-effect they took ISK value out of high-sec.