Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 59 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
668
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 16:22:00 -
[361] - Quote
Caljiav Ocanon wrote:Carebear Noun A word used by generally unemployed/unemployable males to describe anyone who they dislike in a video game, usually teenage virgins or "men" in their 30s and 40s with no life.
Carebear is an Eve only term used to describe anyone who doesn't pvp.
Not derogatory in itself, however since carebear is used mostly in a negative connotation it has become an insult like midget or the r word.
Please stop posting if you can't actually defend your own points or have nothing to contribute except for short statements that don't add anything to the conversation. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
203
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 16:27:00 -
[362] - Quote
Caljiav Ocanon wrote:Carebear Noun A word used by generally unemployed/unemployable males to describe anyone who they dislike in a video game, usually teenage virgins or "men" in their 30s and 40s with no life.
In EvE, a carebear is someone who avoids pvp at all costs.
Real simple, actually. Carebears can be in hisec, losec, nulsec or w-space. But generally, a carebear will work so hard to avoid pvp that they'll actually petition CCP to change the game so that it is easier for them to be a carebear.
They also seem to hate the idea that the market is pvp, and that they can negatively affect other players' games by simply trying to mind their own business. It's an anti-social sentiment that as long as they don't shoot other players, they are in their own bubble and shouldn't be held accountable for other actions. If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality.-á That 'griefer/thief' is probably more sane than you are.-á How screwed up is that? |
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
74
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 16:44:00 -
[363] - Quote
In response to several different claims that separating the Empires with lowsec space would not disrupt the current system of massive trade hubs, I have this to say: separating the Empires with lowsec should be only part of a larger plan.
If fuel prices climb and nullsec industry actually gets a kick in the pants like it's supposed to in Odyssey (both big "if"s, I know) massive trade hubs will already be taking a hit, and think lowsec (shifting-sec-status FW space, or even nullsec) between Empires would be a good additional step.
|
ravill rivyll
Perkone Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 16:47:00 -
[364] - Quote
I cant say if its good or bad but its definitely interesting... I would go for it.
|
Nahkep Narmelion
CALIMA COLLABORATIVE Atrox Urbanis Respublique Abundatia
53
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 16:48:00 -
[365] - Quote
Ruze wrote:
Honestly, I like the idea because I feel that it will minimize the 'central trade hub' idea a lot and start pushing local hubs a lot more. The centralized hub of Jita, in my mind, needs a lot of it's oomph taken out and more placed in regional and local hubs.
Plus, if it's dangerous to haul goods, the value of said goods will vary more greatly in each region. I'll have lasers all day in Amarr, but getting missiles or autocannons might cost me more than they would in their areas.
Finally, as mentioned earlier, I hate the fact that mass-trade is mostly a solo endeavor. Single accounts living in NPC corps, flying freighters to and from Jita. They stick to NPC corps to keep from getting war dec'd, to avoid loss. I like the fact that this idea would sincerely push those who are willing to make trade into a group endeavor into more profitable territory, while nuking the solo trader's profit margin considerably.
Feel? You like it because it makes you feel something. I like the idea of me staying home all day playing Eve while I collect $80,000 from the government so I can...I like it because it would make me feel good.
Feelings are great, but I think you should have some sort of reason beyond feeling it will do something. It is entirely possible that Jita and possibly Amarr will get a boost out of this, not a nerf. Did that feeling crop up?
And what exactly does price differentials bring to the game? Greater profits? Maybe. Maybe not. If prices go up, but the demand goes down you might not see any change in your profit. As I noted price is not everything.
As for trade, you don't trade do you. Sure, the hauling alt may very well be in an NPC corp, but the rest of the operation probably is not. Depends on what that person is doing. For example, when I was doing invention and manufacturing I had several alts all in the same corp doing various things. Why? I needed a POS, can't have a POS in high sec in an NPC corp. Having them all in the same corp allowed for sharing a hangar as well that made doing all that crap easier.
It would be nice if you guys actually knew what you were talking about. |
Nahkep Narmelion
CALIMA COLLABORATIVE Atrox Urbanis Respublique Abundatia
53
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 16:51:00 -
[366] - Quote
Ruze wrote:[quote=Caljiav Ocanon]
They also seem to hate the idea that the market is pvp, and that they can negatively affect other players' games by simply trying to mind their own business. It's an anti-social sentiment that as long as they don't shoot other players, they are in their own bubble and shouldn't be held accountable for other actions.
Then this proposal is decidedly anti-market PvP. Market PvP has another name. Competition. To the extent that a guy who is set up in say Caldari space already making say, Amarr T2 items, will have less competition if most of the other Amarr T2 inventors/manufacturers are in Amarr, Gallente or Minmatar space.
Any time anybody is advocating for something that will raise prices for the greater good of everyone else, it is ******* bullshit. That person is advocating higher prices to line their own pocket. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
668
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 16:55:00 -
[367] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:
Any time anybody is advocating for something that will raise prices for the greater good of everyone else, it is ******* bullshit. That person is advocating higher prices to line their own pocket.
Won't prices drop for other things at the same time? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
205
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 17:03:00 -
[368] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:Ruze wrote:[quote=Caljiav Ocanon]
They also seem to hate the idea that the market is pvp, and that they can negatively affect other players' games by simply trying to mind their own business. It's an anti-social sentiment that as long as they don't shoot other players, they are in their own bubble and shouldn't be held accountable for other actions. Then this proposal is decidedly anti-market PvP. Market PvP has another name. Competition. To the extent that a guy who is set up in say Caldari space already making say, Amarr T2 items, will have less competition if most of the other Amarr T2 inventors/manufacturers are in Amarr, Gallente or Minmatar space. Any time anybody is advocating for something that will raise prices for the greater good of everyone else, it is ******* bullshit. That person is advocating higher prices to line their own pocket.
As for both posts, I see that your personal opinion is wrapped in this. Else why would you be so insulting? As far as I can tell, this is a fairly civil discussion.
I argue that with the break up of the one trade hub and (hopefully) the practice of penny bidding that is so very common in Jita (so common that the devs have to work extra hard to crack down on third-party programs that are abusing the trade system), you'll see more market variance. More market variance between hubs creates more price variance. The person importing trade goods has an actual means to make a profit. The cost of local goods goes down, and the cost of others go up.
What Jita is doing is baselining all the items to at, or sometimes even below, their actual production value. Great for buyers, bad for sellers. It is actually stifling competition, when you combine the mass of products, the ease and regional access of the market database, and the penny bots.
If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality.-á That 'griefer/thief' is probably more sane than you are.-á How screwed up is that? |
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
74
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 17:06:00 -
[369] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:Ruze wrote:[quote=Caljiav Ocanon]
They also seem to hate the idea that the market is pvp, and that they can negatively affect other players' games by simply trying to mind their own business. It's an anti-social sentiment that as long as they don't shoot other players, they are in their own bubble and shouldn't be held accountable for other actions. Then this proposal is decidedly anti-market PvP. Market PvP has another name. Competition. To the extent that a guy who is set up in say Caldari space already making say, Amarr T2 items, will have less competition if most of the other Amarr T2 inventors/manufacturers are in Amarr, Gallente or Minmatar space. Any time anybody is advocating for something that will raise prices for the greater good of everyone else, it is ******* bullshit. That person is advocating higher prices to line their own pocket.
You complain about other people making unsupported claims you go off like this... |
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
282
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 17:11:00 -
[370] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Gate camping =! True piracy
Shouldn't that be != ? We are recruiting talented pilots for innovative small gang PvP
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=175061
http://www.thedeadrabbitsociety.com |
|
Nahkep Narmelion
CALIMA COLLABORATIVE Atrox Urbanis Respublique Abundatia
53
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 17:13:00 -
[371] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Nahkep Narmelion wrote:
Any time anybody is advocating for something that will raise prices for the greater good of everyone else, it is ******* bullshit. That person is advocating higher prices to line their own pocket.
Won't prices drop for other things at the same time? I would say the competition in medium hubs like amarr and dodixie is fairly adequate. If all the hubs were equal they would all probably have average local populations of 700, making for an adequate amount of competition everywhere, unlike hek and rens which are so small they just are terrible.
Noting that prices for something you produce will drop while the prices of things I produce does not negate what I said.
And there is nothing in this proposal/suggestion that indicates trade hubs will become more equal. They might, but that is unlikely. Think of it this way. The possibilities are:
1. Hubs become more equal. 2. Jita and/or Amarr get increased shares of trade.
We have two outcomes, so an a priori non-informative probability assessment would be to put the chances of these two events happening at 50-50.
Now, if you disagree with that probability assessment that is fine, but it would be nice if you said why you think that Jita will lose ground. For example, I used to invent/manufacture in Sinq Laison. If I decided to keep doing that and this change was announced what would keep me from moving to Caldari space if I wanted to avoid these low sec regions prior to the patch that introduces these changes?
Or if I thought Amarr was going to get a buff, what would keep me from moving to Amarr prior to the change. That I might get awesome prices for the T2 autocannons I was making in Dodixie?
See, what I'd do is look at the demand in systems like Dodixie. I'd look at the price. I'd then have to come up with how many guns I'd have to sell at different prices to keep things going and make a profit. If the demand is weak that would necessitate a higher price post-change. If Idon't think I'm going to get it, I just might scoot over to Caldari or Amarr space thinking that many null alliances will still use Jita or Amarr.
|
Nahkep Narmelion
CALIMA COLLABORATIVE Atrox Urbanis Respublique Abundatia
53
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 17:14:00 -
[372] - Quote
Xavier Thorm wrote:Nahkep Narmelion wrote:Ruze wrote:[quote=Caljiav Ocanon]
They also seem to hate the idea that the market is pvp, and that they can negatively affect other players' games by simply trying to mind their own business. It's an anti-social sentiment that as long as they don't shoot other players, they are in their own bubble and shouldn't be held accountable for other actions. Then this proposal is decidedly anti-market PvP. Market PvP has another name. Competition. To the extent that a guy who is set up in say Caldari space already making say, Amarr T2 items, will have less competition if most of the other Amarr T2 inventors/manufacturers are in Amarr, Gallente or Minmatar space. Any time anybody is advocating for something that will raise prices for the greater good of everyone else, it is ******* bullshit. That person is advocating higher prices to line their own pocket. You complain about other people making unsupported claims you go off like this...
WTF are you talking about? Right there in the OP the claim is that the goal of this is to reduce trade. Reducing trade reduces competition.
Its pretty ******* simple. |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
207
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 17:18:00 -
[373] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:Commander Ted wrote:Nahkep Narmelion wrote:
Any time anybody is advocating for something that will raise prices for the greater good of everyone else, it is ******* bullshit. That person is advocating higher prices to line their own pocket.
Won't prices drop for other things at the same time? I would say the competition in medium hubs like amarr and dodixie is fairly adequate. If all the hubs were equal they would all probably have average local populations of 700, making for an adequate amount of competition everywhere, unlike hek and rens which are so small they just are terrible. Noting that prices for something you produce will drop while the prices of things I produce does not negate what I said. And there is nothing in this proposal/suggestion that indicates trade hubs will become more equal. They might, but that is unlikely. Think of it this way. The possibilities are: 1. Hubs become more equal. 2. Jita and/or Amarr get increased shares of trade. We have two outcomes, so an a priori non-informative probability assessment would be to put the chances of these two events happening at 50-50. Now, if you disagree with that probability assessment that is fine, but it would be nice if you said why you think that Jita will lose ground. For example, I used to invent/manufacture in Sinq Laison. If I decided to keep doing that and this change was announced what would keep me from moving to Caldari space if I wanted to avoid these low sec regions prior to the patch that introduces these changes? Or if I thought Amarr was going to get a buff, what would keep me from moving to Amarr prior to the change. That I might get awesome prices for the T2 autocannons I was making in Dodixie? See, what I'd do is look at the demand in systems like Dodixie. I'd look at the price. I'd then have to come up with how many guns I'd have to sell at different prices to keep things going and make a profit. If the demand is weak that would necessitate a higher price post-change. If Idon't think I'm going to get it, I just might scoot over to Caldari or Amarr space thinking that many null alliances will still use Jita or Amarr. I argued this same point earlier in this post. Amarr space is considerably larger than the other empires. What would stop players from moving to Amarr in order to use the larger quantity of available stations and belts?
That is a fair argument. The markets don't necessarily balance out. Sure, if everyone moved to Amarr, the markets in Minmatar space would get higher rates. But you can already sell things for above market value in Khanid or Derelik. You can already get better prices further from the central hub.
If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality.-á That 'griefer/thief' is probably more sane than you are.-á How screwed up is that? |
Za'kerak
7
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 17:19:00 -
[374] - Quote
step closer to WOW |
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
76
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 17:35:00 -
[375] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:Xavier Thorm wrote:Nahkep Narmelion wrote:Ruze wrote:[quote=Caljiav Ocanon]
They also seem to hate the idea that the market is pvp, and that they can negatively affect other players' games by simply trying to mind their own business. It's an anti-social sentiment that as long as they don't shoot other players, they are in their own bubble and shouldn't be held accountable for other actions. Then this proposal is decidedly anti-market PvP. Market PvP has another name. Competition. To the extent that a guy who is set up in say Caldari space already making say, Amarr T2 items, will have less competition if most of the other Amarr T2 inventors/manufacturers are in Amarr, Gallente or Minmatar space. Any time anybody is advocating for something that will raise prices for the greater good of everyone else, it is ******* bullshit. That person is advocating higher prices to line their own pocket. You complain about other people making unsupported claims you go off like this... WTF are you talking about? Right there in the OP the claim is that the goal of this is to reduce trade. Reducing trade reduces competition. Its pretty ******* simple. BTW, you do know what a conditional statement is, right? You know, "if...., then..."?
"Reducing trade reduces competition" is not an argument, it is a claim that needs to be supported by an argument.
One reason I would be happy to see the scope of common trade within Empire space reduced is so that systems/stations other than the current trade hubs would have a better chance to grow more, since there would be incentive for traders/manufacturers to NOT move their goods to the centralized hubs. This could (and I think would) open up new opportunities for daring traders to move goods between empires in smaller volumes to take advantage of the price difference. It would also probably reduce the extent to which real players have to "compete" with trade bots, by spreading them out.
Further, with less traders concentrated in a single area, it could potentially lower the barrier to entry (or at least the perceived barrier to entry) on marketing for new players, increasing the competition by bringing more people into the market, over a wider area.
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
668
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 19:50:00 -
[376] - Quote
Za'kerak wrote:step closer to WOW what crack are you smoking, WoW has PvE servers that prevent all non consensual combat. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
668
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 19:51:00 -
[377] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:
WTF are you talking about? Right there in the OP the claim is that the goal of this is to reduce trade. Reducing trade reduces competition.
No no no no.
What is the difference between competition from someone who is moving things in with an obelisk and competition from someone who produced it locally?
Massive ******* facepalm right their. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
669
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 19:59:00 -
[378] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:
Now, if you disagree with that probability assessment that is fine, but it would be nice if you said why you think that Jita will lose ground. For example, I used to invent/manufacture in Sinq Laison. If I decided to keep doing that and this change was announced what would keep me from moving to Caldari space if I wanted to avoid these low sec regions prior to the patch that introduces these changes?
Lack of demand and resources,duh.
Jita right now has the best prices and the most demand, an extremely large part of that is 0.0 alliances buying things to JF and that is probably one of the biggest reasons jita is a super hub, which is about to be nerfed. The fact that lots of demand in Jita encourages more items, making more people move in, forming a self feeding cycle, all of these people don't care about location really because traveling across space is safe so it doesn't matter where you live.
If even more of that demand were cut out by people from other regions not coming to Jita, then Jita has less demand. Consumers (mission runners and pvp pilots in empire space) will not want to move to caldari space because it cuts off access to their preferred LP rewards and combat zones. If you took the average populations per system for all of the empires (excluding Jita) then you would find the populations of these places are fairly homogenous. If anything Amarr would become the biggest hub because it has the most space to live in.
Many industrialists can't go to Jita due to lack of ice/station slots. Ice will soon be in finite supply, and caldari capital ships aren't that great. Certain minerals are also not as common in certain empires, incentivising production of certain ships in their home space. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Sakkar Arenith
Amarrian Vengeance
62
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 20:07:00 -
[379] - Quote
agreed
the empires ought to be more "isolated". That will actually boost regional/empire markets and actually give reason to not shop in jita ll the time |
Nahkep Narmelion
CALIMA COLLABORATIVE Atrox Urbanis Respublique Abundatia
53
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 20:08:00 -
[380] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:stupid blathering....
We've been over this before.
For example, inventors rarely use station slots as they are already taken up now. Inventors put up POS so they can:
1. Work on PE/ME of their BPOs. 2. Do invention.
The idea that the lack of stations is a constraint is not really valid given the vast number of moons in Caldari and Amarr space.
So, I'm going to TL;Dr the rest of your crap, because you still haven't learned how to use dotlan.
|
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
671
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 20:29:00 -
[381] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote: We've been over this before.
For example, inventors rarely use station slots as they are already taken up now. Inventors put up POS so they can:
1. Work on PE/ME of their BPOs. 2. Do invention.
The idea that the lack of stations is a constraint is not really valid given the vast number of moons in Caldari and Amarr space.
So, I'm going to TL;Dr the rest of your crap, because you still haven't learned how to use dotlan.
Station slots aren't just used for invention and your completely ignoring my biggest argument, YOU CAN'T GET OTHER FACTIONS LP ITEMS AND ICE IN CALDARI SPACE.
If people aren't buying goods from 0.0 in jita because they make it themselves, and 75% of the missioners, militia pilots, and wardecers are in the other empires, who is going to buy your ****.
Also what I said about the populations is true ask CCP's official economist: http://youtu.be/7MZD6-vGQms?t=6m53 The CCP economist also says that space is in fact getting limited, thats right an economist just confirmed what I have been telling you this entire time, nobody is going to cram in caldari space because their isn't enough ****.
Youtube link is ****, just go to 6m 53 seconds https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Llyona
Posthuman Society 10110001100111101000
17
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 22:04:00 -
[382] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Llyona wrote:
Yeah? No one cares.
Do you want to get some super awesome tears from a nearly endless source of carebears? Go into an anom system in nullsec (Military 5) with a cloaky. Watch as the tears stream in from all the nullbears, mainly because they can't run their bots or anoms. Nullsec anom systems are quite possibly the biggest concentration of carebears in EVE.
>Says no one cares, then proceeds to ramble off topic about something people care less about.
Seems I struck a nerve there. Also, I said no one cares about you war decing carebears in high sec. It's like bragging about beating up old ladies in wheelchairs. Either way it only makes you look ridiculous.
Anyway, my point illustrated that shooting at carebears in high sec gives SOME lulz, whereas cloaky camping military 5 systems yields a whole new level of tears. I'm actually starting to think you may be one of the sources of those tears.
As for the topic, it's absurd and will never happen for a couple reasons:
- The empires spent centuries securing trade lines between their main hubs. They're not going to suddenly give that up because you want targets given to you on a platter.
- A highly secure trade route is important for multiple reasons, the main being the smooth movement of goods to a central marketplace. A central marketplace allows everyone a single place to compete on prices, or for buyers to receive the cheapest prices available.
- Security of trade has always been paramount to the vitality of a market. There's a reason financial institutions and trade organizations spend the most on security of all industries.
Long story short, your "idea" flies in the face of lore and common sense. Anyone with two neurons to rub together would realize this. Then again, you missed my previous point in a laughable manner.
Caljiav Ocanon wrote:Carebear Noun A word used by generally unemployed/unemployable males to describe anyone who they dislike in a video game, usually teenage virgins or "men" in their 30s and 40s with no life.
"I like to make up my own definitions"
EVE is an illness, for which there is no cure. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
671
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 22:08:00 -
[383] - Quote
Llyona wrote: Seems I struck a nerve there.
>Interprets a 1 line response to be proof of being mad. /facepalm
Jita is not a good thing, it is a cancer that enables .01isk bidding and basically removes the need for any sort of trade between empires. Their is no real trade, just everyone drops off their goods to be sold in one spot, which really benefits nobody except nullsec alliances who move everything by jump freighter (which will soon not be the case) and trade bots.
The empires have not spent centuries securing those lines, especially since they were just at war and concord is a recent invention, and since sec status is determined by concord, the security status and military build up should be two mutually exclusive things. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Job Valador
Super Moose Defence Force
37
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 22:28:00 -
[384] - Quote
Just quickly butting in again because of the bugger who posted after me earlier... I am not an alt >.> [IMG]http://imageshack.us/a/img836/7059/c00286794da9496e2b391.jpg[/IMG]
Rule 34 ^ |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
9
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 23:41:00 -
[385] - Quote
So the piddly arguments are TL;DR if not just totally vague. I think this is a great idea from a content point of view. What are the counter arguments to this idea? Please make it plain to understand. I will state some Pros.
1: This will create game content that is desperately needed in EVE overall. 2: This will give Low Security space more reason to exist than just as a buffer to Null sec. 3: The heart of Eve online is the PvP content. This change would put PvP at the heart (or center) of Eve (New Eden). 4: New high sec corps would know where to go to find fights when they want to learn/fail PvP. 5: The hauling profession would have new life breathed into it and would become much more interesting than Mining/Scanning/missioning. 6: People would redistribute themselves around the empires. If importing becomes necessary then probably around the border zones. 7: Racial Identity would probably become quite a bit stronger for new players since they'll be spending more time in their faction's space before they're ready to fly through Low Sec.
I'm sure i could think of more if i had a little bit longer but here are just a few of the positive implications (based subjectively on my oppinion of positive).
Like i said before, this doesn't make space any less safe. You can still choose to never leave Empire, but this would definitely promote making the leap to low. |
Vega Umbranox
Eternal Darkness. Fatal Ascension
2
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 12:48:00 -
[386] - Quote
i like this idea itd be alot better |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
12
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 04:30:00 -
[387] - Quote
Be there no rebuttles?
Does this mean everyone is on board with a change like this? |
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
82
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 14:51:00 -
[388] - Quote
Llyona wrote:As for the topic, it's absurd and will never happen for a couple reasons:
- The empires spent centuries securing trade lines between their main hubs. They're not going to suddenly give that up because you want targets given to you on a platter.
- A highly secure trade route is important for multiple reasons, the main being the smooth movement of goods to a central marketplace. A central marketplace allows everyone a single place to compete on prices, or for buyers to receive the cheapest prices available.
- Security of trade has always been paramount to the vitality of a market. There's a reason financial institutions and trade organizations spend the most on security of all industries.
Long story short, your "idea" flies in the face of lore and common sense. Anyone with two neurons to rub together would realize this. Then again, you missed my previous point in a laughable manner.
Wat? I can't even just let this one go.
1). The Empires are in a state of cold war, which (given that in the case of the Minmatar and Gallente they just slaughtered a couple thousand of each others military service people and destroyed over a dozen Dreadnaughts) could escalate to full war at any time. Nations don't just keep trading with each other when they go to war in the real world because they've been doing it for a while. And that's entirely discounting the Empire factions that weren't already friendly with each other. Yeah, there's been a lasting peace for a while, but I doubt trade between the Minmatar and Amarr was ever that much of a priority for either Empire, and even the Gallente and Caldari massively distrust each other. Honestly, you're claiming it would be illogical for them to stop trading, but I think it's more illogical for them to currently have as open commerce as they currently do.
2). A central marketplace which allows everyone a single place to compete on prices, etc. etc. is pretty much exactly what proponents of this change are against. As multiple people have pointed out: it raises the barrier to entry to become involved in the market, reduces the advantage from specializing in particularly regional goods production, limits the existence of actual trade (by which I mean the shipment of goods from one location to another because of price differences), homogenizes the empires, eliminates a lot of danger from market activity, and draws people away from other regions of the game.
3) Security of trade should be paramount to the market, but it should be made possible by the players, not by game mechanics that allow the nearly danger-free movement of goods from one end of high security space to another. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
130
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 15:16:00 -
[389] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Be there no rebuttles?
Does this mean everyone is on board with a change like this?
There is plenty of rebuttal. Supporters of this idea have chosen to downplay, ignore, or outright delude themselves regarding the glaring flaws. It's been pointed out repeatedly that a change like this would not have the intended effect. It will screw up the markets for no real gain except a few pirates get some more targets. It's entirely possible to work toward the goal of making a low sec trading hub already, but the kind of people that like rolling freighters are too risk adverse to put their own ISK on the line making it happen. It's as simple as investing in a few bulky and expensive items and putting them up on a sell order for a very good price, then catching the freighters that come to get them on the way out, in turn putting whatever they have in their holds when you catch them back up for sale at bargain prices... Get together with friends, pool resources, hire traders to stock your station, supplement with the proceeds of your piracy, attract Null Sec business with shorter supply chains that can be more easily secured with jump freighters, etc... It does mean effort, financial risk, and doing something other than shooting anything that lights up your gate, but nothing in life or in EVE is free.
It's a suggestion meant to boost the temporary satisfaction of a small segment of toxic players at the expense of the majority, and will result in large alliances owning trade routes and freezing smaller operators out---probably to the ultimate conclusion of overall cancelled subscriptions and dissatisfied customers on all levels. |
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
82
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 15:29:00 -
[390] - Quote
The problem we're having here is that neither side can back up their arguments with facts, because we're talking about a possible change and not even specific details, and people on both sides are getting way to butt-hurt over being disagreed with. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 59 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |