| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] [19]:: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Ginger Barbarella
State War Academy
Caldari State
335
   |
Posted - 2012.12.16 03:01:00 -
[541] - Quote
After 27 pages how could they POSSIBLY care anymore?!?!?!? 
Fly Minmatar Air --- "Trust in the Rust!" |
Frostys Virpio
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
111
|
Posted - 2012.12.16 03:31:00 -
[542] - Quote
Ginger Barbarella wrote:After 27 pages how could they POSSIBLY care anymore?!?!?!?
Internet spaceship is SRS FKN BZNSS!!!! |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1416
|
Posted - 2012.12.16 03:44:00 -
[543] - Quote
sYnc Vir wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:sYnc Vir wrote:Null sec folks say that highsec players get too much money for too little risk. They point out that they live in the most dangerous space in eve and should therefore be rewarded far greater then high sec players.
This is in fact totally bullsh!t. Null sec isn't even the second most dangerous space in eve. The list goes, Losec > Wormhole > Null > Empire.? An area of space is as safe as the players make it. Highsec cannot factor in to this because it is made safer by CCP through various mechanics with no input by the players.
Not true, empire players can make space safer if they want to. Don't see many Skiffs getting blapped, Mission Drakes seem largely unganked.
Sure empire can't bubble every entrances to your pve system to slow people down, but ships choice is still a choice. After that, if someone wants to waste six Talos hulls to kill a drake of skiff, then so be it. Its also now extremely cheap to slap four Osprays into your corp mining fleet.
You don't see many mission Drakes being ganked because they aren't worth ganking (except that one guy who had a bunch of officer mods on his mission Drake) & you don't see many Skiffs being ganked for the same reason. Actually, you don't see many Skiffs at all because they aren't viable as an AFK mining boat.
Players can do a few things to make what ever activity less risky for them, but in general most of the work has already been done for them by CCP. It's fairly common to see threads of highsec denizens wanting mechanics changed instead of using their own initiative to mitigate the risks. Highsec could be a lot safer than it is but I can't see this ever happening, because it's easier for them to do nothing about it.
It's about time CCP stops catering to the lazy players with this sense of entitlement for fear of losing money. These aren't the people making the game better, these are the people wanting you to turn EVE in to a game that is like most other MMO's. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1925
|
Posted - 2012.12.16 04:14:00 -
[544] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:Players can do a few things to make what ever activity less risky for them, but in general most of the work has already been done for them by CCP. It's fairly common to see threads of highsec denizens wanting mechanics changed instead of using their own initiative to mitigate the risks. Highsec could be a lot safer than it is but I can't see this ever happening, because it's easier for them to do nothing about it.
Indeed, it's the optimal solution to have mechanics changed, since you don't have to put in continual effort. Once you get buffed, you generally keep it.
Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd
Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm |
Harland White
Circle of Fortune
85
|
Posted - 2012.12.16 04:28:00 -
[545] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:sYnc Vir wrote:Null sec folks say that highsec players get too much money for too little risk. They point out that they live in the most dangerous space in eve and should therefore be rewarded far greater then high sec players.
This is in fact totally bullsh!t. Null sec isn't even the second most dangerous space in eve. The list goes, Losec > Wormhole > Null > Empire.? An area of space is as safe as the players make it. Highsec cannot factor in to this because it is made safer by CCP through various mechanics with no input by the players.
Yep. Get over it. Not changing. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1925
|
Posted - 2012.12.16 04:30:00 -
[546] - Quote
Harland White wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:sYnc Vir wrote:Null sec folks say that highsec players get too much money for too little risk. They point out that they live in the most dangerous space in eve and should therefore be rewarded far greater then high sec players.
This is in fact totally bullsh!t. Null sec isn't even the second most dangerous space in eve. The list goes, Losec > Wormhole > Null > Empire.? An area of space is as safe as the players make it. Highsec cannot factor in to this because it is made safer by CCP through various mechanics with no input by the players. Yep. Get over it. Not changing.
No, wait !
We still need to buff CONCORD more, or freighters... something, anything to reduce ganking !
Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd
Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
Damu'Khonde
2136
|
Posted - 2012.12.16 04:51:00 -
[547] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote: they aren't worth ganking
For those reading this who can't figure out whether something is "worth ganking" for profit, you can use this interactive tool I made to get a ballpark estimate of how gankable something is.
Rifterlings - small gang frigate PvP - low/nullsec operations, newbie-friendly, free ship program; Join today! www.rifterlings.com
Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com |
La Nariz
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
286
|
Posted - 2012.12.16 04:55:00 -
[548] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Harland White wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:sYnc Vir wrote:Null sec folks say that highsec players get too much money for too little risk. They point out that they live in the most dangerous space in eve and should therefore be rewarded far greater then high sec players.
This is in fact totally bullsh!t. Null sec isn't even the second most dangerous space in eve. The list goes, Losec > Wormhole > Null > Empire.? An area of space is as safe as the players make it. Highsec cannot factor in to this because it is made safer by CCP through various mechanics with no input by the players. Yep. Get over it. Not changing. No, wait ! We still need to buff CONCORD more, or freighters... something, anything to reduce ganking !
Freighters need slots so they can fit a ~tank~. (Not that we'd consider putting cargo expanders in the lows.)
npc alts aren't people |
Frostys Virpio
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
111
|
Posted - 2012.12.16 04:59:00 -
[549] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Harland White wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:sYnc Vir wrote:Null sec folks say that highsec players get too much money for too little risk. They point out that they live in the most dangerous space in eve and should therefore be rewarded far greater then high sec players.
This is in fact totally bullsh!t. Null sec isn't even the second most dangerous space in eve. The list goes, Losec > Wormhole > Null > Empire.? An area of space is as safe as the players make it. Highsec cannot factor in to this because it is made safer by CCP through various mechanics with no input by the players. Yep. Get over it. Not changing. No, wait ! We still need to buff CONCORD more, or freighters... something, anything to reduce ganking !
Watch out or they will reduce teh alpha of every single weapon in the game by 40% thus not changing the firepower balance of anything but severely breaking the tanking side of most ship making them space maus.
I probably should not of posted that... |
Frostys Virpio
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
111
|
Posted - 2012.12.16 05:02:00 -
[550] - Quote
La Nariz wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote:Harland White wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:sYnc Vir wrote:Null sec folks say that highsec players get too much money for too little risk. They point out that they live in the most dangerous space in eve and should therefore be rewarded far greater then high sec players.
This is in fact totally bullsh!t. Null sec isn't even the second most dangerous space in eve. The list goes, Losec > Wormhole > Null > Empire.? An area of space is as safe as the players make it. Highsec cannot factor in to this because it is made safer by CCP through various mechanics with no input by the players. Yep. Get over it. Not changing. No, wait ! We still need to buff CONCORD more, or freighters... something, anything to reduce ganking ! Freighters need slots so they can fit a ~tank~. (Not that we'd consider putting cargo expanders in the lows.)
Well if you look at the icon of a cargo expander, it does look like a tank. :D |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1928
|
Posted - 2012.12.16 06:22:00 -
[551] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:La Nariz wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote:No, wait !
We still need to buff CONCORD more, or freighters... something, anything to reduce ganking ! Freighters need slots so they can fit a ~tank~. (Not that we'd consider putting cargo expanders in the lows.) Well if you look at the icon of a cargo expander, it does look like a tank. :D
Maybe ... maybe cargo expanders should be a tank module as well. Why not. Expanded Reinforced Bulkhead Cargohold
Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd
Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm |
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
Lost Obsession
413
|
Posted - 2012.12.16 06:43:00 -
[552] - Quote
I wouldn't mind a mid slot on my freighter and enough CPU and Power-grid for a 100MN MwD, for sum reason.
I think I should be rewarded with that for being at keyboard.
Don't ask about Italics, just tilt your head. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1419
|
Posted - 2012.12.16 08:35:00 -
[553] - Quote
sYnc Vir wrote:I wouldn't mind a mid slot on my freighter and enough CPU and Power-grid for a 100MN MwD, for sum reason.
I think I should be rewarded with that for being at keyboard.
Or you could always use one of the other several viable methods of avoiding a potential gank.
It's about time CCP stops catering to the lazy players with this sense of entitlement for fear of losing money. These aren't the people making the game better, these are the people wanting you to turn EVE in to a game that is like most other MMO's. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
2305
|
Posted - 2012.12.16 08:47:00 -
[554] - Quote
La Nariz wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:La Nariz wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote::words: :words: :words: A hulk pre-EHP buff could be tanked to 20k EHP with minimal effort. The mack required more effort to do so but it was still possible. I don't care about any silly agenda you are basically :foxnews:, spouting talking points, refusing to corroborate anything, and thinking that if you can shout louder than the other guy it means your argument was right. Well we are different, I always care about what the other say. Else why are you even on a forum? You could as well paint a big "I WON'T HEAR YOU TRALALALALA!" giant poster and stare at it all day long. Where di I say Macks could not be tanked? I said they could, even if that required to be a bait fit (that is, nominally capable to perform the role). Its not that I won't hear you, its that I won't give any time of day to your talking points and that I expect you to support your points with evidence. Instead of being a :foxnews: dude you could you know cite some of these statistics you claim exist and actually try to prove your points.
What statistics?
Also, I have no idea what a foxnews is (it's not in my country) but apparently they have more success than random-guy-who-thinks-to-be-elite-and-all-in-a-basement.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
NosceTeIpsum
Cult of Escobar
19
|
Posted - 2012.12.16 08:51:00 -
[555] - Quote
After living in Null for around 2 years, allow me to eleborate on it.
* Words from CCP and what they believe as far as Nullsec goes and what they wanted to change http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=944 *
Nullsec design rules
EVE turned up to 11
Nullsec features should always reward teamwork, organization and interaction in every feature
Nullsec features should always support the core fantasy that we're offering
* I can agree on both of these, the PVP is amazing and enourmous sometimes in Null*
Maximize "can", minimize "must"
Nullsec features should always maximize the amount of valuable options available to the player, and minimize the number of mandatory tasks they must complete
Nullsec features should always encourage players to solve their own problems rather than using mechanics to regulate things
* There are lots of things to do there, you just have to go hunting for them, I agree with this *
Keep a careful eye on economic balance
Nullsec moneymaking activities should be generally competitive with one another, and therefore pay out more than equivalent activities elsewhere
Nullsec should always remain economically linked to other areas of the game, but this link should be carefully balanced
* This is were I think people miss their mark. Money making in Null and WH space is AMAZING. Picking up officer gear or DED crap really gets the blood flowin. And we all know what some of those run for. But it requires more EFFORT (oooh there is that word you peeps keep throwing around) to get and has a more severe RISK (The other one too?  ). The problem I think people are missing is they don't sell often, so it seems like its unbalanced. However if someone wanted to do 2B through L4s, it would take weeks. So the trade off is apperent. Its fast cash vs Holy Grail of modules. And we can argue about belt ratting and other BS like that but its besides the point. Plus Nullsec and WH space have monopolies on rare minerals and moon goo mats which keeps Highsec Indy corps in check (Because they are losing millions in profits from buying these obviously needed items). All I see here is one factor balanced out by another factor.*
Everyone should be able to see how to get involved
For a given nullsec feature or activity, any player should be able to figure out a plan that ends with them participating in that activity/feature
* ANYONE can do this if they choose to, I agree.*
Players should be able to mitigate danger, but not eliminate it - nobody should be safe in space, everything that's built should be destroyable
Nullsec features can (and often should) allow players to mitigate the inherent danger of Nullsec with effort, teamwork and organization, but they should never make a player feel safe while in space, or secure in their investments from month to month: every organization should have a discoverable weakness, and anything that can be built up in should be possible to tear down again
*Yet another problem we encounter. I guess CCP doesn't realize that to kill Goons, ATLAS, ******* PL.... you need like 60% of the entire community to do this. Its like a Manager with "grandfathered" pay. Something extraordinary needs to happen to "tear down" these already mighty giants.*
The rest after that isn't really important. But the ones stated are what I consider to be the home runners. And to be completely honest I'm not sure how to "fix" things that are already cemented into the world, like Goons etc. I agree that some aspects of the game can be somewhat balanced out but they seem so minor, whats the point? Like Highsec vs Nullsec incursions. Nullsec ones are better, but no one does them because its TO risky or whatever other reason they have. (Fear of Null?)
To finalize my point, yes, some changes should be made so it balances out a bit, like nullsec POS refineries and the such, but beyond stuff like that I feel most of it should be left alone. Like watching the stock market, I'd rather see the numbers go up and down rather than shoot to $2000 a stock only to destroy the market 3 days later because the "improvements" were the exact opposite. |
Vanishing Shadow
Kurved Space
0
|
Posted - 2012.12.16 10:15:00 -
[556] - Quote
Quick question from a six month old noob - are system security ratings static or dynamic? I.e. does a system's security rating change dynamically over time in response to kills (or lack of kills) , ganks, industry etc or are they set by CCP? |
NosceTeIpsum
Cult of Escobar
19
|
Posted - 2012.12.16 10:17:00 -
[557] - Quote
Vanishing Shadow wrote:Quick question from a six month old noob - are system security ratings static or dynamic? I.e. does a system's security rating change dynamically over time in response to kills (or lack of kills) , ganks, industry etc or are they set by CCP?
No its Static. |
Gillia Winddancer
Shiny Noble Crown Services
156
|
Posted - 2012.12.16 10:19:00 -
[558] - Quote
NosceTeIpsum wrote:
*Yet another problem we encounter. I guess CCP doesn't realize that to kill Goons, ATLAS, ******* PL.... you need like 60% of the entire community to do this. Its like a Manager with "grandfathered" pay. Something extraordinary needs to happen to "tear down" these already mighty giants.*
*ding*
Now kindly further expand on what exactly the problem lies here. Include everything that you can and cannot do against these groups.
|
Vanishing Shadow
Kurved Space
0
|
Posted - 2012.12.16 10:26:00 -
[559] - Quote
NosceTeIpsum wrote:Vanishing Shadow wrote:Quick question from a six month old noob - are system security ratings static or dynamic? I.e. does a system's security rating change dynamically over time in response to kills (or lack of kills) , ganks, industry etc or are they set by CCP? No its Static.
Wouldn't many of these arguments go away if it was dynamic? Give players the ability to downgrade Jita's status during hulkageddon and before long Jita will be low sec. Of course, the market hubs would shift to the new high sec (which would probably be located in blue null!) but change is usually healthy in these sort of environments.
A dynamic security system would prevent blocs building to absurd degrees which they are on both sides at the moment. Would probably have to be coupled with a sort of Concord tax. |
Silath Slyver Silverpine
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
102
|
Posted - 2012.12.16 12:52:00 -
[560] - Quote
Vanishing Shadow wrote:NosceTeIpsum wrote:Vanishing Shadow wrote:Quick question from a six month old noob - are system security ratings static or dynamic? I.e. does a system's security rating change dynamically over time in response to kills (or lack of kills) , ganks, industry etc or are they set by CCP? No its Static. Wouldn't many of these arguments go away if it was dynamic? Give players the ability to downgrade Jita's status during hulkageddon and before long Jita will be low sec. Of course, the market hubs would shift to the new high sec (which would probably be located in blue null!) but change is usually healthy in these sort of environments. A dynamic security system would prevent blocs building to absurd degrees which they are on both sides at the moment. Would probably have to be coupled with a sort of Concord tax.
It'd be a hell of a lot of work on the coding end, I think, to make sure the surroundings fell in line with the new sec status (What rats appear, how much PI resources are available etc.)
But that's a really interesting idea. It'll never happen, but it'd be pretty badass if it did. |
|
CCP Falcon
1400
|
Posted - 2012.12.16 13:17:00 -
[561] - Quote
This topic is closed.
It is quite clear that people cannot have a civil, adult discussion regarding this without the need for ISD to clean the thread multiple times.
Our volunteers have wasted enough of their time trying to bring people's ridiculous behavior in this thread under control and have cleaned it multiple times to no avail.
Do not re-open this topic.
Locked.
CCP Falcon -á || -á EVE Community Team -á || -á EVE Illuminati -á || -á-á@CCP_Falcon -á || -á-á@EVE_LiveEvents
-- Disciple Of The Delicious Tea -- |
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] [19]:: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |