There are a number of threads on this topic that have been locked on this forum.

This one so far as stayed civil, as such I'll leave it open.

Take care when posting, and make sure you keep it within the forum rules.

This is the problem of gheto-thinking of low/null dwellers (shoot anything that moves) , not by the game mechanic.

Here is a more than likely terribly thought out rookie idea, how about downsizing the potential number of bodies in any given corp/alliance. Then work on making corp/alliance controlled areas give real perks to the owners.

Would that lessen the 'blob', or a least make many of them.

Yes this is the exact gheto thinking i was talking about. Same thinking are among african countries.

Look I know that nullsec is full of asshats that will shoot anything that moves, thus preventing you from making your claimed space safe for neutrals. But thats the problem of low/null dwellers. Its not fault of hisec dwellers that null suck and that 90% of its dwellers are savage monkeys. Hisec works because it has reasonable dwellers.

There are already better rewards from PvE activities in low/null.
And what about Jita? And trading?.And industry?.Jita is succesfull because traders/manufacturers are no fighters. They will trade anywhere where its safe. Its like wallstreet. no Trader will trade in the middle of foking desert.

What prevents null from making a couple of NO FIGHT ZONE star systems open for all (you know - diplomacy)? There should be ageement among all low/null dwellers that certain systems will be safe for neutrals. You know, player made police, player made military (OMG Sandbox). You can profit from docking fees, you can profit from taxes, gatecamps could levy tolls ...oh wait... gatecamps would surely shred those ships to pieces.....But aggain... thats the problem of low/null dwellers themselves.

Hisec is not most profitable region. If null could have reasonable dwellers it could outprofit hisec by orders of magnitude. Hisec is just mirror of how bad are low/null dwellers at utilizing opportunities.

But nerfing Hisec just because of incompetence of low/null dwellers?... LOL

As i said before: "Gangsters who lives in the woods are complaining about criminality in the woods".

If you had 5 minutes a day to play the game for a year+ like I had, you'd have created a fat zero.
I quit my friends because I felt like a dead weight on them even if they never asked me to leave.

But hey, you know everything about everybody's life, don't you?

In theory the ability to build supercaps is a pretty big advantage. Whether the market conditions at any given point support that theory is obviously another question.

Highsec industrialists can't even build dreads, though, so saying that there is no advantage to doing industry outside highsec is ignoring a few limitations of highsec industry.

There's certainly no advantage to building things that *can* be built in highsec in nullsec as things currently stand, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing given the current shape of the game. Changing it so that nullsec industry was advantaged in every respect would be a quite dramatic change, and I'm not even sure that it is really possible.

A SELECT DISTINCT name from these continuously spammed threads would reveal the same 7-8 names, 4-5 of which belonging to a strongly interested lobby.

My agenda is to grow EvE's player base and make its markets liquid. Simple and clear like water.

Edit: "grow player base" means an increased chance at statistically getting suitable people for whatever gameplay you like. It also means letting CCP hire more staff to create more content and more fixes.

I don't hide behind manifestos, I don't sit behind idiosynchrasies (like: the richest and largest alliance calling for buffs that will directly make them even stronger), I don't spam dozens of threads all about impairing somebody else, I don't coordinate 3rd party blogs to instill an ideology on the general playerbase.

1. The two things are related. I have played in games with 1M+ subs to see how different and healthier their markets are.
In EvE I cannot even sell 150B worth of stuff spread in 50 different items without killing half of those markets for weeks.

2. I still recall 3 /4 weeks ago Mynna asking on SCC Lounge if I was dumping fu*kwads of stuff on buy orders (some large markets were cracking) and no, I was not. All it takes is some random with a some stuff to kill major commodities like Zydrine or Megacyte. That was exactly what convinced me that EvE needs much more "raw meat" (players), it's absurd that a lone random can crush markets like that, in the highest number of concurrent players time of the year none the less.

3. I don't see what's wrong about Technetium except being concentrated in too a narrow space.
Gone it, the next bottleneck will surface. Bottlenecks are realistic.

4. You first abused of its flawed mechanic, made some hundreds of billions+ out if it and *then* came out laughing at CCP.
To demand proper credit and "We wanted it nerfed" you would have to have petitioned the flaw to CCP first and not used of the mechanic.
You know, I found a second FW flaw myself (even said about it on SCC Lounge) and guess what, I have petitioned it and CCP fixed it, I don't recall having made any sensational proclaim about that (perhaps 1 thread).

5. Unlikely that WH would ever get more industry than low or hi sec.
WHers after all understood the rewards for that content are not exclusively flat, monetary and selectively tangible.
It's a lifestyle to choose (one I like and may return to once I am settled in my new RL home), the reward is in being there and living your lifestyle.

6. Here comes the catch. In a sandbox game "should be" is a banned word.
Everybody ideally get similar sand and thus nullsec should indeed have powerful industry and stuff but don't keep raging at the ISK per hour because if you are playing a game for ISK/hour I pity you.

Edited for coherence please read H. Ratli Smirks guide to posting.

1. A 2 months old character can do L4 missions, training labs and mass industry takes less than that.
In a long term game like EvE, 2 months old is a newborn baby.

2. I did not invent high sec though, if you bothered reading my other posts you'd know my public stance is that high sec should not exist. Because I know that hi sec *can* convince people to never leave it.
But CCP put in hi sec and no nerfing will convince those those who WILL stay in hi sec to move out.
Imo the only viable hi sec nerf is to remove it and it would cost TONS of subscriptions so I can see why CCP does not do that.

3. Citation needed, and won't be found.

If you undock anywhere you can be shot, even in highsec. Even if you play by the rules.

If you pay attention to the rules and intel sources appropriate to the portion of the game you are playing in you are unlikely to be a victim there, and are likely to be able to find nice targets.

Perhaps you just don't understand how the rules work in highsec well enough?

Or perhaps you think that too many people you would like to be easy targets do understand the rules?

I am clearly poorly suited to diplomacy, and you would demand that if I am unable to do so effectively I am unworthy of attaining any proper rewards in EvE?

Pull the other one, it's got bells on it (really, I had them installed last week).

what industrial capabilities do you get being social in low sec?

1) WoW is not even a PvP game nor has the structural facilities to be considered a market and player driven economy.
Try comparing with something PvP and with actual mostly player crafted stuff like GW2 or DFO or Entropia.

2) A lone player can reliably crush ANY market I want except Tritanium, Pyerite and Nitrogen Isotopes and a couple of big huge "beasts". Call it "aneddoctal", I don't mind.

3) Typical case of putting your head under the sand and sing "tralalah". I don't EVER call "evil goonie", I consider them a large alliance doing their interests. Which is really FINE, as long as they don't dress up their interests with forum e-ideology.

4) Here's all the grasp needed: "Aryth and co. exploited the problem". Which I don't even find to be expecially bad, since CCP are notorious for being completely oblivious to feedback. But that in my dictionary that does not mean they are the saints you try painting them to be. Of course you conveniently skipped the second part about me having found a second flaw and NOT having exploited it... and CCP fixed it without me doing any fireworks, proclaim threads and so on.

5) It's not about red herrings, it's about WHs missing *stations*, where the hell do you want to stick your awesomesauce 10000000 slots station in a WH? All you (and I) can hope is to get buffed POSes structures for industry but WH dwellers just won't get as many slots as any other sec, it's just the nature of zero civilization / zero facilities WHs.

6) I have ideals of mine... and guess what I tell them. Also please notice how a sandbox is neutral by nature, it cannot favor one golden path else it becomes a WoW clone, with canned progression, magic bullets and whatever crap.

7) Aka 6 edit: I have, but you unsurprisingly keep not wanting seeing them so it's useless to repeat them.

8. By the way the other areas *don't* require social interaction, but they greatly benefit off it. Hi sec does not require social interaction, it less greatly benefits off it. Whereas the "future" for an other area player is uncapped and unlimited, an hi sec player will not be able to even compare with that.
Other PvP games too reward social interaction but don't require it. The prize is in the social interaction itself. A soloer may create his "skillpro" videos killing 1..2..3 other guys, a big corp can deal with hundreds.
If you were in hi sec you'd NEVER become a super-alliance, you'd NEVER monopolize markets, you'd NEVER have your own empire vs a similar null sec based alliance.

9. Finally, prove me how solo gameplay is more rewarding than group play. The very fact you exist and are the strongest in game (and not a soloer) is the living proof that by socializing you can beat everyone and everything.

:words: CCP forums aren't letting me post the entirety of your post for some reason

:words:

1. Which ones?

2. I googled this Big Lie thing of yours and I have found this interesting paragraph:

(2) Beware of the zero-sum. When someone says that we need to nerf A in order to boost B, the first question you should ask is if there's a way to boost B without nerfing A. If B is unattractive, then nerfing A won't make it any better, it will only reduce the overall attractiveness of the game. That's not balancing the game; that's just spitefulness. Look for alternatives to attain your stated goals that won't nerf other people's activities. If nerfing is inherent, look for ways to mitigate or evade the effects on other players. No one is playing EVE to be your *****. If someone wants to nerf your A to boost their B, then you have an even better reason to look for alternatives to that nerf. Simply treating their proposal as yet another insidious attack on your play style only makes you look self-interested and parochial.

Odd, eh?

3. Keep hoping, I don't even know who is this Icefluxor guy.

4. I don't envy you. At all. Money driven people and people putting money on the altar are not tasting anything of life, neither RL nor in game. EvE should NOT be balanced on ISK, that's what a min maxing prostitute would do and this is THEIR bad.
EvE should be balanced over goals, where ISK is just a contour. You chose to have a shiny empire? Then THAT is your goal, not to be super-mega extra rich.
No, the hi sec noob with a 3B Tengu is not super-mega extra rich, he's just somebody that won't ever go beyond 1-2 ships then his "life" is done.

5. The LP idea would be good, if only LP would not have been gang r*ped repeatedly and put as exploitable material for FW farmers. Last time I checked, LP lost tons of value, that's another big nerf for hi sec. It's all to be seen if the FW fixes have reverted the loss, I have not had time to check it. Smartly invested LP used to be worth from 1200 to 3300 ISK per LP, how much do they go for, today?

i still dont understand whats wrong with no risk industry in high sec

You're never going to make any headway trying to sell this idea to dumb people. Why would they want changes that would make the game harder for them?

And letting one neutral stop your entire bearing operation is you own fault.

Some of us were here before the Drone regions. Not the Drone region nerf but before the Drone region buff. We saw what Null did with their Null based industry.
Super Caps Online.
I think that's why CCP sent Industry back to High Sec. Trouble was, they nerfed Meta 0 drops and somehow Meta 4 got replaced by Pithi drops, Mining Missions stayed Nerfed.

My suggestion is similar to one someone else made but with a twist. More Grav sites but not of the high End kind. More Grav sites with Pyro, Plag, Scordite and Dense Veld. With enough large rocks to amount to a ship or two.

What I wouldn't give to have a Dense Veld Grav site with 20 rocks 100K each.

So if you feel that way then go harass them. Gank them or something instead of whining that CCP should be doing it for you since you're too lazy.

2. Figures, I'd never think you'd say that.

3. Yet you keep replying.

4. It does not make you an horrible person, it makes me think you are not enjoying the game and your zone goals at it should. For the rest, don't flatter yourself with the default stupid "I will say the guy says PvPers are sociopaths" because I PvP in all sorts of games since a decade+. ISK addicted people <> PvPer anyway.

5. 2-3 years ago that was exactly like you say, then CCP put soloable, farmable FW in direct competition for many "former good items" so there's no "dumb or smart", just "boned". To do what you say CCP would have to remove that FW overlap and this is not going to happen.

1. I could imagine you would not see the difference between WoW and a PvP game if you were not an EvE player. But you ARE an EvE player how can you even compare WoW with a real PvP game? Ever played any of Darkfall, DAoC, Warhammer? Those are PvP games. Even GW2 is more of a PvP game than WoW and that's a theme park.

2. You and the other guys pretend all people have to fall to your boring bullcrap made just to raise rubble. No, I don't care about you being a PvPer, about yourself saying I say you are something bad IRL, about yourself saying I am going to do something with CSM. You are a LOBBY, clear and sharp, nothing ideological more, nothing ideological less. You do your interests and I could respect that if you did not keep painting yourself either as the "public enemy" or the "victim" or "selfless heroes out to save the game".
So, stop playing the "everyone hate us" role and similar bull, it really does not suit the richest and largest alliance in game.

3. Yes because saying an American knows what's a lobby is, it is clearly racist
I mentioned American because in other countries people don't know what a lobby is, they don't exist or are not legal nor allowed to officially exist.

4. I misrepresented what's not relevant (as I am not in the alliance) but wrote down what's relevant (an exploit *made* and derisive thread done to CCP).

5. Whatever suits you. I am trying to provide more details to try make it clearer, if to you that's moving goal posts, guess what I don't care. As I said, let's agree to disagre and be done with it.

6. Nope I never said the intended game play is to have progression from hi sec to null sec, you did.

7. Not my fault you 5-6 people keep enlarging this thread more than a Viagra carton.

8. Well since I am certainly not the most hard core nor most capable player in the world yet I seem to manage at what you find impossible / unbelievable then that anedoctal evidence becomes evidence.
I also would have called anedoctal evidence the possibility to grab drones off opponents then I have seen Kil2 doing it and thus it became evidence.

---

9. Anyway we are at the end of an argument ping pong and I got bored.
What I had to say, I said. Feel free to ignore it.

Haulers are perfectly gankable. The amount of goods sold in Jita 4-4 that is actually manufactured on site has to be minuscule.

:words:

the thing is ccp designed the game in a certain way (which doesnt have to be fair to everyone) to appeal to pvp and pve players,its bussiness first,so if you want to make an argument about nerfing high sec it should be nerfing high sec will bring more players to eve

because with the current state of things,playerbase is growing and no bussinesman in the world would toy with overhaul of huge part of the game just for the sake of satisfying minor part of the playerbase

im not for or against changes to low,null or high sec - i just want to see a reasonable argument why something should be changed based on economic analyses not just personal biased opinions - if you cant provide that, this thread is like couple of friends talking in the bar about how local coach should train their team

No, EVE gets into the NY Times, and Forbes magazine. That's adult news.
Why in the world would CCP cater to self entitled children who have no concept of the value of effort, and just want things to be handed to them?

thats a great argument dude (no sarcasm)

the only problem i have with it is that if people are drawn to the game by reading about the low sec shenanigans why isnt the number of players in lowsec growing? if you are right and "the pve players arent the ones that grow the game" how come there is such big difference between lowsec and high sec players?seems like players are perfectly happy in highsec,happy enough to pay subscription...

it looks like even if the new players are drawn to the game by reading about low sec stuff,majority doesnt participate in it - so would you change a big portion of the game even tho you knew it might affect (maybe negatively) your biggest stable playerbase?

Glad to see you are the official spokeperson for CCP and dictate who to take and who to refuse to the game.
With those abundant epitects I can also see a bright future in your attempt at gaining simpathy to your cause exactly off those who are your subject.

EvE does exactly like many brands do: they create a luxury brand selling some silly hat / woman dress. They will sell all of 5 of their $30,000 exclusive, bait items, then make 30M dollars selling cheap hats, mundane woman dresses and so on in the supermarket.

EvE 5k concurrent online "content creators" are still the same amount since the dawn of the game, CCP use them to attract the remaining 40,000 who are not news worthy but bring in the wage for the CCP employees.

I'm not going to get in to a protracted debate about this particular topic as I've made my point and outlined the genuine reason behind this latest call to twist the knife yet further in to the back of Empire.

However, just to scotch this myth about Empire being supposedly so perfect perhaps you can explain why living in null and low sec you can afford to build and maintain the logistics of industry necessary to support the construction of vast fleets of Capital ships comprising of Dreadnoughts, Carriers, Super carriers and Titans worth hundreds of Billions of Isk that no other ordinary Joe living in Empire could afford in a lifetime?

Even if it were possible to construct these vessels using conventional Empire industrial means there are very few with the financial clout to do so.

The fact remains that the capacity for earning wealth and wealth creation (including industrial capacity) in Low and Null space is vastly superior to anything that can possibly be achieved within Empire and so the suggestion to dumb down Empire yet further is frankly ludicrous in the extreme.

everyone knows lowsec is high risk but same isk as high sec (give or take) - but it has also other perks,i find it unfair when you shrink eve to just isk making game,you are not playing to gain isk,tho im sure there are ppl like that

you have a game where high sec is the way it is, yet the game is growing,majority of people are obviously happy with the current state of things

so why change it?

you say that ccp shown they can recover from mistakes,but would you dare to gamble with the playerbase again?especially after incarna fiasco id be twice as hesitant to do major gameplay changes

i can see your point,however im not sure if i would try to toy with high sec playerbase,maybe ccp execs will...

so you are assuming that nerfing high sec industry and industrialists will improve the game? and since when are you the braintrust?

did i miss an announcement promoting you as chief designer? how do you know it will improve the game?little bit offtopic - whos gonna win the super bowl?

you dont know if it improves the game, you only think it will improve the game because its what you want,it will improve the game for you...

it certainly doesnt improve the game for high sec players,or are you saying that you are more important than ppl who would not benefit from such gameplay change?

while were at it,i want titans in high sec,it will improve the game,there i said it so its true

i can play this game all day

if you could support the bold part with the actuall numbers you d pretty much won the nerf highsec argument,and certainly more people would support your ways - at least the people who want the game to continue growing

i dont know how many people actually like the game and wouldnt change a thing,maybe a massive poll would be required for ccp to make sure they wont fail with important gameplay changes

so maybe in the future they will decide to do something like that and we will all be surprised how many players want the game to be like you are suggesting or maybe not,who knows

i feel like you made some interesting points mate,it was a good exchange

Eve Online is a series of trade off's depending upon your location, surely that concept is not lost on you?

If you believe that you are somehow disadvantaged in performing industry in Null or Low then relocate an alt or another resource in to Empire and perform it there instead.

For every positive that you can identify about the benefits of high sec industry over its null or low sec equivalent you can equally list aspects of null and low that are equally more advantageous than Empire, but I don't hear you on here suggesting that because miners cannot mine Ark, Bist or Crokite or run Level 5 Missions in Empire then these should be obliterated in Null or Low?

Of course you wouldn't proffer that line of argument because that would be unbalanced and one sided. Seriously don't make me laugh any more than I already am.

From a miners perspective if they want to mine A,B,C ores or mission runners wanted to do level 5 missions they accept that they have to leave their comfort zone and go to low or null to perform those activities.

I remain of the opinion that the purpose behind all of these threads is to repeatedly over the course of time attempt to dumb down, to the point that Empire becomes pointless, the benefits to be afforded by safer space ultimately pushing more folks in to your backyard.

Come on be honest and transparent, you know you want to really.

If the only metric of "winning EvE" you have is how big your virtual bank balance is, you lost before the first time you logged in.

The point of EvE is to have fun playing EvE. That means different things to different people, from being a part of massive fleets of gigantic ships competing for control of nullsec to sitting in a quiet backwater listening to the hum of your mining lasers as they steadily fill your hold.

Isk is just how you gain access to the parts of the game that you enjoy.

It's not all about isk per hour, thats certain. Friendship, cameradery escapism (from sitting with the wife) are all hugely admirable aspects of Eve.

I give most of my isk away to those less fortunate to help them up the ladder, so I'm usually broke

Try to nerf high sec is good for busniss. ... WRONG

You. talking about evidence try to explane that to ccp...

Decrease player base is not good for busniss. See how criple all mmorpg are with less player base.... you need to balance everything not nerf here and there hopes player A is happy and player B there is always a war agains that....

People love intel cpu other people love amd there are the same but the are not.... meh good try.

No need in nerfing highsec.
But there can be a talk on boosting null a bit.

Subscriber base.
The more people are playing EvE, the more people are having fun at it.

I am not the guy demanding EvE to change, no need to be a spokesperson to do nothing.

I feel perfectly well and fine, it's your super wealthy, top alliance who are complaining like crazy.

I am very OK at changing the game to implement powerful industry in null sec etc. etc. but in the end it's YOU who are advocating it, not me, so the spokesperson are you.

What part of "sandbox game" is so hard for you to understand?

If half the user base is perfectly happy nibbling on rocks and running highsec missions and doesn't want to stretch into more challenging aspects of the game, that's twice as many players as there would be if those features were made too difficult for them to access.

That's twice the market size (well, maybe only 30% more market, but still bigger), twice the potential PvP targets, twice the jeers and twice the tears.

If all you care about is isk, I've got a 128 bit integer with your name on it on a private server. Have as much as you want, but you have to play alone.

There are plenty of hi sec content creators, you just don't want to see them.
Even the dumbest ice mining system lives its daily struggle and drama, if you want I can tell some tales about it.

Also, ATM I am in hi sec and creating content. You just don't head to the Market Discussion forum to read about it, because you don't consider market PvP "content".

Stories about Null are as common as stories about the CSM in the main stream media, not really something to get over joyed about.

The best one to make it out lately was a huge battle in Wormhole Space.

I make content every time I update my market orders.

Its group content that other players respond to. Our collective effort forms the economy.

You should read MD some times, there's lots of stuff I do for everybody, and I am not just talking about my free ware apps.

*edit* I would argue that the economy affects more players than the conquest of a single region.

Its not chicken and egg, its cause/effect.

Plex speculation in Jita has a bigger impact on the average player than the conquest of Delve.

I think what your grasping at is that somehow nullsec "content creators" such as your own alliance are more vital towards the continuation of the game than players in other parts of the sandbox. That isn't true.

VV's examples of what he does are valid, though I would classify him as the exception that proves the rule

[quote=Varius Xeral]They are debasing what happens in other parts of the sandbox so they can justify nerfing hi-sec and buffing nullsec industry. When you are talking about industry, buying and selling and building are the most important things to talk about.

The risk reward argument falls flat because the reward in hi-sec industry is small, often items are put up below build cost. The intense competition keeps prices and profits low. The reward is in line with the risk. Buffing nullsec industry won't change low prices. Nerfing hi-sec severely would have negative consequences for the game such as inflation, as prices rise due to a lack of competition, and people quitting industry in hi-sec.

I do not agree. A 160-man high-sec mining corp engaging in daily 40-50 ship mining ops, without firing a single weapon, generates plenty of pgc. Irrespective of what sec it is found in, cooperation needs to be rewarded and the quality of pgc isn't dependent upon the size or purpose of the ships being flown. Imo, creation of "content" is derived from player interaction, not location.

But as I still read through this topic, I keep wondering why Ethiopia has residents. Clearly a lack of resources hasn't caused an exodus of the populace. But when war threatens similar countries, numerous humanitarian crises arise as everyone tries to evacuate. Thus, security trumps resource availability.

So it still seems to me that a lack of resources (i.e. taking things "away" from high sec) will have virtually no effect on player circulation. It does nothing to better the game for the 71 percent of characters located in high sec now. All a hs nerf will do is reduce the quality of a high sec game for the majority of characters, further enrich null sov. holders, and it still does nothing to prevent null alts from afk mining whatever's left in high sec afterward. There's still going to be security and that matters most.

As security isn't even being discussed, only rewards, high sec exploitation will continue until there's nothing left of value.

Yonis Kador

The only way to buff nullsec industry would be to raise prices, Jita is too efficient and keeps prices low. Nullsec industry does suck. But it will continue to suck even if manufacturing slots were increased. The only way to raise prices would be to nerf hi-sec severely and as I have stated previously, that comes with its own set of problems.

The risk in hi-sec is losing money on what you produce. This happens a lot. People produce at a loss. Its an economic risk, not a safety risk. Its market PvP.

Your proposals, if they went forward, would definitely raise prices and null would consider itself buffed and hi-sec nerfed. I doubt it would have any effect on average players other than making things more expensive, so you have to grind more to afford the same thing. If hi-sec can't compete people won't build there any more. The people in hi-sec would have no choice other than to move to null to continue their industrial activities or unsub their industrial characters.

Your proposals would also place industry firmly within the grasp of established nullsec alliances, shifting profits to them and away from hi-sec. I would view that as a negative thing. Nullsec is run by giant blue blobs and this would centralize even more power in their hands. In my view, nullsec is broken and this would make it even more broken. I would much rather have things the way they are than to change things as you have proposed.

I would also ask the larger philosophical question why is it necessary to shift industry to nullsec. The same things would be produced and in some cases it would even be the same alts producing the same stuff. The only thing that would be different would be the location. There is nothing stopping anyone from producing the same goods in hi-sec. What is the overriding concern that would make it necessary to shift locations for production, according to the economy it doesn't matter where it gets produced as long as it gets produced.. In my view its an irrational desire that necessitates the switching of location. It would only serve to make logistics harder and goods more expensive.

*edit* I don't buy the idea that making things more expensive doesn't matter.

No, you are trying to convince me that any metric of reward has to be quantifiable directly on a player-by-player basis, and I'm telling you that's poppycock.

The purpose of the game is in the playing of it.

Just because you assert something over and over doesn't make it true. Your grasping at something to do in nullsec? try pvp. Leave industry to the professionals.

Geeze, this thread has gone places.

We can fix high sec without nerfing it, just double rewards in low, null, and wormholes. Solved.

No, thats not my argument. Leaving industry in hi-sec is whats best for the game. We have gone an entire decade with hi-sec as it is and it seems to be working OK. Your proposals break things far more than they fix things. I get that you are bored, and have nothing to do, but thats your own fault because you have half of New Eden blue. I hope CCP doesn't listen to you.

If the reward for nullsec industry is so awful, why is there a problem with supercap proliferation?

Perhaps you mean reward for the ordinary nullsec player, who is completely locked out of industry there, but that is a problem that the fine folks of Goonswarm can fix for themselves within their alliance space. All that needs to happen is rent out all those newly idle CSAA POS facilities to the folks in your alliance that want to use the industrial space for other things.

There's nothing stopping you but you.

you do know that the 4 different station types do different things right? so if you want production then you have to build ammarian stations, caldari for science, gallente for your little corp offices, and minmatar for refining.

and i agree, you'll never be able to match hi-sec in output capacity. so don't try, build for yourselves.

( I will read the entire thread thread after work, and will amend my statements then if needed)

why are people talking about nerfing. How about something that only people get in null sec. Not only moon harvest but things thats needed for high sec thats only to get from zero sec..... Its not easy to think about something. Nerfing will not help.. forcing players to get null sec is general a bad idea.

ps evidence see the lore of all mmorpg.... nuff said. Or you want to try a free eve online with some magic kids shop to unballance the **** out of this game with real money? or some farm vile game like world of wankers and diablo 3 your pick here

I guess the thing I just dont understand is the NEED for anything to bloom in null. Null as I understand it is the frontier of EVE. It is supposed to be an area that is untamed and in a constant state of transition. I dont think it was ever anyones intention that one group could get a stranglehold over all of it or most of it. Had the original idea of null remained true to form, there would be no need for the burgeoning industry needs it apparently now has. Thats not a failure of the game mechanics however. That is a failure of the people that dwell in null. I would say that even if CCP did everything you suggest above, nothing would change. Sure, a few folks would take advantage of the better ores and outposts but most wont. In the end, high sec industry will continue to plug along. The higher costs would just be passed along to the end user of what is produced and then your problems would be even bigger.

Its not an interesting choice at all. The people in null would make new alt armies to do industry and the hi-sec industrialists would be out of a job. I guess you don't want to wreck the game, just wreck my game.

Well if thats the best solution anyone can come up with then lets get it rolling. If they nerf hi sec, then you will see the mass exodus from the game everyones talking about. Its not about ISK for most of these hi sec folks. Its about taking away how they like to play the game. I personally dont care.I think it would be a huge mistake followed quickly by the biggest rollback in EVE's history, but Id kinda like to see that to tell you the truth. Then perhaps they will begin to look at whats really wrong with the game. If something has to be nerfed to make something else more appealing, it will never work my friend.

I think my post was pretty clear.

Quite frankly. You are WRONG with your second need.

Your first need I fully support, Null should be capable of supporting a proper industrial infrastructure that makes building your own empire viable.

But Null Industry does not NEED to be 'better' than High Sec Industry. It doesn't even need to be the same cost as long as it is close. People are out there because they WANT to be. Make it capable for them to do so, and give them similar costs to high sec industry, and they will do so because it is what they WANT to be. There is no need for it to be better, just similar and those that WANT to build an empire will use the capability to do so.

There is nothing wrong with High having 100% refining, Null just should also be able to have 100% refining at the same skill level of refining. Now if this means dropping NPC stations from 50%-40% so that only pilots with the top refining skills can get to 100% in High or Null, then so be it. But lets get rid of this idea that if High is 100% Null is dead, thats just rubbish, plain and simple. All that is needed is basic similarity. Not a superior Null and a Nerfed High Sec.

N.B. I don't mind high sec industry cost going up, providing that there are similar costs for null sec. I.e. Remove the cost of 'hiring' manufacturing lines in high sec, but make all lines, Null, Low & High require fuel (in the same amounts) of some kind to run instead. This fuel can be acquired anywhere, because really, the existing Empires would have settled on sources of whatever fuel is required to run machinery. This puts the cost of manufacturing into the hands of players as to the cost of the fuel, so if a Null Sec alliance can source it at half the cost it sells for in Jita, they then have cheaper manufacturing costs via their own efforts sourcing the fuel.

Some folks seem to be doing a pretty good job of it. You hadn't noticed?

That door swings both ways

Some of what you say makes sense. I can see that someone in null having to actively defend their assets should be able to reason that effort against a reward that makes it worthwhile. As for the things I have being handed to me, I mine veld, plag, scord and omber. CCP doesnt do that for me. I run missions. Again, CCP does not do that for me. However, I suppose a tax would be fair enough to justify since I am doing it in Concord protected space. CCP gotta have their doughnuts I suppose.

Beyond that however, I do not feel I owe null sec anything.

:words:

Umm, I am in a player run corp. I dont like the folks that stay in the NPC corps anymore than you do. Youre preaching to the choir there. I do think there should be a mechanic to limit how long someone can stay in an NPC corp. However, I also think than when someone gets their arse kicked, they need a place to go and recover. They should not stay perpetually harassed. I am sure CCP would love to find a solution to that issue but it isnt easy to fix. You could say that in that case people just need to join stronger corps, but eventually you would end up with just a few mega corps. Nothing new would ever get off the ground. Not easy to fix and I suspect thats why it has not already been done. Could tax people that are in NPC corps 50% or so. Surely null could compete with that.

Who think Hi sec is overpowered i mean people in hi sec earn to much money, well if empire become place where people earn like 10-20mil per day or like 3mil isk per lvl 4 mission nobody will play EvE, because economy die, people need isk to buy expensive stuf. Here a lot casuals who need isk, not eveyone is hardcore rich carebear with bilions in walet.

Ships are expensiv, for example cuasual who want buy battleship need spent a lot time while mission runing, that because casuals spent in game few hours per week, and this mean they need total like two week of total game play to afford battle ship like rookh, or tech 2 cruisers, again not everyone is hardcore carebear, in my opinion hi sec is well balanced.

:words: :words: :words:

Hence the hue and cry to get more people to come to null, and to buff/nerf to make it more interesting.

?

So havent you yourself argued against a Null buff?

The mining income is so low due to all the blues, so now so many people can mine.

The risk level has dropped so much, just have a look at the number of barges destroyed in the last year in Null vs Hi-sec.

You diplomacy is successful, congrats. You have managed to make Sov Null the most boring space in the game.

If you want, you can always try being a newbie again and join a blob....

It is in line.

Rewards in lowsec and NCP null are significantly greater for those with the ability and inclination to grab them, and the rewards for the leaders of the nullsec alliances (those who actually play and win the social game instead of tagging along for the ride) are greater than can be had in any other part of space by a huge margin.

Not broken at all, I sense somebody hasn't realized they aren't playing the game right yet if they aren't reaping the rewards their space offers.

What CCP intends is: Harvest, Build, Destory. In endless cycle. What happens when everybody is blue (or runs away "we didn't want that space anyway"). Well if you are all friends the third link in the chain does not happen. So, maybe CCP does not intended null to do all friends afterall? Doesn't everybody keep saying this is a PvP game?

No, they entertrain a vision where they build an all encompassing empire that spans the whole null sec (and not only there), where people live in their farms yet their non ISK faucet productions HAVE to have high revenue (competition even adjacent system neighbours? What's that? We SHALL mine all together megacyte at 10k per unit), where any opposition is crushed (yet demand of ~gudfites~), where the whole other players HAVE to play "as intended" else "they are playing wrong", where they control whatever markets they want yet it's everybody else's fault if stuff is not sitting at their home... Where everybody in the end is a lovely working and taxed ant under the wise directions of the Queen (the More Equals among Equals).

Basically the perfect incarnation of an all encompassing and swallowing para-socialist utopia, with specific EvE mechanics created or twisted to avoid it ends in the unavoidable dead ends all the socialist utopias meet: ~real human egos and greed~, debt, taxes, down levelling, on long term, meritocracy ban that leads to apathy and self disintegration.

I've already covered the biggest reason why highsec can't be nerfed, but since this thread is getting longer and longer and the same tired non-arguments are being trotted out over and over again I'll repeat it:

There needs to be an aura of exclusivity to nullsec to keep things lively there. Not everyone can be allowed to play in sovereign nullsec.

The people who can't (or don't want to) currently play in sovereign nullsec need a place where they can play the game at all.

This means a place with effectively unlimited content (including industry) so it can hold all the players not currently in nullsec alliances (as well as however many nullsec alts as people care to make and play there).

This content has to provide some level of reward for players at any level of experience, which means that for players with both elite player and character skills it will provide significant rewards. The only way to prevent that is to literally kick players out if they are too good.

As such, I propose something that *could* be an effective nerf to highsec:

If it doesn't spawn or can't be built in in highsec it is contraband there.

There, no more deadspace fit pirate faction battleships blasting through L4 missions as fast as the players can pull them, nerf accomplished.

If that isn't enough for you, if you can't raise your rewards well past highsec levels using capital ships in their intended environment, the problem might not be with the game.

"No it's not" is hardly a rebuttal.

People are building effective empires in null, they are exercising power. Working as intended. The game mechanics are fine... it's all about getting more players into the "wider" game. Farms and fields, reinvigorating industry, increasing outpost capacity, nerfing NPCs corps, all of it. Because as it stands the current empires are really threatened by only one thing: boredom.

As it turns out, administering a secure empire (the kind that might actually attract settler types) is apparently a hell of a lot less interesting than conquest and even fewer people get to play pivotal roles. So the idea is to adjust the game mechanics to handle the stuff the players don't want to.

Carrier ratting is normal in nullsec already. Do you even log in?

Wasn't this the OP? Or is that the joke

CCP says all sorts of things.

It's not a whine, it's your future and I haven't talked about any ISK faucet so I don't know where you got that notion.

Edit: also as I have said in previous posts and nobody has had the guts to reply it, bringing in line hi sec with its risk means either removing hi sec or nerf hi sec by 1000%+. Because there's NO WAY to nerf a "safe" place enough to make an unsafe people more enticing.
You earn 5M per hour in hi sec doing L4 missions (a 400% nerf)? Still people won't find doing null sec content "worth it because in hi sec it's less ISK but safe".

Yes, and as I said, if they make a change that obviously stupid I'll quit even though it doesn't effect me directly.

People are complaining that nullsec rewards are too low, so they are talking about lowering them further? That doesn't even make sense in bizarro world.

Buzzy Warstl said "If that isn't enough for you, if you can't raise your rewards well past highsec levels using capital ships in their intended environment, the problem might not be with the game."
La Nariz said "So now we change to carrier ratting. Yeah CCP doesn't want that its been said in a dev blog before."

Now La Nariz Says "Yeah no one is talking about lowering nullsec rewards I have no idea how you thought of that. "


I may be a mere pubbie, but I do have an attention span of more than a page. Do try to stay consistent.

If you are merely the messenger for CCP's message you are still saying it.

You might not like it (I know I wouldn't were I in your shoes), but it's where I would have gotten the idea that someone was talking about it.

Reading for comprehension, you might try it some time.

1. How? Even using the currently worst available type of station refining %, hi sec will still be efficient enough to blow null sec (and low sec even more) out of the water.

2. Low sec would quickly replace high sec, most T2 production with good revenue is small sized and a blockade runner is enough to make a number of T2 mods at a time. WHs after low sec and before null sec.

At this point you'd be forced to demand T2 to become exclusive to "pure" null sec but then, the "center-periphery" EvE economy model will short circuit, as the periphery now is the center, and the center is a.... non center any more.

3. Yes but please explain me, why this intentions change? For years it used to be "let's push people out of hi sec because [reason]" and now it's been changed.

Green herring. You obviously don't go ratting in your staging system.

In before someone gets killed belt ratting in VFK in a carrier.

People asserting things doesn't necessarily make it true.

The profits in empire aren't that great from industry. Many items sell at a loss at major hubs.

Nullsec can make a 10% or more profit on most anything because its a more difficult location. Its lower volume though. Thats already more than you make in hi-sec. I don't have much experience with Sov null so much, but I assume there is a markup there too.

Ironically, if hi-sec were nerfed and nullsec buffed, you would still be making next to nothing because of competition. So why bother.

I think a Huge part of this debate, which rests just under the surface, is the "I PLEX my accounts every month, I don't want to pay". I think that's why there are so many emotional half baked responses.

If everyone had to pay tenbux a month no questions to play then there would be a much greater sense of everyone wanting the game to be as good as possible. Who cares if you're income goes down 5-10%? It won't make much difference, unless you have an expensive thing you have to buy every month.

Now there is a group, who barely contribute to CCP (their efforts might help the game if they are traders or miners but not if they are mission runners, and they reduce the profits of those who do pay) who has great vested interest in HighSec being mega profitable.

They're the money changers in the temple (Seeing as it's Christmas I wreckon I'm allowed one biblical analogy).

No, I actually like low sec more than sov null, it's just not matching with the various GS posters desires.

Bolded the part you are mistakingly trying to impose on me since pages.

Yours is a lobby, one of several. Sounds less poetic and less dramatic but that's all to it.

Of course I have admitted, I tell things straight in face. I am alone so I can't really be a "lobby".
You, for the simple reason at least 2 of your high rank officers posted to support are doing a bit more serious and coordinated task than being simple "industry fans" and certainly in a vastly more powerful way that a loner or 5-10 randoms could hope to do.

1. No, a lobby is dependent on their ability to influence decisions. The largest alliance in EvE decided to push CCP's hands towards their objectives (regardless objectives even being the best in the world, it's still a push) including constant, never ending forum posting and 3rd party web sites.

2. I agree with what you (your bosses) ask at 75%. You demand no less than 100% else it's forum wars and whatever.
That talks more about your organization ways than about me.




3. I notice how in a first sentence they are put aside to gods and in the next they are randoms.

Anyway I don't want to doubt they know more about [XYZ] than me, this does not guarantee that their point of view is neutral or even catering to all the players best interest or even catering to CCP's best interest.

4. That's the bad thing about painting themselves as the vicious villains of EvE: that after enough years people (not me) start to believe your "ruin your game" etc. propaganda as real and react accordingly.

Had it been CVA or some other alliance to write up all those nerfs, they'd probably have a much easier way convincing the player base about the various points.

I am alone so I can't really be a "lobby".

Somebody needs to carry the banner for evil incarnate. May as well be Goons.

Emotional, lol. That was meant to be funny. Obviously I failed.

Seriously though, themittani.com has the talking points on nerfing hi-sec (tl;dr). Is it any wonder that a lot of Goon posts pop up saying nerf hi-sec? Some posts in this thread are 3 in a row from Goons. Looks like forum warriors are busy and on message. Its a Goonspiracy.

Since it bears repeating.

You ALL FAIL!

You keep tying Highsecs Industrial capatity directly into Null Secs lack of it.

THESE ARE SEPARATE THINGS.

Null Secs Industrial capacity can be buffed significantly without touching High Sec at all.
BUT, this is a RELATIVE nerf to High Sec, since Null Sec is then significantly closer to high sec, so no longer will a single high sec System have more industrial capacity than all of Null (Citation needed on that claim btw, because I seriously doubt that one is accurate, even knowing how unbalanced the ratio is currently).

If you want to be able to do Industry in Null, ASK FOR THAT. Get off the 'Nerf High Sec' page, and onto the buff Low/Null/WH Industry page. You will do much better on that page, and it is an 'effective' nerf to High Sec, while not actually nerfing it directly.

And I did point out the connection. That a Null Sec Buff is equivilent to a High Sec Nerf already. Even if High Sec allows 'perfect' industry.

But why exactly does Null Sec Industry NEED to be BETTER.
I'm yet to see a single argument that can justify this.
Null Sec has better rewards already in terms of the higher Isk generation available via Tech Moons, Anoms, & Null Sec Ratting.

All I see is that Null Sec Industrialists want High Sec Industrialists to be unable to compete.
After all, you are all in Null Sec because you WANT to be right......
So if you have the industrial capacity to manufacture at the SAME cost as High Sec anything you need, where is the issue here? Since you WANT to be in Null you will be able to manufacture there just fine at that point.

I fail to see exactly how it is an emotional appeal to seperate the 'Nerf High Sec' cry from the 'Make Null Sec Industry workable' cry.
Unlike your 'Null Sec must be better' cry you keep pushing.

Since it bears repeating.

You ALL FAIL!

You keep tying Highsecs Industrial capatity directly into Null Secs lack of it.

THESE ARE SEPARATE THINGS.

And you totally don't get any rewards for building outposts other than Industrial slots.....
It's not like they serve as a great base of operations for everything in Null......

And some Null Seccers complain about the High Sec sense of Entitlement, Jeez, some people need mirrors.

Make Industry equal, give it six months to settle out, then see how many industrialists have moved to null. My guess is quite a few will have moved once they have decent Null Sec capabilities, but if I'm wrong and no-one at all moves even once Null Sec has equal capabilities, then I'll admit it.

Honestly, why should *anyplace* in space be better than the most civilized regions with the highest population density for T1 production?

All the reasons come down to "we are elite nullsec players, we work harder so we deserve the best of everything" and that is selfish, self-entitled bullcrap.

1. Much talk vs me about "red herrings", "fallacies" etc and in one line there are these effects:

a) personal attact by proxy.
b) attributing me an "hi sec" label to put me in the ideologically determined "enemy group".
c) putting some "intellectual" near to "hi sec" to make it stand out the incredibility of what I say.

The first (a), well I won't comment.

2. b) I have posted a number of screenshots in the last years showing me everywhere. Despite I am a trader (that is, there's no hi sec for me in the markets) and stated I go where business is (and it's not always in hi sec), I am flagged as "hi sec" because in this game saying anything "just" 75% conforming to the current game bossy bosses ideas is BAD and must be flagged as such.

3. c) Thinking different has never made somebody an intellectual, just someone disagreeing with a thesis. You somehow can't stand this and so you need to put it into "you vs us" simpleton categories.

4. Let me make it clear: if I ever had decisional power on CCP's balance, only low sec would smile. WHs imo are perfect so I would not touch them beyond the indirect POS (including industry) buff. But hi sec and null sec would be completely devastated and turned upside down to remove ANY form of safety and welfare and make EvE a dynamic PvP game where your ass is 24/7 under huge risk. Null sec would become a 2009 WH online style PvP lake.
You'd have to lose AT LEAST AS MUCH if not more than hi sec and mammoths like your alliance would be impossible to have. Alliances that would be a strategy evolution of PL or with heavy hit and runs would lay waste too much for your bloc to survive a long time. And then it'd be worth for me returning to spaceships PvP, because despite with age I lost a lot of twitch PvP skills, with a group of 10-20 I could farm dumb zergers every day like I have done in my past and future years in other MMOs and then get proper small scale fights with those actually providing ~quality PvP content~.

5. I heard from you that a loner in a one man corp thinking different = lobby. I am humbled. May I ***ROAR*** now and make you over 9000 strong p!ss your pants as well?

6. The people in MD are independent, MD is not my "reign" and I have groups of opponents at everything I do expecially markets related. Also, influencing non risk averse people in a PvP forum (MD is a strictly completely unsafe PvP forum) is certainly not your best propeller for your "hisec intellectual" definition.

7. Ideology still clouds your mind. That's OK. Let me restate the obvious: differently than Blizzard, CCP keeps TONS of stats. The barges buff unfortunately (it hit my business hard) happened because:

- in 4 months ice prices went from 400 pu to 1600+,

- because NEVER before a major organized alliance organized an industrial scorched earth campaign. Gankers have always been hobbysts, casual PvPers, small merc corps and had a very limited operation extension and duration.
In your case you had quasi endless man power, limit-less extension and declared it "permanent".

- because no individual nor corp, not even Helicity Boson could promise a permanent payment for forever keep suiciding ships even with removed insurance payout. Yet your endless ISK could allow that.

- of course - as ALWAYS - you (r alliance) could not brake yourself a bit, your endless and ever growing push would never end until a cop with a bigger gun than yours comes shot you in the forehead.

It was not 10 bad tanked idiots whining on GD to make CCP buff barges but - like for boomerang - it was YOUR irresponsible (can't stop myself!) and not smart (let's do it below the CCP nerf hammer decision thresold!) behavior to cause it.
Result? You still wailing about the nerf, my business damaged by the nerf, ALL hi sec casual gankers fun destroyed.

8. No sermon, don't try the "drama card" as you keep doing. it's your bosses. End of.

1. actually current sov 0.0 sec sends another message to new players: "It doesn't matter how much effort you put into your 0.0 home, eventually big bad boys will come and take it away from you". It simply not good idea to invest a lot into industry in space where you (and your corp, your alliance) play very limited role in politics.
You don't need 100s of manufacturing lines in outpost if you can lose it in 2 days because some "big blue" came and stomped on you.
The smartest people move all valuable assets into empire and have only pvp equipment in 0.0.

2. you can't balance risk (provided by players) and rewards (provided by CCP). So all ideas "neft there" or "boost here" are useless.

3. However should you really want to balance it you have 2 ways:
- make high-sec riskier: there is some alliances (which name should not be used in public) which have resources to provide risk even in empire
- make 0.0 safer: and here people already done good job. We all love blue seas of NAPs

1. This is not whine. I don't care about 0.0. It is in the past of my Eve game.
However what do you offer to "new players" (we speak about message to them here)? Join big group? Or you can show one (!!!) new (1-2 years) alliance which took his part of 0.0 kicked old ones? And not alliance who just joined "big blue" but actually took space?

2. Ok. You say it is possible. Then give exact numbers which would make this balance good. How many percents you would remove from rewards in high-sec to compensate cynos? And there is next question already: why did you give this number and not another.

3. I see you agree here. So do it! Make risk/reward in 0.0 better than in high-sec. Why ask CCP to do your job?

It might not be where your heart is, but raw numbers and the design of the game both from a mechanics and lore perspective say it is.

1. I'll be kind here, I'll concede you the precedence, and wait for you to stop using them yourself before I do.

2. A Google search revealed it was Tesal in a reply to you. No idea about your criterium to define somebody ~highsec intellectual~ but I see you get hurt when being confronted in a debate. Now, freedom happens and so do different opinions. Freedom is being fixed both in game and RL ASAP but for now you'll have to survive the different opinions for a little while.

3. Where? I went back the history till this post which should be the first and could not find it. While doing that, I noticed how many identical NERF HI SEC, NAO! threads have been spammed and how on mittani.com at the same time we had similar articles. I have to tip my hat to the relentless, ever present and coordinated, almost concentric propaganda steamroller. No one, NO ONE does it harder and better than you guys.

4. Griping in fear at the idea of turning EvE into a real PvP game? You know, one not entirely driven by alliance leaders who don't even need to log in or be subbed to decide the sorts of tens of thousands. I like this strawman then.

5. This is you not willing to accept that I have a rubber dinghy while you have a Titanic. Unlike that other guy who in previous posts kept repeating "we", us" I don't even pretend having a single other player backing me up. If this makes me a lobby, then I am a lobby and also Superman!

6. Which part of "MD is not my "reign" and I have groups of opponents at everything I do" and "influencing non risk averse people in a PvP forum (would be pointless since) is certainly not your best propeller for your "hisec intellectual" definition is not clear?

7. I don't discredit you. You are doing your task in a most effective, stupefying resilient way!
"You think the complaints are over boomerang, yeah you are totally out of touch if you think that is true. The complaints are over the unwarranted barge EHP buffs." => you should better what I post (as also seen at point 6), since I really wrote down the whole process at how CCP nerfs everything. Boomerang and other PvP nerfs including barge EHP buff are all related to statistics. Your alliance for some reason does not play smart with the statistics, they keep pushing the limits till CCP smashes your toys. If you wanted to not have the EHP buff you should just had to refrain *a little*. Also, spamming everywhere about the thousands of ships killed and boasting about the 4 trillions (if I recall correctly) of damage dealt, certainly prompts CCP at checking their stats about what you are doing. Exactly like it happened when people started spamming about how easy, effective, fool proof boomerang methods had been implemented and kept posting on the most read forum about how to do it en masse.

8. I am trying to emulate what your alliance are doing since ever but I just can't beat the masters.

Because the players abused having blue lists to do it.

1. Sure

2. I have posted (yet another) post right above explaining the whole risks at changing the EvE foundation models. Skipping what others post and then rebutting they don't "make an argument" is like driving with sunglasses with salami as lenses. Can't see what you don't want to see.

5. One man "lobby" vs the most important alliances in game, with CSM members and stuff. That's certainly going to redefine the meaning of lobby.
I take it, in parliament the one man representing, one man lobbies *exist* and are feared by National Rifle Association and similar!

6. Lolwut?

3 & 4 & 7 & 8: Goonspiracy lol => Don't know how to reply or what? Seems Goonspiracy definition = every written text I won't reply to ~because~.

Of course I have admitted, I tell things straight in face. I am alone so I can't really be a "lobby".
You, for the simple reason at least 2 of your high rank officers posted to support are doing a bit more serious and coordinated task than being simple "industry fans" and certainly in a vastly more powerful way that a loner or 5-10 randoms could hope to do.

So a lobby is entirely dependent on the arbitrary number of people in it. What a convenient definition to place on something. Using that definition you can easily go "lol no you are a lobby," do a little hand waiving and then continue to disregard anything that person said no matter how well reasoned their post is without most people being the wiser. Lets not forget while doing this you can pretend to be the amazing white knight championing the cause for all these poor good good people you are protecting from the evil lobby. You really have this :foxnews: thing down.

No, a lobby is dependent on their ability to influence decisions. The largest alliance in EvE decided to push CCP's hands towards their objectives (regardless objectives even being the best in the world, it's still a push) including constant, never ending forum posting and 3rd party web sites.

The people in MD are independent, MD is not my "reign" and I have groups of opponents at everything I do expecially markets related. Also, influencing non risk averse people in a PvP forum (MD is a strictly completely unsafe PvP forum) is certainly not your best propeller for your "hisec intellectual" definition.

Nice putting the name of other posters like they typed text they never had

1. Had I been risk averse I would not swing trade (that is, buy and try predict what a market does in the next weeks, can lead to large gains but also to staggering losses), both in EvE and RL.

What I am totally averse to, is trusting CCP with the ability to pull a major game revolution in one swift swoop, without major screwups, major exploitable gaping holes and so on. Sure, the boot.ini days are long gone... yet the days of the "awesome inventory", "pizza targetting", "Forex FW", "hi sec incursions where group content has to reward more than solo" (group content that ended well! ) and so on are well modern and present.


2.

1. Your assumed premises <> mine. Lobbies are lobbies, a group pushing their interests. "Bad" / "wrong" is irrelevant.

2. "Determined" is improper. A lobby effectiveness, 24/7 coverage, organization and weight is greatly enhanced by having the numbers.

3. "Determined" is improper. A lobby does attempt to influence people, it's what they do.



Conclusion: your specific alliance case is lobbying CCP into drastically changing the game without bothering with the possible adverse consequence.


3.

No, I point the conversation this way because I am stuffed of your alliance never ending complaints spamming months and months of forum posting. You cry like you are a 1 system holding sov being swamped by scores of evil casual players, while you are the richest and most prominent alliance TODAY, that is in your oh-so-pitiful status.

The fun thing - as I said now plenty of times - is that I agree with 75% of your points, yet for you 75% and 0% is the same. You demand 100% or nothing.


4.

Lobbying your already top dominant alliance power into a more dominant position is not goonspiracy (as in, some sort of colorful term to attach to random hi sec poasting). It's lobbying and some kind of plan is definitely there. If there wasn't, we'd not have a concerted number of aptly themed blogs on mittani.com while at the same time the same heads are talking on the EvE forums about the same topics again and again.

I am being generous here, because if you really don't have a plan but are genuinely and independently incessantly crying since months on 2-3 websites then your alliance makes me boggle. The most powerful and influential, those with the most of everything act like the poor orphan children abandoned in the streets.

1. No. Game's old and mechanics have "stabilized". Your requests (edit: the ones going beyond adding production lines to null and POSes) would be golden for an alpha status MMO, not a 10 years old one. Plus the old developers seem to have gone as well. As much as their programming practices could be labelled as "spaghetti code", it's them who brought us a game with more features 1 year ago than today. It's thanks to *them* EvE became what it is. The new ones don't seem to be able to refactor existing code without dropping much nice features like corp hangars for ships, stored hangar to open when docking and much more.

2. It's not lobbying as a concept per se, it's *your* lobbying that I don't agree with.

3. I don't hate goons, I don't like every people who want to take an old game and flip it upside down without looking ahead enough to see the risks and consequences. Plus you have an history of "breaking stuff and getting it nerfed" because you just could not refrain from pushing whatever mechanic to beyond absurd levels.

4. You don't even need a coherent plan. You expand filling everywhere like a big blob of the old movies and what you don't like, you start campaigns to have it changed. Once again, there's really nothing so colorful or "Bilderberg" about what you do. It's just self interest and corporate expansion.

5. It's even understandable, most would do what you do in your place (with a less ideological approach). But you can't stop yourselves before you go too far, it's CCP's duty to do so. And they have done that several times now, kinda proving my thesis again and again.

Yes but it also means its not a couple of minutes and adds in extra vulnerability and cost to the supply chain.

If they chose to do it with more supers so be it.

It would at least mean that they have added a cost to increase their logistical performance and also increased their risk, so even though they are flooding the market the cost to do so is still increased.

EvE is about risk vs reward and given the current jump ranges the risk is insignificant given, the reward that would be obtained from an increased Null Industry(or as I prefer a buff of player owned facilities)

Plus don't you think that if Null has a bigger industry capability and Hi-sec minerals that a lot more supers will be built any way.

Must balancing risk/reward equate to loss of high-sec ability?

A circle jerk consensus.

"**** you, got mine"

Define 'minimum required capabilities' please.

Hi-sec people aren't privileged, they deserve all those free facilities because they pay 0.25% transaction taxes.

As for nerfs and buffs, I've already said my piece in this thread. You just don't like what I have to say because it goes against your consensus.

tl;dr Its already balanced. Don't screw it up.

The HBC and CFC don't need, nor should they get, more power than they already have. If null wasn't so blued up it might be worthwhile to change things. Its best to keep power divided between null, low and hi-sec.

I won't quit if hi-sec gets nuked, just unsub my industrial character who will be useless.

Also, serious Goons make me laugh. You make me laugh. So rage on for the greater glory of Goonswarm.

There is a division that works. Hi-sec has low end minerals and general production. Low can produce caps and do reactions. Null sources moon goo for T2 and high ends and does cap and supercap production. This divides industrial power between the parties.

You're blue to me, I hate you.

Its not horrible. Its actually faster and easier to source materials and produce stuff. Less travel time too.

Don't worry, I hate myself too. I recently torpedoed my own battleeship while multiboxing ratters. Opps...

Making things difficult, expensive and not very fun is the alternative that's been proposed.

Well, compared to CONCORD, our local, intel channels and blue lists aren't nearly as good. Clearly the NPCs are better.

The alternative is legions of POS everywhere. Not very fun.

Its a big assumption that POS will stop sucking in a revamp.

The NPC stations that are just there and riskless and cheap to use are clearly better for highsec.

No the point is that the CFC and HBC will have secure industry. Other people won't. Its not hate, its a self evident situation. Industry will gravitate towards the safe zones.

I am sure I will get the will back, when the CSM candidates list is released for CSM 8.

I didn't say hoarder, I said POS. Your people will form up to defend their stuff against anyone silly enough to attack it. Putting the shoe on the other foot, other people outside of the CFC and HBC get their baby titans killed just for fun. I doubt their industry will be as secure.

The problem for Null has no relation to the game mechanics and every relation to the mentality of the individuals that populate and more specifically control it. IGÇÖve read these threads for sometime now and as far as I can discern the problems in Null are in the main attributable to the sorry arsed egomaniacs that control it, if they collectively managed their territories effectively they would be developing strategies encouraging Hi Sec dwellers to settle and develop industry in their space rather than continuously whine about how unfair life is. If the retards that control the mega alliances spent half as much effort to develop their fiefdoms as they put into puerile campaigns like Hulkaggedon they could improve Null considerably, this seems to be beyond the capabilities of their pathetic intellects though. In essence if Null sec characters want to see changes in the game they need to realise that there is effectively nothing that the developers can do to improve their lot until they decide to do something themselves.

You asserted that nullsec was safe. I cited a reason contrary to your assertion. The whole premise behind player structures at all is that the player gets some advantage in exchange for protecting and maintaining it. It's one of the things CCP refers to as a "conflict driver" and essential to the farms and fields approach. If you want to be able to go and solo-reinforce stuff then I suggest you put up your own server to do it. Why should you as one person be able to wreck what 10000+ people built together? This all boils down to "I hate CFC and HBC and because one of their members is championing a balance change I have to be against it." What alliance were you in that we killed?

This last line is the problem with the Null Sec argument. (I say Null Sec as a lot of people who identify as Nul Sec or are blatent Nul Seccer industry Alts are pushing this, obviously not all of Null are).
Living in Null already has significantly higher Isk rewards, for a multitude of reasons as well as full local availability of all materials needed for producing all T1 & T2 ships & mods.

Therefore the argument that Null needs to be 'better' at refining & production than High because of Risk holds no water, as you already have the benefits for your risk in the Isk Generation and Material Availability.

What Null does need is equivilence in production capability. Then it comes down to player choice, which is what a Sandbox is about. If Null is made better, then you force Industrialsts into Null Sec if they want to compete or they just have to retire or find another profession. It just moves the problem, doesn't solve it.

While Equivilent facilities means that people have the means to refine & produce wherever they choose to live, and Null Alliances can do everything locally if they want to. Real player choice at that point. Lets grow the game towards choice, not stagnant perfect paths.

If I remember correctly you had the opportunity to align with a very good Hi Sec industrial corp that wanted to lease space from you in Null, after entering into a formal agreement one of YOUR members arranged for them to shift the industrials fleet and assets into the leased section of space. For your Corp it was a great joke you ambushed them when they jumped and pillaged their corpses, what wonder you can not get people to move into Null when itGÇÖs inhabited by asshats. As I said in a previous post the problem is not with the game mechanics its with the very people who infest these forums with their whining, and yes Local is a valid point but its not the fix your looking for.

Maybe I missed it, but what are everyone's thoughts on industry in NPC null space and the stations there?

*popcorn*

Are you even capable of posting without all the personal attacks?

I rest my case; you wonder why Null is stagnant and you complain about the lack of industry. They did the research and trusted to the integrity of a corporation that obviously doesnGÇÖt have any.

Even when we don't make personal attacks you act as though we're all out to get you personally. So it's more fun this way.

IGÇÖve read it, I just donGÇÖt see it as an insurmountable problem. The issue with POS permissions are restricting and manufacturing outposts are set up that way for a reason [they are outposts], all I see are complaints but there is a vast wealth in null and it seems to me that some people want it all the manufacturing security of Hi Sec and the mineral wealth of Null.

Also you seem to assume that Hi Sec access to factory slots is a given, IGÇÖve setup several POS because its practically impossible to get access to research or factory slots in Hi Sec, also refining, manufacturing and research costs also escalate significantly unless you have faction standings with the station, and who likes to grind?. To be truthful IGÇÖd rather do whatGÇÖs needed at multiple POS or an outpost.

I let the developers plan their game, I guess I am doing something wrong.

Should jump in the forums and create 100000000000000 photocopy cry threads to force them change the game ASAP, of course in my favor!

"Plan" (taken from my post) <> implement / debug ("fix" in your reply). It's also why I am against going all berserk out with nerfs buffs and drastic changes. They PLAN their game but when it's time to implement then stuff happens.

No. Game's old and mechanics have "stabilized". Your requests (edit: the ones going beyond adding production lines to null and POSes) would be golden for an alpha status MMO, not a 10 years old one. Plus the old developers seem to have gone as well. As much as their programming practices could be labelled as "spaghetti code", it's them who brought us a game with more features 1 year ago than today. It's thanks to *them* EvE became what it is. The new ones don't seem to be able to refactor existing code without dropping much nice features like corp hangars for ships, stored hangar to open when docking and much more.

EvE is made on a center-periphery model somewhat based on the Dependency Theory.

That brings in two different and quite important issues:

1) Changing that into a "peer model" (or even swapping the sides) is something extremely profound. If done fast or bad it could impact EvE like NGE did for SWG.

This (and not the immediate hi sec nerfs) is what really really troubles me into stepping in with two elephant feet as GS members want.

While I'd like for EvE to change, I don't want it to die because of the change. Unlike SWG we *already* start with a "nerfed" number of player base, we can't afford a second WiS fiasco (even the risk of having it), EvE is still not done recovering from it!

I wish the various GS posters could *see* this hugely massive danger, but they seem "water proof" when limitations are presented before them.

2) We know CCP are using an economist (with a part time team or similar). His expertise and view of how EvE should work are probably strictly doubly tied to how the game actually works. Changing EvE as requested would put him in a position of having to adapt the whole thing to a new course. Who is ready to bet he would be willing to do that or even could manage to do that?

There exists this thing called "bringing a t1 mining barge thingy to test the water before actually splurging on the big toys" in such a situation.

However, that did involve putting a whole, what, 5-10 million isk on the line. The horror.

I think this is one of the profound issues with the development of EVE at the moment.

The idea that the space you live in gives you an identity, you are a "HighSec player" or a "null bear" or a "wormholer" etc.

This then makes you feel like you have to fight, in a partisan and biased manner, for your space, your nationalistic identity defining space, to be improved at the expense of the others.

I this this kind of belief should be discouraged at all turns, as above, "Null players can come to hi-sec, hi-sec players can't necessarily go to null", this is just wrong, jump gates go both ways, the barrier is intellectual, imaginary, in the identity.

Moreover this problem gets much worse when there are a group of "HighSec Players" who plex their accounts every month.

Basically they will fight tooth and claw against any HighSec Nerf because their world is under threat. They have built a prison, a prison of the mind, and then others come along and threaten to destroy the one place they have! At least there is the prison cell to live in! And what if that is damaged, unmanageable chaos...

...except that all of this thread is about rebuilding null, making it meaningful and whole. Making it more worth recruiting newbs and industrialists to the big Null blocks, giving people more options and more freedom and making the game better.

No "HighSec Player" will ever agree, but for the rest of us, all of us who are just players, there is no other path to go down.

Oh shullbit.

It's not nothing to do with your little catchphrase meme, and everything to do with the deliberate impression that's been created.

"Hey, highsec miner carebear pubbie! You are the most hated person in EVE, we want you out. We're ganking you for teh LULZ! But pay us 20m and you can come to our backyard where we promise not to shoot."

And you pretend it's all a rational deliberation based on the actuality of rental agreements and mutual financial benefit?

Either your social skills or BS skills are in need of a serious touchup.