| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
2
   |
Posted - 2013.03.13 16:41:00 -
[1] - Quote
I have just read your manifesto for high-sec and must say that it isn't worthy of consideration. Just more nul-centric diatribe of which we have far too much of coming from the CSM as it is. Personally I feel it would be better if the CSM was dropped done to two sets of six members with two members from each half GENUINELY representing the issues and residents from the nul, low, & high-sec communities. Then we might get some fairness and move away from the fallacy that nul-sec is the end game of EVE Online and the best place to be which it isn't and nor should it be so.
EVE Online is a sandbox within which people are free to do what they like and enjoy without having the shallow views of one community forced upon the entire playbase.
I strongly suggest you cut the ****, affix the Goons badge to your lapel and be honest with yourself and to others. You'll feel much better for doing so.  |
Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
2
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 16:57:00 -
[2] - Quote
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:Malcanis wrote:Yes I would absolutely like to see a smoother gradient between the restrictions in a 1.0 and those in a 0.1 system. The precise mechanics would be up to CCP to set; the list you quoted is an example of the kind of incremental change, although not necessarily the specifc set that I'd choose.
Operating in a 0.5 vs a 0.9 should matter way more than it does now.  As a new player (+5 months), I see a deep chasm around HighsecGǪ the drop of is both sharp and deep, but change that by modifying the risk and things will changeGǪ for most in both High and Low Sec. A miner in 0.5 space is fairly safeGǪ easy money and usually death for the pirate. A miner in 0.4 is nuts. An easy kill for the pirate. Modify the risk/reward for both by blurring the line and the game has gotten a whole lot more dynamic.
There is no need to change anything regarding CONCORD response times and protection in 0.5 to 1.0 systems inclusive. For those that are into suicide ganking all you do is have an alt,preferably with positive sec status, doing ratting and salvaging and scan the mining ships in the belts. A high proportion of hulks & macks are STILL being flown with little or no tank and can be taken down with a catalyst reasonably easily. Bring your main in and do the gank then get your alt to salvage the wrecks. Simples.
There is absolutely no need to make it easier to suicide gank as even post the mining barge changes which were seen to be making these vessels stronger in most cases they will still be easily ganked even in 0.5 systems. Alternatively go and bumping and demand 'mining license' fees. |
Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
2
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 17:05:00 -
[3] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:Lord Zim wrote:
How? Alliances which would move some (or all) their industry into nullsec would be more vulnerable to interference, as opposed to today's situation where it's ... not.
Are you saying this would be bad for Null? If, so ... then would they just ignore this change and continue with Highsec production? Why make the change at all, unless it improves EVE? Alliances which are good at protecting their productive activities will benefit. Those that aren't will lose out. Where's the problem?
Even a blind man can see where this is heading. We will end up with one or two alliances in nulsec. |
Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
2
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 17:10:00 -
[4] - Quote
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:Bethan Le Troix wrote:...I strongly suggest you cut the ****, affix the Goons badge to your lapel and be honest with yourself and to others. You'll feel much better for doing so.  I thought he was a TEST stoogeGǪ damn I need a player score card. I donGÇÖt agree with Malcanis on some or many issues, and he sometimes falls back on nerf highsec, but I think there is more to him than simple label you wish to attach.
Hmm. It's like when you could buy blue or pinkish-red parafin (fuel for lamps,greenhouse heaters etc.) in the UK years ago. Some people would swear the blue or the pink version was better. But in actual fact they were exactly the same bar the different colour.  |
Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
2
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 17:17:00 -
[5] - Quote
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:Bethan Le Troix wrote: There is no need to change anything regarding CONCORD response times and protection in 0.5 to 1.0 systems inclusive. For those that are into suicide ganking all you do is have an alt,preferably with positive sec status, doing ratting and salvaging and scan the mining ships in the belts. A high proportion of hulks & macks are STILL being flown with little or no tank and can be taken down with a catalyst reasonably easily. Bring your main in and do the gank then get your alt to salvage the wrecks. Simples.
There is absolutely no need to make it easier to suicide gank as even post the mining barge changes which were seen to be making these vessels stronger in most cases they will still be easily ganked even in 0.5 systems. Alternatively go and bumping and demand 'mining license' fees. I donGÇÖt gank. It seem fairly boring to me. I use to mineGǪ now I run missions. Altering the way Concord/Faction Navies respondGǪ down into .3 space, would add to the game. It shouldnGÇÖt be in 0.4 the pirate knows he can always kill a minerGǪ make it dynamic. He will most likely get that untanked retriever, but that Skiff? In 0.3, four Skiffs and some escorts means any pirate will not only have to fight the escorts, but get it done or flee before the Faction Navy arrives. Dynamic for both pirate and miner.
Aye I also feel low sec needs something done to it to improve it but I'm not sure what or how that should be done. I don't feel it was a good idea to have datacores coming from Factional Warfare and it has indeed turned out to be a bit of a mess. Would have been far better to leave datacores just coming from research agents as before. I hope that once DUST 514 is officially released it can be fully integrated with FW to help make low sec much better. |
Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
2
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 17:20:00 -
[6] - Quote
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:Bethan Le Troix wrote:
Even a blind man can see where this is heading. We will end up with one or two alliances in nulsec.
Nullsec is broken... it sucks... it is dead. That is why they are in highsec. It doesn't mean that high and low couldn't use some change.
Nul sec is for large fleet battles and sovreignty. Working for 'the man' in enlarge allaince territory etc. I'm not sure it's broken. |
Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
2
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 17:33:00 -
[7] - Quote
"punishing people for playing EVE the wrong way."
It is not possible to play EVE Online the wrong way Malcanis as it is a sandbox.
"There's only one way of life and that's your own, your own, your own." The Levellers. |
| |
|