|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Zircon Dasher
141
   |
Posted - 2013.03.05 20:46:00 -
[1] - Quote
Quick question: How much reward is too much for highsec risk? Just want to know how much item prices need to increase in order to get all explo moved to low. |
Zircon Dasher
141
|
Posted - 2013.03.05 21:34:00 -
[2] - Quote
If you want to nerf DSP then you also should nix combat probes being able to pick up explo sites. You can do the same with cores, but its harder to do without having a spreadsheet open to figure out the effect range will have on the sig str.
|
Zircon Dasher
143
|
Posted - 2013.03.07 15:57:00 -
[3] - Quote
St Mio wrote: Many players wonder "Why should I bother going to low, where I have to pay attention to dodge gatecamps, be aware of players trying to blow up my ship, while being kept in one location in space like a sitting duck, in sites that are harder and take longer to run, when I can sit in high-sec and farm DED 4/10s instead?"
I was just wondering something similar yesterday.
Why should I bother going to high, where I have to pay attention to flag mechanics, have a harder time finding ships to blow up, all while being forced to move around a lot because the sites are so much quicker and easier to run, when I can farm plexers in low-sec?
The risk in high-sec is to high and the reward is too low. |
Zircon Dasher
143
|
Posted - 2013.03.07 16:54:00 -
[4] - Quote
Makavelia wrote:
How does that fix the problem when T3 will simply scan down faster than any other combat ship?. Even if they are slightly behind in finding the plex for random sig luck they still have a huge advantedge in rushing in and stealing the loot.
Makavelia wrote:The balance factor is that you have more to lose when things go wrong..... the balance is gone.
Are imbalanced because people can scoop dah loot (and thus can be popped) or are they totally out of balance because nobody flags themselves for pew-pew fun time? |
Zircon Dasher
144
|
Posted - 2013.03.07 20:02:00 -
[5] - Quote
Kodama Ikari wrote:
No because missions suck, and they aren't competitive anyway.
I think limiting incursions to t1 BS is a great idea too. Make a F&I post and I will support it. |
Zircon Dasher
161
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 03:54:00 -
[6] - Quote
Unezka Turigahl wrote: As well as the suggestion that we need more ships that are capable of combat as well as scanning.
If you mean more scanning bonused ships- for the luv of jeebus NO!
Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'. |
Zircon Dasher
166
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 23:54:00 -
[7] - Quote
CaptainTr1cky wrote:i think the new expansion will fix this so , lets w8 and see
OOOOooooh...... did you see the super-sekrit-patch notes?
Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'. |
Zircon Dasher
168
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 14:49:00 -
[8] - Quote
dexington wrote:Thorian Omanid wrote:Sounds like what is needed is instanced DED sites. If you find the site you get to keep it.Any on else tries to hop in and they get a new instance. I would like it better if they made the hi-sec 4/10 free fire zones without concord protection.
How great would it be to blap everything that moves in highsec plexes while waiting for srs stuff to happen on your main! No more dealing with silly flags or sec loss \o/!
Make this happen NOW plx!
Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'. |
Zircon Dasher
178
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 17:47:00 -
[9] - Quote
St Mio wrote:Umega wrote:- No one in NPC corps can access above 2/10. Then they'll just make one man corps, that they'll drop out of at the first hint of being wardecced. Why? Competition. If you make a career out of exploring.. others with the same career path should have the option to come after you.. or atleast hire mercs to gun you down. If you want to play like a kiddie and be protected by some virtual papa-bear Concord.. you should be treated like one, and only get the kiddie sandbox.
Umega wrote:- Grant suspect flag to anyone that loots a boss spawn (or final 'treasure chest').. whether it is their wreck or not. I don't think changing high-sec exploration to make it more like low-sec exploration is such a good idea. I mean look how well that's working out for low-sec compared to high-sec. And forcing carebears to PvP doesn't work, look what happened when mission agents gave out L4s in low-sec? People will rather just log off and play something else than risk being forced into fights they have no chance of winning.
I can honestly say this made me giggle. <3
Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'. |
Zircon Dasher
186
|
Posted - 2013.04.07 17:23:00 -
[10] - Quote
Kodama Ikari wrote: its zero risk, and yes, this is the topic of the thread.
If it is zero risk then that is the fault of the player base not being willing to supply said risk.
Changing rewards is just the short hand way of saying people would rather have mommy CCP change the theme park.
Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'. |
|
|
Zircon Dasher
186
|
Posted - 2013.04.07 17:45:00 -
[11] - Quote
Kodama Ikari wrote:Zircon Dasher wrote:Kodama Ikari wrote: its zero risk, and yes, this is the topic of the thread.
If it is zero risk then that is the fault of the player base not being willing to supply said risk. Changing rewards is just the short hand way of saying people would rather have mommy CCP change the theme park. So exploration is broken because suicide gankers don't bother to probe out 4/10s and kill ~1bn isk tengus. Its their fault. Right. 
Oh right. I forgot. Suicide ganking is the only way of supplying risk.
I love eye-roll wars don't you?
Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'. |
|
|
| |
|