http://i.imgur.com/WzXjyuN.jpg

Whoops, there goes that theory. Turns out if you remove losses to rats, hisec comes in third.

http://i.imgur.com/WzXjyuN.jpg

Whoops, there goes that theory. Turns out if you remove losses to rats, hisec comes in third.

That's value, not numbers of hulls.

But it's still probably a correct call.

You just refuted an argument that I've never heard anyone make.

So hey . . . well played?

considering it's in terms of isk, wormholes being so low is reasonably surprising since they tend to fly around in reasonably blingy ships in comparison to other areas of the game.

Hisec wardec pvp, best pvp

Hull cost only, the graph doesn't incorporate mods.
If it did then yes, wh space would be higher.

You apparently missed a number of threadnaughts concerning Null industry capacity. Where there were individuals making such claims, defending High Sec's need for superior industrial capacity.

Of course, ISK value is not an accurate metric to show this, since that's not exactly related to production slots.

Seeing that Nullsec can produce such goods, maybe its not as bad off as people make it out to be.

In addition, what makes you think there are more ships lost to pvp in highsec than in null?

I've never seen such arguments despite reading over a few threadnaughts.

What I did see is that the complaint was that Nullsec has to rely on hi-sec for its manufacturing capabilities as Nullsec could never possibly supply itself with current manufacturing capability.

Overall, I would suspect hi-sec has a much higher total numbers of ships lost, but the ships lost are of much lesser value as no one is strutting around in Titans, dreadnaughts, and carriers whereas Nullsec has ships of much higher value.

Seeing that Nullsec can produce such goods, maybe its not as bad off as people make it out to be.

What makes you think nullsec is producing these goods? You do realize that the vast majority of modules, ammunition, and ships are imported from highsec, right?

In addition, what makes you think there are more ships lost to pvp in highsec than in null?

Actual hulls destroyed in numbers vs ISK would have been the goto graph.

Tis only ship value in ISK shown on that graph.

Just means that most highseccers run around and pew in the Eve equivalent of Yugos while the nullsec crowd goes and pews with their Lamborghinis and Bugattis.

Also, that graph would look different if lets say...capitals were allowed in highsec. 1 titan kill is the equivalent of how many millions of rifter kills?

Actual hulls destroyed in numbers vs ISK would have been the goto graph.

I mean the carriers, dreadnaughts, and titans which cannot be made in high sec.

The graphs don't tell use values versus hi and null in terms of ammo and modules.

I am assuming the high values for nullsec are because of these high value ships being lost and has nothing to do with ammunition and modules.

If they want to show graphs on ammunition spent I suppose that could determine the other argument.

My main guess for PVP ships lost in hi-sec is from the Red versus Blue engagements. Those alone probaly have pretty high numbers, but I suppose I have no hard proof to show you other than the massive ship losses I see on the map every now and then. (Oh wow Dave Stark predicted I would say this but I suppose I clarified that I have no proof to show this).

http://i.imgur.com/WzXjyuN.jpg

Whoops, there goes that theory. Turns out if you remove losses to rats, hisec comes in third.

Be interested to see the graph in relation to PvP kills, rather than isk value. Its no-wonder nullsec leads the pack there, running around in their shiny fleets slamming capitals against eachother. Would pure PvP ship losses there still beat highsec?

considering it's in terms of isk, wormholes being so low is reasonably surprising since they tend to fly around in reasonably blingy ships in comparison to other areas of the game.

although number of hulls would be interesting.