| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |

baltec1
Bat Country
6159
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 12:38:00 -
[241] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:
Also one thing I haven't heard ANYONE point out in the 4 threads I've been posting in recently is that High-sec (or SOMEWHERE) always has has to be able to generate the POWER to sally forth into null sov and shake things up. Maybe it will be stored wealth from missions, or Jita market manipulation or any of dozens of activities, but we should never make the mistake of making Null Sov so good that it becomes permanently static and stale.
Nobody points it out because its not an issue and won't happen. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13971
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 12:39:00 -
[242] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:What people can't seem to get past in this thread (and what I can't seem to capitulate on) is whether it is justified by an argument of industrial imbalance. That's because we have done the maths, and studied the problem, and you have not. Incidentally, this is also why the devs agree with us, and why we're not buying your unfounded and unreasoned claim that no imbalance exists.
Quote:I'm not opposed to the shake-up. But we've spent pages on debating one justification for the shake-up. GǪbecause you refuse to accept reality. Why is that? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.-á |

MrDiao
SUNDERING Goonswarm Federation
19
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 12:43:00 -
[243] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:MrDiao wrote:If there is anything in-game can be reasonably called "broken", then CCP definitely has responsibility on it.
If you're saying the way that players make decision "breaks" something, then it's the fault of CCP that didn't design the game in the way that suits the current human psychology. For some reason the first thing that came to my mind is the scene in Animal House where Flounder (now CCP) is told: You f'd up; You *trusted* us!
It's truly f'd up if you "trusted" players that they can avoid to break things in an environment that does not psychologically suit them.
You assumed that people who have no right to manipulate the environment, have the liability to maintain the order. Why and How? |

Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
56
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 12:43:00 -
[244] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Liz Laser wrote:But if your argument is that high-sec currently is on the winning side of an industrial imbalance, that's when I start chuckling (because moon-goo is an industrial product and can solve all problems). GǪand is easily matched by almost anything highsec has to offer. So at best, we have parity there, combined with immense imbalance everywhere else, resulting in a total imbalance in favour of highsec (the fact that moons aren't just matched, but trivially out-earned by numerous highsec activities, and that moons are not universally available means that we don't even have parityGǪ but let's go with your delusion for the time being). Mongoo does not solve any problems GÇö it's just an income source, like every other income source, that lets you buy things you can't/won't make for yourself. The reliance on moongoo shows that there is a problem; it does not make the problem go away. Quote:Not everything I want is due to being on the weaker side of industrial imbalance GǪwhich is nice and all but not relevant to the case at hand. The reason people want nullsec industry buffs is because nullsec is on the weaker side of an imbalance GÇö something that is blatantly obvious to anyone who has actually studied the mechanics involved. You're essentially making the GÇ£Ancient AliensGÇ¥ argument: there is a (infinitesimally small) possibility that it is like this; therefore it is. Just because there are things that are not due to the obvious imbalance doesn't mean that nothing is due to it, or that the imbalance doesn't exist.
If we're changing the argument to complete wealth generation, you should also include ratting and plexing on null's balance sheet and missioning on high-sec's.
But always remember that the wealth/power to step out and shake up null sov has to come from SOMEWHERE. Maybe it should come from low-sec or NPC null, but we should never make it so Null Sov has so much wealth it can't be challenged by newcomers who have put in the time and effort *somewhere* to unleash the dogs of war upon null sov.
|

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13971
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 12:50:00 -
[245] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:If we're changing the argument to complete wealth generation, you should also include ratting and plexing on null's balance sheet and missioning on high-sec's. GǪin which case highsec wins hands-down. Again: the point is that your notion that mongoo GǣfixesGǥ things hinges on it being more than just an industrial product, in which case it's trivially outdone by other more-than-industrial-products that are available in highsec, so it fails to counterbalance anything.
Quote:we should never make it so Null Sov has so much wealth it can't be challenged by newcomers who have put in the time and effort *somewhere* to unleash the dogs of war upon null sov. This problem is already solved through social and political means, not economical or military, and is not a good reason to maintain a massive industrial imbalance. It certainly isn't a reason to keep a system where player-controlled space offers less freedom to players over NPC-controlled space. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.-á |

Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9022
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 13:09:00 -
[246] - Quote
Lallante wrote:It is and always has been ridiculous that level 4 hisec agents allow you to make so much isk doing such "un MMO" gameplay in such safety.
They were a horrible idea when first introduced (and produced a HUGE amount of negative 0.0 reaction) and have steadily become more and more entrenched. Moving or heavily nerfing them now is basically unrealistic given how reliant on them a large proportion of the playerbase is.
I definitely consider level 4 hisec missions to be the worst game design failure in Eve's history.
Agreed, but as you say, that horse has bolted and we have to learn to live with them.
We can make a virtue out of necessity by bringing changes like fewer, smarter, less predictable rats that act and fit more realistically, so that if we're going to have missions, they can at least teach people basic combat & fitting skills. (And incidentally make the missions less insanely boring)
1 Kings 12:11
|

Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9022
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 13:11:00 -
[247] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:Tippia wrote:Liz Laser wrote:But if your argument is that high-sec currently is on the winning side of an industrial imbalance, that's when I start chuckling (because moon-goo is an industrial product and can solve all problems). GǪand is easily matched by almost anything highsec has to offer. So at best, we have parity there, combined with immense imbalance everywhere else, resulting in a total imbalance in favour of highsec (the fact that moons aren't just matched, but trivially out-earned by numerous highsec activities, and that moons are not universally available means that we don't even have parityGǪ but let's go with your delusion for the time being). Mongoo does not solve any problems GÇö it's just an income source, like every other income source, that lets you buy things you can't/won't make for yourself. The reliance on moongoo shows that there is a problem; it does not make the problem go away. Quote:Not everything I want is due to being on the weaker side of industrial imbalance GǪwhich is nice and all but not relevant to the case at hand. The reason people want nullsec industry buffs is because nullsec is on the weaker side of an imbalance GÇö something that is blatantly obvious to anyone who has actually studied the mechanics involved. You're essentially making the GÇ£Ancient AliensGÇ¥ argument: there is a (infinitesimally small) possibility that it is like this; therefore it is. Just because there are things that are not due to the obvious imbalance doesn't mean that nothing is due to it, or that the imbalance doesn't exist. If we're changing the argument to complete wealth generation, you should also include ratting and plexing on null's balance sheet and missioning on high-sec's. But always remember that the wealth/power to step out and shake up null sov has to come from SOMEWHERE. Maybe it should come from low-sec or NPC null, but we should never make it so Null Sov has so much wealth it can't be challenged by newcomers who have put in the time and effort *somewhere* to unleash the dogs of war upon null sov.
Hi-sec produces more wealth than null.
Power in nullsec comes from organisation, experience and commitment, not wealth.
1 Kings 12:11
|

Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami Moon Warriors
330
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 13:12:00 -
[248] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Liz Laser wrote:I'm rambling, but my point is, that in my opinion the way to weigh the balance is by the overall value of industrial goods extracted PER INDUSTRIALIST. Great, then you fully support a much greater industrial capacity for null as this will be the most efficient way of balancing the value extracted per "industrialist" by drastically increasing their number. I'm glad we agree. (I am, of course, mocking your ridiculous backpedaling, and am more than satisfied that your complete lack of knowledge and coherence has been demonstrated to anyone with a shred of sense)
I think what the OP means, atleast if I were to say it.... is that per LIVE PLAYER CONTROLLING THE PILOT but meh, I just know it's just way easier to plex 20 accounts and run industrial fleets as opposed to sitting at your keyboard and doing your own clicking in null.
It's a matter of involvement, not access.
Sure lack of access IS there, not going to try to say it isn't. But you gotta admit, highsec allows for alot of bot aspirant-cy(sp?) that actually ENCOURAGES the imbalance.
As much as we can argue the semantics of the OP, the idea is still correct, just the delivery is wrong methinks.
It does come down to the individual player as the cause, but it also comes down to the mechanics. Noone is forced to maximize the use of the mechanics to their full benefit, but utilizing it and then saying it's broken simply makes that person a hypocrite unfortunately =(. "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |

Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
56
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 13:19:00 -
[249] - Quote
Tippia wrote:[quote=Liz Laser] Quote:I'm not opposed to the shake-up. But we've spent pages on debating one justification for the shake-up. GǪbecause you refuse to accept reality. Why is that?
When I have lived in null, and was covetous (and coveting is one of the beauties of Eve) I never thought to myself, damn those high sec people and their phat industry, I wish I had that.
Instead, I coveted (and still do) a jump freighter. I also coveted the corp/alliance influence of those who could commandeer slots, and I coveted the real world free time of those who could grind enough to afford POSs. And I coveted moon-goo and wished I had the influence to have my finger in that pie. (And the reason I didn't was largely because I am a casual player who simply doesn't put in the time to earn all those things. The people that had them deserved them because they had some mix of game-time/charisma/guile/leadership-skills that I lacked).
And when I wanted more slots it was because I wanted more slots. Not because I thought hi-sec held the overall industrial balance of power.
I'm reading what people write, I'm dwelling on it, and while dwelling on it other posters make arguments against your stances too, so I'm not the only person you have failed to convince. I'm not being stubborn for the sake of being stubborn. I've pointed out quite a few things people said that I had to agree with and even admitted to a Goon in one post here that I hadn't fully thought out the hypothetical trade of half of null's moons for half of high-sec's slots.
So, to answer "why is that?" I'd have to say because the arguments (so far) for that one single justification just aren't convincing to me, and I'll point out that others in this thread also seem to be unconvinced. |

Captain Tardbar
NEWB ALERT
349
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 13:36:00 -
[250] - Quote
Tippia wrote:This is balanced out by nullsec's havingGǪ what?
I thought we agreed that last night Moon goo was a valuable and important resource worth fighting for that isn't present in hi-sec.
I remember you saying that the output of man hours of moon goo for 5 billion was roughly the same as 5 billion worht of hi sec ice. Seems like an equivalent exchange of a balanced system.
I suppose you can always say "But we have to fight and lose ships over moon goo!"
But isn't that half the fun? Think about actually enjoying combat instead of sitting and watching your ice ming laser cycles. Seems like you've got something more than ice miners do.
Unless of course you don't want to pvp, which is also an acceptable answer. "Entitlement" is a euphemism for "I hate the way you play and it makes me cry like a baby". If you fantasize about being immoral it means you enjoy being immoral deep down. |

Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami Moon Warriors
330
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 13:39:00 -
[251] - Quote
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:Captain Tardbar wrote:Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote: Yah, calling up a 200 player fleet to go deal with timers for a few hours each month is pretty standard as far as nullsec warfare goes.
Even something like OTEC only applies to OTEC members not taking each other moons. It has no real effect on upstarts sniping at OTEC or other moons. This stuff happen all the time. The Asakai incident was over a moon mining POS.
So aside from the basic POS maintainance that goes on, we do deploy (and reimburse) fleets that deal with moon taking and defending fairly often.
I'm confused. If moon goo is worthless why lose billions worth of ships just to defend them. I have never seen an ice miner war on the same proportion. Although that would be interesting to see. Like others pointed out, moon goo isn't worthless. Some moons are worth more than other though. Some are worth sending out huge fleets to take or defend. And you don't see this with ice because ice belts in their current form are effectively limitless and the vast majority of the harvesting is done in highsec where warring over it is complicated. But is does happen (see; Gallente Ice Interdiction)
Or because you can afk defend the pos and also mine on a diff account therefore tossing out all those "500 man hours" out the window bringing in more than 10b a month.
Using the given math and mechanics of active versus passive income.
We went over this before in that other thread. They aren't comparable. It was proven then and proven now. "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |

Captain Tardbar
NEWB ALERT
349
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 13:45:00 -
[252] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Power in nullsec comes from organisation, experience and commitment, not wealth.
Didn't someone brandish a chart around showing that null sec lost more hull wealth than any other sec?
Certainly, if they are loosing that much, it must mean they have wealth to throw away.
Of course, it could be that it was all gathered by null players with hi-sec alts. If that is true, then why break the cycle?
Would all these null-sec alts move their money makers to null where they have to worry about awoxers, roams, and cloakers even if income was increased in null?
"Entitlement" is a euphemism for "I hate the way you play and it makes me cry like a baby". If you fantasize about being immoral it means you enjoy being immoral deep down. |

Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami Moon Warriors
330
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 13:46:00 -
[253] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:Bolow Santosi wrote:Liz Laser wrote: Does null-sec want to trade half their moons with high-sec for half of high-secs slots?
Take a wild guess who would have control over those moons. Because it wouldn't be high sec industrialists. LOL. Yeah, I didn't think that one out all the way. Still, even THAT would be more "balance" than just null getting more null-sec slots. It might also be a bit more INTERESTING. 
But think of the highsec wars. Think of the activity you would bring out of highsec! "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13971
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 13:49:00 -
[254] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:And when I wanted more slots it was because I wanted more slots. Not because I thought hi-sec held the overall industrial balance of power. So you were uninformed. Good for you (well, bad for you, but still]. So what? It doesn't change the fact that there is a massive imbalance in industrial capacity. It doesn't change the fact that this is a design flaw, and not something the players can fix.
Quote:other posters make arguments against your stances too Such as?
Quote:I'm not being stubborn for the sake of being stubborn. Your refusal to accept long-established facts, numbers, and even dev statements sure suggests that you areGǪ
Captain Tardbar wrote:I thought we agreed that last night Moon goo was a valuable and important resource worth fighting for that isn't present in hi-sec. We also agreed that it was no more valuable than ice mining, so it doesn't balance anything out. So, again, aaaaaall of those benefits highsec industry has is balanced out by nullsec havingGǪ what?
Murk Paradox wrote:We went over this before in that other thread. GǪand you consistently and continually failed to GÇ£proveGÇ¥ that 500 manhours spent collecting 5bn ISK was somehow not comparable to 500 manhours spent collecting 5bn ISK. Until you do, they're as comparable as two exactly similar things can be. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.-á |

Captain Tardbar
NEWB ALERT
349
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:02:00 -
[255] - Quote
Tippia wrote:We also agreed that it was no more valuable than ice mining, so it doesn't balance anything out. So, again, aaaaaall of those benefits highsec industry has is balanced out by nullsec havingGǪ what?
Good fights over moon goo?
Wouldn't having the benefit of actually getting out there and shooting things be fun?
Maybe if you don't like mechanics that bring about some modicum of PVP then I suppose maybe its not really a good thing.
"Entitlement" is a euphemism for "I hate the way you play and it makes me cry like a baby". If you fantasize about being immoral it means you enjoy being immoral deep down. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13971
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:07:00 -
[256] - Quote
Captain Tardbar wrote:Good fights over moon goo? GǪwhich is not part of the industry sector. So, again, aaaaaall of those benefits highsec industry has is balanced out by nullsec havingGǪ what? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.-á |

Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
2416
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:17:00 -
[257] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:
2) CONCORD protection 24/7 at zero cost, which hugely reduces the overhead of moving finished products and materials.
Protection?
Since when did Concord actually protect anyone? They punish, not protect. If you can't manage that basic understanding by now, then why listen to the rest of what you have to say?
Mr Epeen  There are 86,400 seconds in a day. You just saved one of them by typing 'u' instead of 'you'.-á Congratulations, dumbass! |

Captain Tardbar
NEWB ALERT
349
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:19:00 -
[258] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Captain Tardbar wrote:Good fights over moon goo? GǪwhich is not part of the industry sector. So, again, aaaaaall of those benefits highsec industry has is balanced out by nullsec havingGǪ what?
I don't know. It seems to me Null-sec is more of a collective front than individual persons performing industry, missions, or PVP.
So having the "good fight" benefits everyone in Null. Not just industrialists, but they get benefit too indriectly. I know that it kind of a weird concept.
Otherwise, I suppose the only thing I still see as silly is the fact that most people who want industry out there are probaly in hi-sec making the goods in question and contracting directly to their alliances.
If they want to move out null, that's fine. The money never leaves the alliance anyways.
It's just the industrial balance that null see's should also be applied to worm holes since a buff to null only benefits the alliances.
And if null does receive an industrial buff, they'll need to carebear up and bring miner's into their ranks as they'll still complain that they still have to buy goods from hi-sec as no one in their ranks wants to spend the time to mine it in null.
"Entitlement" is a euphemism for "I hate the way you play and it makes me cry like a baby". If you fantasize about being immoral it means you enjoy being immoral deep down. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13971
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:21:00 -
[259] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:Protection?
Since when did Concord actually protect anyone? Ever since they started blowing people up without fail, thereby offering the same kind of protection as any N-¦ blob. Just because protection isn't always enough to keep you alive doesn't mean it's not a form of protection.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.-á |

Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
2416
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:25:00 -
[260] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Mr Epeen wrote:Protection?
Since when did Concord actually protect anyone? Ever since they started blowing people up without fail, thereby offering the same kind of protection as any N-¦ blob. Just because protection isn't always enough to keep you alive doesn't mean it's not a form of protection.
Protection is killing the gankers before your freighter is dust not after. Concord has never provided protection for the victim, they provide consequences for the criminal.
That is a huge difference.
Mr Epeen  There are 86,400 seconds in a day. You just saved one of them by typing 'u' instead of 'you'.-á Congratulations, dumbass! |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13971
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:27:00 -
[261] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:Protection is killing the gankers before your freighter is dust not after. GǪwhich CONCORD does just fine, or at least as fine as any other fleet that offers protective fire.
Also, with CONCORD = you pretty much never get blown up; without CONCORD = you get blown up the moment you undock. Has the presence of CONCORD protected you or not? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.-á |

Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
56
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:28:00 -
[262] - Quote
Tippia wrote: That's because we have done the maths, and studied the problem, and you have not. Incidentally, this is also why the devs agree with us, and why we're not buying your unfounded and unreasoned claim that no imbalance exists.
a) maybe they did it for other reasons than your maths.
b) You got the people who thought Dominion was a swell idea to agree with you. That and a small one-time security deposit of 500 million isk will get you membership into Goons.
I once got my sister to lick both terminals of a 9 volt battery. I won't argue that makes me brilliant. |

Danni stark
15
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:29:00 -
[263] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:I once got my sister to lick both terminals of a 9 volt battery.
why wouldn't you? it's the fastest way to check if it has any power left in it. Yay, this account hasn't had it's signature banned. or it's account, if you're reading this. |

Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
2416
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:32:00 -
[264] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Mr Epeen wrote:Protection is killing the gankers before your freighter is dust not after. GǪwhich CONCORD does just fine, or at least as fine as any other fleet that offers protective fire. Also, with CONCORD = you pretty much never get blown up; without CONCORD = you get blown up the moment you undock. Has the presence of CONCORD protected you or not?
LOL!
You're in one of your moods again, I see.
Sorry, Tipps. I'm not biting.
Mr Epeen 
There are 86,400 seconds in a day. You just saved one of them by typing 'u' instead of 'you'.-á Congratulations, dumbass! |

Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami Moon Warriors
331
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:33:00 -
[265] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Liz Laser wrote:
Yet null DOES meet those ammo demands. I'll posit for the moment that it manages to because it spends some of it's surplus riches.
By importing it all. Quote:Wanting stuff so that you experience less inconvenience doesn't always mean you are on the losing side of an unbalanced system.
We literally cannot build and maintain a single fleet of battleships with our entire outpost infrastructure.
I think a huge problem is that people are wanting 500 man battles at a much higher frequency than was originally designed. On any given day you have 5,000 people looking for a huge battle and the influx of ammo can only support 1/4 of that.
The supply doesn't meet the demand sure. But lower the frequency and maybe it would.
If the income levels were not so high and people were not able to trivialize such an expensive fleet at a drop of the hat, the industrial infrastructure of battle would be better suited.
I'd refer to the stories of people ratting throughout the month, then staging up for a sov fight and those month long grinds happening that people don't like anymore with everyone stockpiling munitions.
Now that we have large fights at a drop of a hat for no other reason than arbitrarily throwing isk out the door, of course you cannot keep up on ammo!
Learn to use godamn lasers if you need lol. "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13971
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:34:00 -
[266] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:maybe they did it for other reasons than your maths. Ok. Then invent some other reasons and go right ahead and prove them correct, preferably while explaining how come they're very specifically going after the proven imbalance in just the way the maths show.
Quote:You got the people who thought Dominion was a swell idea to agree with you. That and a small one-time security deposit of 500 million isk will get you membership into Goons. Ah. Ad hominem. Do you have an actual argument instead?
Or, even better, maybe you have an answer: aaaaaall of those benefits highsec industry has is balanced out by nullsec havingGǪ what? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.-á |

Captain Tardbar
NEWB ALERT
349
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:42:00 -
[267] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Or, even better, maybe you have an answer: aaaaaall of those benefits highsec industry has is balanced out by nullsec havingGǪ what?
Command and control of who produces what? And who get's what?
I don't think when null sec gets this industry buff are they going to throw open their arms to any old hi-sec carebear wanting to make goods in their POS (and possibly player owned stations if they give you that).
I mean if I had the ability to kick all my rivals out of hi-sec station because they wouldn't make me ammo and sell it to me at bargin prices, then that would be an extreme advantage.
It's not something you can measure in values of isk, but it is still a potent peice of power that an alliance has over those who produce goods in their space.
Of course I'm sure people won't be so strict to demand every alliance maker churns out X widget all day and sell them at a loss, but I'm sure alliance members will have suggestions to follow and no neutral scrub is going to get their dirty paws on the manufacturing lines to make anything at all.
"Entitlement" is a euphemism for "I hate the way you play and it makes me cry like a baby". If you fantasize about being immoral it means you enjoy being immoral deep down. |

Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9023
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:44:00 -
[268] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:Tippia wrote: That's because we have done the maths, and studied the problem, and you have not. Incidentally, this is also why the devs agree with us, and why we're not buying your unfounded and unreasoned claim that no imbalance exists.
a) maybe they did it for other reasons than your maths. b) You got the people who thought Dominion was a swell idea to agree with you. That and a small one-time security deposit of 500 million isk will get you membership into Goons. I once got my sister to lick both terminals of a 9 volt battery. I won't argue that makes me brilliant.
Link me one post made in the last two years by a goon that says Dominion was a good idea.
I dare you.
I double dog dare you.
1 Kings 12:11
|

Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9023
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:45:00 -
[269] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:baltec1 wrote:Liz Laser wrote:
Yet null DOES meet those ammo demands. I'll posit for the moment that it manages to because it spends some of it's surplus riches.
By importing it all. Quote:Wanting stuff so that you experience less inconvenience doesn't always mean you are on the losing side of an unbalanced system.
We literally cannot build and maintain a single fleet of battleships with our entire outpost infrastructure. I think a huge problem is that people are wanting 500 man battles at a much higher frequency than was originally designed. On any given day you have 5,000 people looking for a huge battle and the influx of ammo can only support 1/4 of that. The supply doesn't meet the demand sure. But lower the frequency and maybe it would. If the income levels were not so high and people were not able to trivialize such an expensive fleet at a drop of the hat, the industrial infrastructure of battle would be better suited. I'd refer to the stories of people ratting throughout the month, then staging up for a sov fight and those month long grinds happening that people don't like anymore with everyone stockpiling munitions. Now that we have large fights at a drop of a hat for no other reason than arbitrarily throwing isk out the door, of course you cannot keep up on ammo! Learn to use godamn lasers if you need lol.
So you're literally saying that the problem isn't that nullsec has only 3% of the production facilities, it's that we fight too much?
I just want to be clear on this one. Too many fights?
1 Kings 12:11
|

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13971
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:52:00 -
[270] - Quote
Captain Tardbar wrote:Command and control of who produces what? And who get's what? Nope, and it's not a part of the industrial sector even if they did. So, again, aaaaaall of those benefits highsec industry has is balanced out by nullsec havingGǪ what? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.-á |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |