Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
205
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 23:06:00 -
[31] - Quote
Xavier Thorm wrote:Danika Princip wrote:A system can support at best three or four ratters at a time, what's everyone else going to do if you're expecting fifty in one place? This is incorrect, and if you disagree with me you should explain how you came upon those numbers. Overall, OP, I like this idea in a general sense. I think it is a good direction for CCP to look in.
Why doesn't the OP do that? He pulls some number out of his posterior based on Dotlan and runs with it.
The OP starts with the number of people in GSF, 10,600.
First remove the inactive players. Then remove the alts.
You could cut that 10,600 down to 5,300 or even lower. Now suddenly, based on the OP's "reasoning" we have 25/system.
In other words, the OP's methodology sucks donkey balls. You call out one person on this who actually makes a good point regarding ratting. On average, I bet you can only get 3-4 people earning decent isk in a system by ratting. Note, it is on average, not how many people could be supported in a -0.7 system or lower.
And for somebody demanding empirical evidence you kind of suck in that department too. I live in Cloud Ring. Do you know the average true sec there? -0.0745. In Fountain the average sec status is 0.292.
And even if Danika is off considerably, e.g. say a factor of 4, the max number is still well below what the OP is calling for. Basically, you don't change the risks, but lower the rewards.
Quote:The other anomalies, the belts, complexes, etc. Or they rat in groups, burning down anomalies repeatedly with groups of ships.
My understanding is that respawn rates depend on the systems True Sec and system upgrades....in other words, in your average system in regions like Cloud Ring and Fountain aren't going to worth all that much, so burning down a whole lot of crap anomalies wont get you much.
Quote:The current system has left us with massive blocks of null sec that are empty.
Because that space sucks, at least for things like ratting and mining. Using your preferred group, Goons, the average sec status of the systems they hold is pretty good, -0.462. That means about 60 of those systems are greater than that Of course, they can't rat in all of them depending on their agreements with their allies. Still limiting it to just Deklein that is 57 systems with an average sec status of -0.657.
So Goons might not be the best example given the high average sec status of Deklein, their main region. Also, you'd probably need to make the scale adjustable to the overall value of the region.
|
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
1303
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 23:20:00 -
[32] - Quote
Xavier Thorm wrote:Danika Princip wrote:Xavier Thorm wrote:Danika Princip wrote:A system can support at best three or four ratters at a time, what's everyone else going to do if you're expecting fifty in one place? This is incorrect, and if you disagree with me you should explain how you came upon those numbers. Overall, OP, I like this idea in a general sense. I think it is a good direction for CCP to look in. I'm not talking -1.0 truesec. I'm talking about the 0.4-0.6 I'm usually in. One guy chaining hubs, one, maybe two guys in whatever sanctums or havens you have, if people still run those, and that's about it. Where does everyone else go? The other anomalies, the belts, complexes, etc. Or they rat in groups, burning down anomalies repeatedly with groups of ships.
Which no-one runs, because there's no money in them, no guarantee there even IS one in the case of complexes, less ISK/hr in groups than simple multiboxing yourself....
if you can make better ISK running missions in highsec than on an activity in nullsec, then it is not worthwhile. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
205
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 23:21:00 -
[33] - Quote
Quote:How many systems does the various alliances in the CFC hold? 400-500? More? How many of them are empty ghost town systems? If those empty system were not worth the cost and effort to hold the CFC would not hold them.
Did you stop to consider that the system might be worthwhile to hold for reasons unrelated to security status and the systems ability to support a number of pilots? For example moon materials? Or how about for a tactical advantage. A system might not be worth much economically, but its tactical importance could be quite significant.
Your reasoning is facile and simplistic. You don't take into account that a system supporting pilots via ratting depends on sec status, that some regions are "richer" than others in that regard, that a systems value is not just on what individual pilots can extract from the system, etc.
|
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
102
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 00:02:00 -
[34] - Quote
Several people responded to me with the same uninformed points, so I'll just simply ask if any of you have ever heard of Forsaken Hubs, whether you have spent any time ratting in nullsec, and if you really believe that large power blocks should be able to reap large rewards from non-upgraded system?
To clarify my mocking point: A lot of the other anomaly types are actually quite good when you know how to run them, because they have a chance for faction spawns or escalations, and really they only make less ISK/hr than F Hubs, which are getting balanced in Odyssey anyway (supposedly) so I think you guys are just making the same false assumption about how to rat in nullsec that a lot of people do, without having much practical experience. Especially considering that you were talking about the truesec of Fountain, which has broken truesec.
Further, I am almost certain that spawn times are not tied to upgrades or truesec, and that only what spawns is. If I am incorrect, the relationship is so minor that it is essentially insignificant in my experience. Ratting in groups can net you slightly less ISK than multiboxing, but that isn't an option for a lot of players so I don't see that as a valid counterpoint, and running anomalies with groups gives you increased chances for escalations/faction spawns, so if done with dedication it is a net bonus and makes more efficient use of the system.
Basically, the arguments about how few players can be supported by a system sound really whiny, entitled, and uneducated, which isn't exactly uncommon among line-members in large nullsec blocks once we get used to suckling at the teats of particularly broken content like F Hubs, but I think it's an attitude that needs to change if we want to see the game as a whole improve. |
Cameron Cahill
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
234
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 00:16:00 -
[35] - Quote
Can any of these other anomalies consistently better the isk/hour of running level 4s entirely risk free in highsec in a moderately expensive faction battleship? No? Then they are not worth doing.
In essence you are misunderstanding the argument, I at least am arguing that while you could squeeze more players into a system it is only worthwhile (as in more income than they could easily get in highsec) for 5-15 pilots in the best systems and one, two or none in the **** ones. |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
1303
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 00:21:00 -
[36] - Quote
Xavier Thorm wrote:Several people responded to me with the same uninformed points, so I'll just simply ask if any of you have ever heard of Forsaken Hubs, whether you have spent any time ratting in nullsec, and if you really believe that large power blocks should be able to reap large rewards from non-upgraded system?
To clarify my mocking point: A lot of the other anomaly types are actually quite good when you know how to run them, because they have a chance for faction spawns or escalations, and really they only make less ISK/hr than F Hubs, which are getting balanced in Odyssey anyway (supposedly) so I think you guys are just making the same false assumption about how to rat in nullsec that a lot of people do, without having much practical experience. Especially considering that you were talking about the truesec of Fountain, which has broken truesec.
Further, I am almost certain that spawn times are not tied to upgrades or truesec, and that only what spawns is. If I am incorrect, the relationship is so minor that it is essentially insignificant in my experience. Ratting in groups can net you slightly less ISK than multiboxing, but that isn't an option for a lot of players so I don't see that as a valid counterpoint, and running anomalies with groups gives you increased chances for escalations/faction spawns, so if done with dedication it is a net bonus and makes more efficient use of the system.
Basically, the arguments about how few players can be supported by a system sound really whiny, entitled, and uneducated, which isn't exactly uncommon among line-members in large nullsec blocks once we get used to suckling at the teats of particularly broken content like F Hubs, but I think it's an attitude that needs to change if we want to see the game as a whole improve.
Put your fifty ratters in a -0.4 system of your choice. Tell me how many of them actually make usable ISK on their own. Not everyone wants to or is able to group rat, and even if they did, don't you end up costing yourself ISK if you have more than four or five in a site? Pretty sure you'll run out of sites well before you hit the fifty guys per system you seem to think is a good idea.
If you chain forsaken hubs in a system with only two, you cannot share it with another ratter without losing ISK compared to a system on your own. Is this broken? Sure, but it's getting fixed soon anyway. I suppose that means you can add in one extra ratter per hub, at least until people figure out how to chain them like mad again.
I play casually when I'm ratting, with plenty of wandering off, playing dust or watching TV. Hardly suitable with group ratting, hence I prefer to just dual box on my own. I've lived in null longer than you have too, so please don't try the old 'you have no experience' thing. |
Franky Sugaz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 06:44:00 -
[37] - Quote
So basically for many poster there sys in null are empty because there isn't enought rats, due to true sec problem, to sustain the same isk/hr of lvl4 in high sec? If that is the real problem why not ask ccp to build up mission hubs in sov null? Maybe after building an outpost a bunch of officer take home in it and start giving out mission with a high isk/hr ratio than higsec lvl4 ; what i'm a bit sceptical is if pvper are willing to committ themselve to protect those who do mission in sov null. |
Mark Androcius
109
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 08:26:00 -
[38] - Quote
You do realize that people don't want to be shot right? Not that I'm talking about my personal preferences or anything.
Why do you think all those miners stick to high-sec space? the vast majority even.. They don't want to get killed, surprising isn't it?
Without miners, we have nothing to build ships and modules with, without ships and modules, no PvP. Miners can not defend themselves against gankers, therefore every loss they make in PvP is ********, it doesn't increase their wealth, it doesn't gain them useful experience ( other than avoiding the ganky-systems altogether ) and it doesn't improve their gaming experience.
Don't get me wrong, i love PvP ( starting to get addicted to it more and more ), but i REFUSE to be nothing but a sitting duck. Why are you expecting anybody else to be your very own sitting ducks?
I am not a carebear, but don't go around shooting EVERYTHING you see and then come to the forums to complain that nobody wants to get killed anymore. It is like expecting a Christian priest to enter a Muslim extremist mosque. Or asking a 12 year old to enter a Catholic church. If a man speaks his mind in the forest and no woman hears him, is he still wrong? |
Cameron Cahill
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
238
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 10:03:00 -
[39] - Quote
Franky Sugaz wrote:So basically for many poster there sys in null are empty because there isn't enought rats, due to true sec problem, to sustain the same isk/hr of lvl4 in high sec? If that is the real problem why not ask ccp to build up mission hubs in sov null? Maybe after building an outpost a bunch of officer take home in it and start giving out mission with a high isk/hr ratio than higsec lvl4 ; what i'm a bit sceptical is if pvper are willing to committ themselve to protect those who do mission in sov null.
There is a fairly strong case for this although it would make people ratting in 0.0 a lot harder to catch, perhaps if a new kind of mission with no acceleration gates was used it would make it feasible.
Personally though I think it would be easier for CCP and less homogenizing for the game if they just buffed system upgrades or truesec so at maximum levels the lower end of worthwhile anomalies would appear in all systems and generally more anomalies spawned at any given time. Or just buffed the worse anomalies to make them usefull. |
Cameron Cahill
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
238
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 10:05:00 -
[40] - Quote
Mark Androcius wrote:You do realize that people don't want to be shot right? Not that I'm talking about my personal preferences or anything.
Why do you think all those miners stick to high-sec space? the vast majority even.. They don't want to get killed, surprising isn't it?
Without miners, we have nothing to build ships and modules with, without ships and modules, no PvP. Miners can not defend themselves against gankers, therefore every loss they make in PvP is ********, it doesn't increase their wealth, it doesn't gain them useful experience ( other than avoiding the ganky-systems altogether ) and it doesn't improve their gaming experience.
Don't get me wrong, i love PvP ( starting to get addicted to it more and more ), but i REFUSE to be nothing but a sitting duck. Why are you expecting anybody else to be your very own sitting ducks?
I am not a carebear, but don't go around shooting EVERYTHING you see and then come to the forums to complain that nobody wants to get killed anymore. It is like expecting a Christian priest to enter a Muslim extremist mosque. Or asking a 12 year old to enter a Catholic church.
As delicious as your tears are we are talking about mechanics not the 'eVil g4nkerZ'.
Get.
Out. |
|
Mark Androcius
110
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 10:43:00 -
[41] - Quote
Cameron Cahill wrote:As delicious as your tears are we are talking about mechanics not the 'eVil g4nkerZ'.
Get.
Out.
Tears? hmmm, reading skills are lacking i see. If a man speaks his mind in the forest and no woman hears him, is he still wrong? |
Cameron Cahill
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
238
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 11:00:00 -
[42] - Quote
Mark Androcius wrote: Why do you think all those miners stick to high-sec space? the vast majority even.. They don't want to get killed, surprising isn't it?
Mark Androcius wrote: Without miners, we have nothing to build ships and modules with, without ships and modules, no PvP. Miners can not defend themselves against gankers, therefore every loss they make in PvP is ********, it doesn't increase their wealth, it doesn't gain them useful experience ( other than avoiding the ganky-systems altogether ) and it doesn't improve their gaming experience.
Mark Androcius wrote: i REFUSE to be nothing but a sitting duck. Why are you expecting anybody else to be your very own sitting ducks?
Mark Androcius wrote: don't go around shooting EVERYTHING you see and then come to the forums to complain that nobody wants to get killed anymore.
Mark Androcius wrote: It is like expecting a Christian priest to enter a Muslim extremist mosque. Or asking a 12 year old to enter a Catholic church.
Reads like tears to me. |
Azrael Dinn
The 20th Legion Mildly Sober
113
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 11:26:00 -
[43] - Quote
Not wanna spoil everything but if you want more conflicts... go talk to your alliance leaders and tell them to attack another alliance. Problem solved. |
Cameron Cahill
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
238
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 12:06:00 -
[44] - Quote
Azrael Dinn wrote:Not wanna spoil everything but if you want more conflicts... go talk to your alliance leaders and tell them to attack another alliance. Problem solved.
Notice how 90% of the people bitching about 0.0 being stagnant don't actually live here.
We are involved in two major conflicts just now, almost all of the non-renter alliances in null are involved in at least one. How is that stagnant? |
Franky Sugaz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 12:24:00 -
[45] - Quote
Cameron Cahill wrote:Azrael Dinn wrote:Not wanna spoil everything but if you want more conflicts... go talk to your alliance leaders and tell them to attack another alliance. Problem solved. Notice how 90% of the people bitching about 0.0 being stagnant don't actually live here. We are involved in two major conflicts just now, almost all of the non-renter alliances in null are involved in at least one. How is that stagnant?
maybe peoples expect /dream of every null sys to be like high sec with 30+ characters in local at any given time, in reality mostly sys are empty or with barely 1 character. |
Cameron Cahill
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
238
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 12:45:00 -
[46] - Quote
This is because there is nothing worth doing in most nullsec systems, so why would people spend time there? |
Franky Sugaz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 12:58:00 -
[47] - Quote
Cameron Cahill wrote:This is because there is nothing worth doing in most nullsec systems, so why would people spend time there?
we can argue that even in high sec aside for some specific hubs there is nothing worth, i don't know if expecting such a population in null is realistic even if ccp decide to move everything in null except starting tutorial. |
Cameron Cahill
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
238
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 13:12:00 -
[48] - Quote
Neither do I but in hisec you have level 4 missions in pretty much every system, which have no limit to how many people can run them at once and which have a higher income than all but the high end anomalies, which can only be found in some systems in null, and which have much lower risk than ratting in 0.0. At the end of the day if they want people to live in these systems CCP need to make it worth their while to do so and that means either buffing low end anomalies or making at least some of the high end ones spawn in every system.
Every nullsec system needs to have a higher income potential for at least one or two pilots than any number of people can have in any given highsec system otherwise people will continue to not live there regardless of what else you do. |
Franky Sugaz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 13:44:00 -
[49] - Quote
Cameron Cahill wrote:Neither do I but in hisec you have level 4 missions in pretty much every system, which have no limit to how many people can run them at once and which have a higher income than all but the high end anomalies, which can only be found in some systems in null, and which have much lower risk than ratting in 0.0. At the end of the day if they want people to live in these systems CCP need to make it worth their while to do so and that means either buffing low end anomalies or making at least some of the high end ones spawn in every system.
Every nullsec system needs to have a higher income potential for at least one or two pilots than any number of people can have in any given highsec system otherwise people will continue to not live there regardless of what else you do.
E or nerf highsec L4s but I don't think anyone really wants that.
why don't put space agent in every sys that do mission? better reward the more the system is upgraded and if there is an outpost etc.. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
206
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 13:46:00 -
[50] - Quote
Xavier Thorm wrote:Several people responded to me with the same uninformed points, so I'll just simply ask if any of you have ever heard of Forsaken Hubs, whether you have spent any time ratting in nullsec, and if you really believe that large power blocks should be able to reap large rewards from non-upgraded system?
No, I've never ratted in null and never heard of a foresaken hub.
Dude, I was ratting in Fountain when your alliance was still in the TESTagram.
What do you think upgrading a -0.01 will get? |
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
206
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 13:54:00 -
[51] - Quote
Franky Sugaz wrote:So basically for many poster there sys in null are empty because there isn't enought rats, due to true sec problem, to sustain the same isk/hr of lvl4 in high sec? If that is the real problem why not ask ccp to build up mission hubs in sov null? Maybe after building an outpost a bunch of officer take home in it and start giving out mission with a high isk/hr ratio than higsec lvl4 ; what i'm a bit sceptical is if pvper are willing to committ themselve to protect those who do mission in sov null.
The PvPers will be the one's doing the missions. PvPers also rat so that they can buy their PvP ships. So this class distinction is not everywhere all that valid. Granted I suppose some PvPers never ever rat or do any carebearing, but that is probably the exception not the norm.
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
206
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 14:14:00 -
[52] - Quote
Cameron Cahill wrote:Azrael Dinn wrote:Not wanna spoil everything but if you want more conflicts... go talk to your alliance leaders and tell them to attack another alliance. Problem solved. Notice how 90% of the people bitching about 0.0 being stagnant don't actually live here. We are involved in two major conflicts just now, almost all of the non-renter alliances in null are involved in at least one. How is that stagnant?
I am on the same Jabber as Cameron, there are plenty of pings about ops. Even ops where other members of the CFC show up to help out. Example,
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=17851199
My alliance is sandwiched between two entities that are engaged in low grade hostile actions.
So this idea that null is blue from starting at one point and going 360 degrees is still blue is nonsense.
Now one reason you don't see more sov wars is that grinding sov structures is...well grinding....on the player. After awhile the thought of logging in to shoot another Ihub is worse than going to work. At least in the latter case I get a paycheck. Once an alliance has thrown in the towel on defending their space all that is left are boring as **** structure shoots.
Edit:
Franky Sugaz wrote:Cameron Cahill wrote:Azrael Dinn wrote:Not wanna spoil everything but if you want more conflicts... go talk to your alliance leaders and tell them to attack another alliance. Problem solved. Notice how 90% of the people bitching about 0.0 being stagnant don't actually live here. We are involved in two major conflicts just now, almost all of the non-renter alliances in null are involved in at least one. How is that stagnant? maybe peoples expect /dream of every null sys to be like high sec with 30+ characters in local at any given time, in reality mostly sys are empty or with barely 1 character.
Because most systems suck in terms of resources that can be extracted and turned into isk by players. |
Cameron Cahill
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
238
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 15:18:00 -
[53] - Quote
Franky Sugaz wrote: why don't put space agent in every sys that do mission? better reward the more the system is upgraded and if there is an outpost etc..
Because it then becomes much harder to catch people doing PvE and so much harder to kill them, and besides we have a bespoke kind of PvE for sov null, why remove it and make the game more bland when you could fix it fairly easily.
Another problem with missions is that discourages people from moving because of standings.
|
Franky Sugaz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 06:23:00 -
[54] - Quote
Cameron Cahill wrote:Franky Sugaz wrote: why don't put space agent in every sys that do mission? better reward the more the system is upgraded and if there is an outpost etc..
Because it then becomes much harder to catch people doing PvE and so much harder to kill them, and besides we have a bespoke kind of PvE for sov null, why remove it and make the game more bland when you could fix it fairly easily. Another problem with missions is that discourages people from moving because of standings.
we have discussed till now that aside for high end anomalies there is nothing that keep a decent amount of peoples inside low true sec sys and the thing that keep so many peoples in high sec are missions, to me is pretty clear that to encourage those capsulers to move in null it require implementing missions pve in null. Catch peoples is harder in missions? Maybe but if the number of peoples rise the chances to catch someone rise as well. |
Daedalus II
The Oasis Group TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
173
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 08:01:00 -
[55] - Quote
Maybe nullsec shouldn't be just about how much isk you can make there? Maybe it should be more about camaraderie, the feeling of building an empire, owning and defending space, being self-sufficient within the group.
I mean if your goal is a reliable isk income then running L4s in highsec in a pimped out battleship should be better. |
Franky Sugaz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 11:27:00 -
[56] - Quote
Daedalus II wrote:Maybe nullsec shouldn't be just about how much isk you can make there? Maybe it should be more about camaraderie, the feeling of building an empire, owning and defending space, being self-sufficient within the group.
I mean if your goal is a reliable isk income then running L4s in highsec in a pimped out battleship should be better.
maybe this is why many scream to nerf l4 in high sec, intested of nerfing them and inventing new and rarely appreciated (and used) method to farm isk in null creating lvl4 specifacally designed for that zone maybe the way to go. |
Cameron Cahill
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
239
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 14:47:00 -
[57] - Quote
Franky Sugaz wrote: we have discussed till now that aside for high end anomalies there is nothing that keep a decent amount of peoples inside low true sec sys and the thing that keep so many peoples in high sec are missions, to me is pretty clear that to encourage those capsulers to move in null it require implementing missions pve in null. Catch peoples is harder in missions? Maybe but if the number of peoples rise the chances to catch someone rise as well.
It takes at lest 20 seconds to get a scan result on someone, this and warp time means at least 40 seconds between jumping in and landing on grid in a mission, even more if there are acceleration gates. You could get safe in a supercap in this time, good luck catching anyone paying the slightest bit of attention. You are ignoring the rest of the arguments, answer them if you want to be taken seriously.
Daedalus II wrote: Maybe nullsec shouldn't be just about how much isk you can make there? Maybe it should be more about camaraderie, the feeling of building an empire, owning and defending space, being self-sufficient within the group.
I mean if your goal is a reliable isk income then running L4s in highsec in a pimped out battleship is probably easier.
This isn't about getting people to move to 0.0 in general, its about getting people to be in the currently unused systems.
|
Daedalus II
The Oasis Group TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
173
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 15:43:00 -
[58] - Quote
Cameron Cahill wrote:
This isn't about getting people to move to 0.0 in general, its about getting people to be in the currently unused systems.
The way I see it the reason for that is that more or less all unused systems are currently de facto "owned" of one of the larger nullsec entities. Sure they don't use it, but if someone (say a corp or small alliance) were to settle down there they have two options; 1) Pay the large entity rent for space they aren't using anyway and couldn't care less about. 2) Not pay rent and get roflstomped whenever the "owning" entity gets bored for whatever reason.
If you don't like paying rent for what is essentially a deserted wasteland (and who does?) none of the options are very exciting. |
Franky Sugaz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 16:16:00 -
[59] - Quote
Cameron Cahill wrote:
It takes at lest 20 seconds to get a scan result on someone, this and warp time means at least 40 seconds between jumping in and landing on grid in a mission, even more if there are acceleration gates. You could get safe in a supercap in this time, good luck catching anyone paying the slightest bit of attention. You are ignoring the rest of the arguments, answer them if you want to be taken seriously.
so the choice is btw having systems empty like we have now (with 0 chance to catch anyone) and system with more capsuler doing missions with the chance to catch one or two with their pants down; no brain i take the second; many will escape someone will be caught better than having soo many sys empty. |
Erloas
Unorthodox Operations
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 17:19:00 -
[60] - Quote
There are already seconds of null with mission running. Granted I have no idea how much it is utilized and can be a pain to get the standings to get started with the reasonable level missions.
One of the main reasons null sec systems are empty is because there are no stations in them, and even some of the systems with stations are fairly useless stations. Without the ability to refine or reprocess then a system looses a lot of its value for anyone mining or grinding rats. The lack of a market for most goods (especially meta drops since in any given area everyone has access to the same drops) means any secondary forms of income like loot and salvage and even exploration are of limited value. It is also a very long and dangerous trip to get any of that to a real market. The overhead time it takes to turn said goods into isk can be quite long.
The biggest issue I see with null space is a chicken and egg sort of situation.
There isn't enough industry in null to live in null without occasionally heading to empire. It is a PITA to move large amounts of goods, especially ships. BPOs, especially researched are too valuable to be in null. The limited number of stations and how spread out they are means that much more time and risk to get research/copy/inventing BP, the refined minerals, and the manufacturing slots all together to make something. There isn't enough demand in any given region of null for someone to make the huge array of products that someone might want to buy. So since everyone has to go to empire to get goods anyway there isn't a lot of market for goods to be sold in null. The risk aversion for a lot of people in null isn't the isk it is the time. And if you do produce something your possible market is a fraction of what it would be in Empire, you can only sell to your alliance and their allies, no one else can possibly get to your goods, but in empire you can sell to 99% of the playerbase.
Many alliances get around parts of this with reimbursement programs but those are almost always for very specific ships and often only for alliance PvP outings. There is a good chance any given player (especially fairly new) can't fly (or at least well) the ships the alliance wants everyone to use. Also most of those are for BCs and below, if you wanted to do lvl 4 missions or the high end anoms you pretty much need a BS and probably not one in the PvP fit that might be available for the reimbursement program. Then on top of that the all might killboard seems to be the fixation of so many alliances, so if you are out taking risks to make money and do loose the ship not only are you out the isk for the ship, the time it takes to replace it, you're also getting yelled at by the killboard police because you are making the alliance look bad by dieing .
I have no idea what the solutions might be. I think having more fully equipped stations would help some aspects of it, but not everything. The cloaky haulers ease the pain of some moving but they are limited in use (many can't even move a cruiser, too small for raw minerals for manufacturing), they are also not that quick to train into and all of the larger haulers are too vulnerable or extremely expensive.
The thing I miss about empire the most when in null isn't the safety, it is the convenience. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |