|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
57
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 02:34:00 -
[1] - Quote
Reiisha wrote:Instead of complaining about it, why not offer solutions that could actually work? CCP is just a stumped about it as you guys and are looking for a proper way to do it.
I somehow doubt this. I would guess there is another reason.
If they were stumped, there would be an open call for feedback with a list of their current thoughts.
They have done similar in the past.
Unless of course, they don't have any thoughts. Possible, I suppose. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
64
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 17:50:00 -
[2] - Quote
Where does all this self importance come from?
I find it remarkable that certain people actually believe that all suggestions can hurt them are put forth specifically to hurt them in particular.
News flash: you aren't that important. The name in the upper left have corner has a surprisingly small amount of relevance in the grand scheme of EVE.
The game would tick along just fine with or without you. The people who make a big deal about which particular name is in the corner I think are somewhat insane. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
64
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 18:09:00 -
[3] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Those "huge swaths of empty null sec" are now all rented out, and are generally far more active than they were.
This is deceptive, if not untrue.
I spend nearly all my time in nullsec.
The only major difference I saw in any activity anywhere was the release of Rubicon. Even if your renting sales where approximately around the time of the release of Rubicon, I find it highly unlikely that the increased activity in nullsec is due to your rental racketeering agreements....
rather than due to: 1) Being able to traverse from gate to gate much much faster than before, making nullsec travel somewhat safer, and also allowing people to travel much farther in a single sitting 2) New ghost site content 3) General new excitement at playing the game, as a new expansion just came out 4) Bubble immune interceptors..... |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
64
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 18:26:00 -
[4] - Quote
I suppose vast swaths of 0 - 2 jump per hour sov nullsec with the occaisional docked pilot counts as a "lot of activity" then, because that's what I saw throughout most of nullsec pre-Rubicon.
Stop with the self-importance. These agreements are not having a large impact on the actual game.
Mechanic changes, expansions, content releases, are what have a strong impact on the population in null. Random rental agreements do nothing.
I can't even tell the difference between rental space and non-rental space without looking up to see which name indicates what, because it's pretty much all the same: empty.
The recent spike in activity from Rubicon will slowly drop back down to where it was (perhaps a bit higher depending on how many new subscribers CCP picked up) as the novelty wears off. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
64
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 19:28:00 -
[5] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:CCP obviously doesn't actually care about fixing nullsec
Nullsec seems to be working just fine to me.
The nodes are up. I can fly around in my ship. I can choose to do any content that randomly spawns, or go around looking for a fight, or whatever.
Working as intended.
What's broken about nullsec? |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
64
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 19:46:00 -
[6] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Clearly you're not a participant in territorial warfare, which is the part that needs to be fixed.
you mean the sov system then, not nullsec.
there are many aspects of nullsec, of which one is the sov system. nullsec as a whole is not "broken" even if the sov system is. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
65
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 20:05:00 -
[7] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Considering the vast majority of nullsec is sov space then yes, it's broken.
Except the space works just fine with or without sov.
You could just delete the whole sov system right now and nullsec would keep on working just fine.
Nullsec is not broken. Nullsec works just fine.
Don't project your alliance problems into the entirety of the game.
You're just not relevant enough for that to be the case - sorry |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
67
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 20:12:00 -
[8] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:Again you either deliberately missed the point regarding Industry being awful in null sec
My point was only that nullsec itself is perfectly fine.
If there's a problem with the sov system, that's separate from nullsec as a whole.
The sov system is just an optional layer on top of nullsec. That's it.
It's not the "end game" or some such....
Tauranon wrote:Merely saying no or taking up the opposite position, isn't debating or making your point. You do actually have to offer facts.
The burden of proof lies with the accuser. That would be the people saying nullsec itself (not just the sov system) is broken.
Please explain how nullsec is "broken." I fly in it all the time. Works just fine. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
67
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 20:20:00 -
[9] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Maybe for you, precious snowflake solo player, but null isn't supposed to be an extension of low.
I didn't know you had to have sov to qualify as a team player.
James Amril-Kesh wrote:The picture for "relevant" is a fat bee. Sorry.
Irrelevant alliance is irrelevant. It doesn't actually matter to the game which alliance holds what sov or how much. It doesn't matter. It has no relevance.
It could be owned by a rabbit alliance, a baboon alliance, or a talking donkey alliance, or a combination of all three in varying ratios. It does not matter one tidbit to the balance of the EVE universe or changes put in place.
It's like talking about which player is specifically mining your minerals or whatever service. It doesn't matter. If one person stops, another takes their place. Sorry if this bothers you.
James Amril-Kesh wrote:It's entirely relevant - tedious is a big part of why sov sucks gigantic donkey balls.
Oh no - you missed the point.
What's entirely irrelevant is what you consider to be tedious. Players can do whatever the hell they want, and what one player considers tedious, another might consider exciting. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
67
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 20:30:00 -
[10] - Quote
M1k3y Koontz wrote:[sarcasm] I, as well as the majority of the EVE Online player base, greatly enjoy shooting at immobile, defenseless structures in 10% Time Dilation until my eyes bleed. [/sarcasm]
I don't enjoy taking my girlfriend out to see boring romance movies, or spending lots of money on expensive dinners.
I do it for the big explosion afterwards |
|
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
67
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 20:35:00 -
[11] - Quote
Tauranon wrote:Most systems don't support anomolies that earn more than L4 missions in highsec.
If you find the reward/time ratio to be too low doing an activity, then you should either stop doing said activity or re-assess your approach to the activity and see if you can refine it to be more efficient/faster.
I can outperform highsec L4 mission runners by doing nullsec relic sites ALONE. Just those are enough.
And you're trying to tell me that you can't beat a L4 mission runner when you have access to nullsec?
You are either: 1) Misinformed 2) Lying or 3) Really really really slow at farming.
Or some twisted combination of all three.
Tauranon wrote:There are no content that is better done multiplayer.
That's so false I don't even know what to say to you.
|
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
68
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 20:58:00 -
[12] - Quote
Tauranon wrote:Of course I can. I reserve a whole system for myself because of the rental system, which includes the gurista ded 6s. But 4 of those a month, hardly constitutes entertainment even if it does constitute income. I'll leave it up to you to figure out what happens if 5 of us lived here...
OK.
So let me see if I am understanding you correctly.
You have gotten yourself into a situation where you are only "allowed" to farm a singular system that you camp in because of a racketeering program that you are voluntarily participating in.
And you are complaining that this style of gameplay is boring.
I am shocked.
Please explain to me how this problem is at all related to the sov system? This is something you literally negotiated yourself into, it sounds like. You're voluntarily having a boring-as-crap time.
Consider moving outside of your system and farming more of null, finding better areas, and getting some decent pvp.... Do it with an alt, that way nobody can trace it back to you and you won't get "timeout" for violating your racketeering agreement. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
68
|
Posted - 2013.12.02 01:49:00 -
[13] - Quote
La Nariz wrote:ISD Ezwal wrote:I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them. Please refrain from discussing forum moderation. If you are perceiving a problem with ISD behaviour on the forum or are disagreeing with the way (your) posts are being moderated, please feel free to read the CCP policies and follow the procedure found under the header 'Complaints'. What do we do if we think there is an intrinsic problem with how the ISD acts, is run and selects new members?
I think you are poking the fire. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
71
|
Posted - 2013.12.02 14:34:00 -
[14] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Face the facts, "small groups" do not have any business being in sov null.
Sorry dude.
100% of nullsec is open to anyone and anybody.
I can fly my ship wherever I want, when I want. If it bothers you that you can't add padlocks to your gates, then I don't know what to tell you. CCP will never add padlocks to the gates, so you're just going to have to deal with the fact that people are going to be moving around in null who don't have sov. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
71
|
Posted - 2013.12.02 15:27:00 -
[15] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:and CCP is quite content with that.
Because it's completely irrelevant to the game who controls what. The game ticks on anyways. It's not something that actually matters.
Also, you can't "win" EVE....In fact, if the amount of whining on the forums is any indicator, goons seem to be losing at EVE. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
71
|
Posted - 2013.12.02 15:45:00 -
[16] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Can't win Eve...wow.
Correct.
[quote=Dinsdale Pirannha every other null sec group, every wh group, every FW group, and all of high sec, if they all rose up against the goons, in the end, the goons would win[/quote]
This is probably not even true, first of all. The same was said of BoB. Furthermore, it's irrelevant. Like I said, the game does not care who controls what.
It just does not matter. There's several pages of QQ, in this thread, some of which is even from goons, about how little they think a lot of their own sov matters....
And here you are saying people "won" at EVE.
|
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
71
|
Posted - 2013.12.02 17:39:00 -
[17] - Quote
La Nariz wrote:The easiest way to apply a quick fix to nullsec would be nerfing highsec. Remove station slots from NPC corp members, reduce the amount of highsec slots to the same amount available to unupgraded outposts, and only allow station slot access to people who have offices there. The rest of highsec production/research can be switched to POS. That would make production/research more viable for nullsec and can be scaled so production is worth doing in lowsec.
It also adds content to highsec as wardecs will be more significant because there are assets people can threaten/defend.
Bad idea.
All it would do would increase the cost of ships and mods, which would decrease the amount of pew-pew and PvP in general. Not good. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
72
|
Posted - 2013.12.02 23:55:00 -
[18] - Quote
La Nariz wrote:The resistance to this idea is people being unwilling to change and highsec refusing to give up anything for the good of them game then throwing a huge tantrum over the thought of change.
This is a strawman argument and is patently false.
I live and play in nullsec, and I disagree with you.
I don't think this would be good for the game. It would be bad for the game. Incredibly bad. As others have said, the income in nullsec is perfectly fine.. I don't go to nullsec for cookies. I go there for isk.
Not to mention that there are well established rental fees in the order of 1 - 10 BILLION isk per month, for a singular system, and people still rent those systems and make a profit doing it (or they would stop doing it...)
If there is some fundamental problem with nullsec, I don't think it has to do with the income potential. Definitely not.
|
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
72
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 00:12:00 -
[19] - Quote
mynnna wrote:You realize that 10 billion isk a month is about 14 million isk an hour, right? Saying that people "make a profit" doing that isn't really that impressive at all.
Wow. You don't know much about economics, do you?
Here's a hint: in assessing the cost of a situation like this, you can't just divide it out and call it a profit. That would be called a revenue, not a profit. There is then other complexities involved, such as the opportunity cost of spending 10b on it, logistics, shipping, movement, etc. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
72
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 00:19:00 -
[20] - Quote
Promiscuous Female wrote:did you miss the part where every major nullsec bloc had to create a gigantic rental empire to recover our income from the loss of the technetium gravy train or were you too busy sucking crokite to notice
I think you are hilariously misinformed.
The nerf hurt one particular alliance far more than anybody else, and it wasn't Goonswarm .
Also: don't be absurd. The rental racketeering program is generally about laziness and double income potential, more than anything else.
1) Charge people rent for a system. 2) Farm the same system with anonymous alts when they aren't online, or if you feel like a ****, even when they are online 3) Profit....Twice.
I don't know how anybody is stupid enough to get sucked into it, but with the population of EVE, there's plenty of suckers. Heck, scamming in Jita is still profitable from what I hear. |
|
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
72
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 00:26:00 -
[21] - Quote
La Nariz wrote:~Has no experience running a rental program,
~Only been in highsec corps/alliances,
~Claims to have better knowledge of economics than one of the top finance people in the CFC,
~Claims to have a better concept of history than the people that were in existence for it,
~Throws a ~Highsec Tantrum~ over discussing nerfing highsec.
Yeah you have nothing and are providing yet again another example of highsec people being completely unreasonable with their tantrums.
So you basically call me out on a bunch of random bullshit that is obviously untrue (unless you think this is my only account -- which would make you naive).
Not only that, you put it in italics, and bold.
And I am the one who is having a tantrum?
Stay mad. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
72
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 00:33:00 -
[22] - Quote
La Nariz wrote:You are having a ~Highsec Tantrum~ its okay we'll still be here when you finish. Tell you what here too I have more than one account and they live in highsec because they can make more isk there since highsec is far to good. Two can play at that dumb game.
I don't participate in highsec besides buying ships and selling loot from nullsec.
Where is this tantrum? |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
72
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 00:36:00 -
[23] - Quote
Stahlregen wrote:Pinky Hops wrote:La Nariz wrote:You are having a ~Highsec Tantrum~ its okay we'll still be here when you finish. Tell you what here too I have more than one account and they live in highsec because they can make more isk there since highsec is far to good. Two can play at that dumb game. I don't participate in highsec besides buying ships and selling loot from nullsec. Despite all evidence pointing to the contrary. We have this really handy response to these sorts of easily verifiable but ultimately and seemingly invariably disproved claims; ~citation needed~.
What do you want me to do, post screenshots of my wallet history? |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
72
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 00:38:00 -
[24] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Pinky Hops wrote:La Nariz wrote:You are having a ~Highsec Tantrum~ its okay we'll still be here when you finish. Tell you what here too I have more than one account and they live in highsec because they can make more isk there since highsec is far to good. Two can play at that dumb game. I don't participate in highsec besides buying ships and selling loot from nullsec. Where is this tantrum? If you need advice on how to successfully make ISK while in nullsec, hit me up in game. I will give you free tips. "all evidence may point to me being a highsec pubbie, and my posting is indistinguishable from that of a highsec pubbie, but i say im not. checkmate"
The truly ironic part of this is that I am currently in Goonswarm space.
I guess I should be paying rent. Oh wait - **** that!
|
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
72
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 00:39:00 -
[25] - Quote
La Nariz wrote:Full API or bust.
You first. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
72
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 00:42:00 -
[26] - Quote
La Nariz wrote:Pinky Hops wrote:La Nariz wrote:Full API or bust. You first. I'm not the one making the wild claims, you are.
You heard it here first folks -- living in nullsec and making isk is a wild claim!!!
******* wild. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
72
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 00:45:00 -
[27] - Quote
Promiscuous Female wrote:guys I am totally making so much money but you will just have to trust me on this one here is an emoticon so you know I am trustworthy:
I'm not claiming to be super space rich.
The only things I have pointed out are:
1) Nullsec is extremely profitable.
That's basically it. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
73
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 01:01:00 -
[28] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Yet there are still no answers to my question. If nullsec is so bad, why do people pay ISK just to be there?
Because it isn't bad. Nullsec rules in terms of an income stream. There are high value moons, every single PvE spawn is worth exponentially more than the highsec equivalent.
Pretty much everything you can do is more profitable in nullsec than in highsec...There's not that many exceptions I can think of. Perhaps manufacturing simple goods? Selling items?
I mean, selling goods in highsec (jita in particular) is always very fast/efficient, but highsec has always been a kind of trade hub...
The whiners in the thread screaming about how nullsec needs to be buffed are just typical childish players begging for free gimme gimmes. CCP has historically ignored this kind of crap, and I hope they continue to do so. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
73
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 01:09:00 -
[29] - Quote
Promiscuous Female wrote:Pinky Hops wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Yet there are still no answers to my question. If nullsec is so bad, why do people pay ISK just to be there? Because it isn't bad. Nullsec rules in terms of an income stream. There are high value moons, every single PvE spawn is worth exponentially more than the highsec equivalent. Pretty much everything you can do is more profitable in nullsec than in highsec...There's not that many exceptions I can think of. Perhaps manufacturing simple goods? Selling items? Set autopilot to Osmon Accept level 4 mission from Sisters of Eve money appears as if by magic
Yes, because there doesn't exist a corporation that offers those ships for less loyalty points and offers you more loyalty points per mission.
Hint: this corporation exists in nullsec.
Promiscuous Female wrote:incidentally the addition of bastion mode relieved a significant tank requirement from Marauders, and the introduction of the mobile tractor unit means that you don't even have to stick around to loot the L4
if it looks like a highsec buff and quacks like a highsec buff
Does bastion mode not work in nullsec? That's news. I also thought mobile tractors worked in nullsec. Strange. Perhaps you should file a bug report. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
73
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 01:18:00 -
[30] - Quote
Promiscuous Female wrote:Except for the fact that there are two (three? not sure if the third one got converted back) L4 agents in Osmon for SOE compared to all of one in X-7, meaning that a highsec dude is able to stack missions and earn way more purchasing power than the nullsec dude can
Boohoo. You are already in nullsec while you do this, giving you access to all manner of other revenue streams, and that singular L4 agent will give substantially more LP/hour than anything in highsec.
Also: SoE ships are a bubble. It's not like this profitability will last forever. The market is self correcting.
Promiscuous Female wrote:Bastion mode is suicide in nullsec but thanks for playing
Interesting. You must not have any friends or support, being in goonswarm and all.
Also, this still leaves the problem of mobile tractor units apparently not working in nullsec . Don't forget to file a bug report! |
|
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
73
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 01:24:00 -
[31] - Quote
I don't know a single mission runner who realistically claims that it's more profitable than nullsec activity.
It isn't.
I only see a singular group/alliance claiming that in this thread, which they seem to be doing under guise while they beg/ask for free gimme gimmes (which I find pathetic) |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
73
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 01:27:00 -
[32] - Quote
Promiscuous Female wrote:Pinky Hops wrote:I don't know a single mission runner who realistically claims that it's more profitable than nullsec activity.
It isn't.
I only see a singular group/alliance claiming that in this thread, which they seem to be doing under guise while they beg/ask for free gimme gimmes (which I find pathetic) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
Let's look at the development of this thread.
It started out as people talking about sov mechanics, which is valid.
It progressed into people talking about how "terrible" the income in nullsec was. All of the people with this opinion are from the same group.
This complaining/whining was packaged along with suggestions to make nullsec more profitable. This group happens to have a lot of control over various spaces of nullsec.
Aka: Begging for free gimme gimmes.
|
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
73
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 01:34:00 -
[33] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Pinky Hops wrote: It progressed into people talking about how "terrible" the income in nullsec was. All of the people with this opinion are from the same group.
as a reminder you're a highsec pubbie who is claiming their opinion is valid because they're secretly in nullsec
1) I don't play in highsec.
2) One of these days I am going to make a goonswarm insult generator. It shouldn't take too many lines of code. The only ones I ever see are "pubbie" "sperglord" and "go biomass"
3) I don't understand the "secret" comment. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
73
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 01:35:00 -
[34] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Pinky Hops wrote:I don't know a single mission runner who realistically claims that it's more profitable than nullsec activity.
It isn't.
I only see a singular group/alliance claiming that in this thread, which they seem to be doing under guise while they beg/ask for free gimme gimmes. You know one now. Smaller initial outlay, much less attention paid, nearly comparable income. (especially the LP)
Ah ha. Nearly. So, basically. it's not as profitable as nullsec.
Got it. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
73
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 01:37:00 -
[35] - Quote
Stahlregen wrote:Pinky Hops wrote:Promiscuous Female wrote:Pinky Hops wrote:I don't know a single mission runner who realistically claims that it's more profitable than nullsec activity.
It isn't.
I only see a singular group/alliance claiming that in this thread, which they seem to be doing under guise while they beg/ask for free gimme gimmes (which I find pathetic) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum Let's look at the development of this thread. It started out as people talking about sov mechanics, which is valid. It progressed into people talking about how "terrible" the income in nullsec was. All of the people with this opinion are from the same group. This complaining/whining was packaged along with suggestions to make nullsec more profitable. This group happens to have a lot of control over various spaces of nullsec. Aka: Begging for free gimme gimmes. ~citation needed~
Read the thread.
I could quote every single post in the thread as a citation, but that would just double the length of the thread and probably make the moderators angry. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
73
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 01:40:00 -
[36] - Quote
Promiscuous Female wrote: there's little indication that the addition of additional rewards is somehow going to lower this conversion rated
Markets are self correcting. Should I cite this?
I don't know how many people here have taken economics 101
Basically, profits lower as other people discover the profits and equalize while undercutting each other in a competitive market. Complex stuff, I know.... |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
73
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 01:44:00 -
[37] - Quote
Promiscuous Female wrote:Except for the fact that there are two (three? not sure if the third one got converted back) L4 agents in Osmon for SOE compared to all of one in X-7
I actually agree that this is somewhat bullshit - but it would be easily fixable by just giving an extra agent or two to the nullsec region.
God knows it would help lower the prices faster.
But this is such an incredibly minor thing in the grand scheme of the nullsec/highsec debate that it is scant worth mentioning. The EVE economy is ******* huge. SoE ships are a tiny tiny tiny tiny minuscule fraction of it, and their extreme profitability is at best temporary. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
73
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 01:46:00 -
[38] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Pinky Hops wrote:Promiscuous Female wrote: there's little indication that the addition of additional rewards is somehow going to lower this conversion rated Markets are self correcting. Should I cite this? I don't know how many people here have taken economics 101 Basically, profits lower as other people discover the profits and equalize while undercutting each other in a competitive market. Complex stuff, I know.... i did then i took economics 102, 201, etc because im not a moron who thinks economics 101 is anything but make-believe stories to get you started understanding how behavior can be modeled and the like and is no more true than the idea than the incredibly simplified stories you were told about chemistry in grade school and virtually every axiom is selected according to "what will minimize the amount of math we expect hungover college freshmen to do" rather than a relationship to the real world
I guess you did poorly then, because the situation is incredibly simple. It's a highsec mission hub. You can't keep people "out" of it -- meaning there's no complex economic tactics like buying out smaller entities and forming a monopoly or oligopoly. It's just an agent you grab a mission from which is publicly open to anybody.
The more people take advantage of it, the more profits will lessen for that activity.
Sorry if this is going over your head. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
73
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 01:50:00 -
[39] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Pinky Hops wrote: I guess you did poorly then, because the situation is incredibly simple. It's a highsec mission hub. You can't keep people "out" of it -- meaning there's no complex economic tactics like buying out smaller entities and forming a monopoly or oligopoly. It's just an agent you grab a mission from which is publicly open to anybody.
The more people take advantage of it, the more profits will lessen for that activity.
Sorry if this is going over your head.
i have yet to ever, once, see someone cite "econ 101" and then not say something immensely stupid about economics you have not disappointed
I have the same experience with econ 102 and 103, and likewise, you have not disappointed.
You are right. I expect prices to go upwards as more people compete to generate goods in a market. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
73
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 01:54:00 -
[40] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Pinky Hops wrote:I have the same experience with econ 102 and 103, and likewise, you have not disappointed. You are right. I expect prices to go upwards as more people compete to generate goods in a market. no one who ever took anything above econ 101 has ever cited econ 101 for anything at all because the classes are "you know all that stuff we taught you in econ 101? that was garbage, here is how it really works. also i hope you have managed to learn to do math with a hangover because we're no longer assuming away anything more complex than algebra" so i could believe your claimed economics experience, or i could infer from your "sure i understand what rack and peanut steering is i'm a well-known car engineering person" like statement decisions decisions
Reading this:
Zero content. Lots of ad hominem. Not surprised. |
|
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
73
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 01:56:00 -
[41] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:by the way, a little college tip for you: when you are trying to claim you actually took real classes in a subject remember that the more advanced classes increment the first digit
Still waiting on the content. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
73
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 02:02:00 -
[42] - Quote
Hi guys:
I'm going to claim that 1 + 1 = 3
Then when you ask me if I ever passed kindergarten, I will act with indignation and accuse you of bragging that you passed kindergarten.
|
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
73
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 02:05:00 -
[43] - Quote
Weaselior wrote: my truth-challenged friend,
ad hominem
Weaselior wrote:you kept trying to claim things on your own authority
citation needed
Weaselior wrote:while lying about who you are and what your qualifications are
citation needed. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
73
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 02:19:00 -
[44] - Quote
How the hell did that happen?
I defend myself from a bee swarm of (citation needed) and ad hominem, and all the sudden because of this, I now have been labeled as thinking highsec doesn't need to be nerfed.
This is insane, lol.
I never even made that claim. I think the only thing I said in that vein was that it probably wouldn't be good for the overall game if you /halved/ the amount of highsec production slots....
Ever since then, it was just a torrent of negativity, flames, and random spam directed at me and my character. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
73
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 02:41:00 -
[45] - Quote
Look:
The low prices of basic T1 ships/modules and honestly just ships/mods in general, especially so to new subscribers, which is what will keep EVE alive and relevant. Saying you don't want new players is like saying you want the game to die, so I hope nobody says that.
These ships and modules are generated by the industrial type people, a boring job from my perspective but some find it rewarding.
Any hindrance to their ability to produce stuff raises the value of the produced goods and therefore the amount of time required to acquire them...Unless they can "overcome" the hindrance, in which case it wouldn't be a hindrance at all.
It can be somewhat shaky because people can switch roles because of incentives. If all of the sudden production is competitive (higher reward due to increased hindrance), perhaps more people compete to be industrialists and miners, thus equalizing the cost.
But then we have the situation where we are drawing people away from PvP (what I consider to be the fun stuff) and more into boring **** like shooting rocks.
If you want to nerf highsec, fine, but then you would also HAVE to buff nullsec or lowsec, or both. If you just nerfed highsec, all you do is effectively increase the barrier of entry into the game (by increasing the price of goods across the board).
Industry should be efficient. A high amount of wealth in the game keeps prices down and keeps people exploding ships and not worrying too much about it. That's great.
I don't give a crap where the industry comes from in particular. Nullsec, highsec, whatever. It makes no difference to me. As long as it's there, functioning, efficiently, and ideally not requiring too much of the playerbase to feel like all they do is grind repetitive crap over and over.
I wouldn't even try to draw my friends in at that point. "Hey man, want to shoot rocks over and over and over and over?" The response would be NO. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
73
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 03:00:00 -
[46] - Quote
i don't even play in highsec. for the last time. i have no way to really prove this to you, but i can't think of anything i said that would suggest i am a "highsec player" besides the fact that i enjoy low ship prices.
that's about all i go to highsec for. i buy stuff. and sell stuff. then i leave.
if having the opinion that nerfing highsec alone and not buffing nullsec/lowsec is bad, makes me a "highsec player" then i don't really know what to say to you anymore.
it's not about highsec or lowsec or nullsec. it's about the EVE economy. it doesn't matter where the wealth comes from, but it needs to be there and it needs to be farmed. if you make industry harder in one area, you need to make it easier in another. straight nerfing highsec without providing an equivalent buff to nullsec or lowsec is a stupid idea.
saying otherwise is basically saying you want high prices on all goods. is that what you want?
what does this have to do with Sov, again? |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
73
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 03:12:00 -
[47] - Quote
I'd love to see more ISK sinked out of the economy, but the EVE economy is such that sinks and faucets are voluntary, which is a problem.
EG, you can choose to be an ISK faucet by running bottable, repetitive missions over and over.
A miner adds a lot more to the economy, as he generates true wealth (STUFF - ships, modules etc) - but that's still a boring as **** job, and very bottable.
I don't know the solution, but I do know that the solution does not involve making it more difficult for minerals and built goods entering the economy, wherever they come from. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
73
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 03:35:00 -
[48] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Highsec's risk/isk ratio is out of whack, because the intended risk in highsec has not been present for a long time.
I think it is important to take this apart and think about this for a second.
As stated, I agree. You can faucet in a lot of ISK in highsec through missions and bounties. But not all activity in highsec is a faucet. Production of goods, and trade, is actually not an ISK faucet. It's an ISK sink.
Trading in EVE is a lot like poker in a casino in a lot of ways. You can beat the other people and come out ahead, but the house still rakes your winning, even if only a tiny amount. You don't "create" ISK. You can /earn/ ISK, yes, but you aren't creating any. You actually lose ISK. The house/casino in EVE just deletes the rake, thus functioning as a sink.
Production is a gamble in a different sense. You add "value" to a material by altering it's state - but again, no ISK is generated, and you still have to sell your goods (sinking ISK in general), or even buy certain sets of materials (sinking more ISK).
HOWEVER
I don't dislike your idea, so don't take this post negatively - I think it would stop some behavior that I consider to be basically an exploit. I just view it as an unfinished idea. I don't like the concept of punishing people who are adding wealth to the economy.
Punishing the people who only add ISK to the economy is a perfectly fine idea.
|
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
73
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 03:57:00 -
[49] - Quote
I don't think nerfing highsec would hurt newbies.
I think nerfing INDUSTRY would hurt newbies -- and players in general!! Higher ship prices mean less pewpew and more grind.
If anything, moving industry into nullsec would make the game a lot more entertaining. But straight nerfing highsec doesn't do that.
Chances are, the nerf won't be enough to make it worth it in nullsec. Nullsec will still be crappy for industry because of the amount of logistics involved in selling the goods. Thus, prices are raised. Not only that, but everybody will still be highsec because why the **** not (from an industry perspective)
To make it even out, you would really have to straight buff the ability to produce **** in nullsec efficiently, and make it easier for players to purchase goods there or interact with the nullsec environment in general.
Which I think brings us back to the sov system. I'm a fan of a faster moving sov system with bigger bonuses attached and more options to publicly disburse said bonuses for profit...Bigger bonuses, faster production, better production, more pewpew, faster pace.
PLZ |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
73
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 04:22:00 -
[50] - Quote
Increasing conflict potential whilst reducing supply of industrial capability is a nerf.
Without compensating for that elsewhere, you are raising the price of goods. |
|
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
74
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 05:06:00 -
[51] - Quote
La Nariz wrote:So what part of shifting translates to reducing? I get that you're trying to say people will fight over industrial capabilities which will reduce supply. The same was said of ice belts and the price increase hasn't been ruinous as you claim this change would be.
Well, when you shift parts of highsec into tight controls, you reduce the quantity of trade as not everybody will have access to said trade.
This reduces one of the core isk sinks in the game. If you don't think a huge amount of ISK is sinked out of the game by a high quantity of trade -- you are wrong.
Meanwhile -- mission runners -- who are a huge ISK faucet, are unaffected by your change by and large, as once they have access to an agent they can freely run it over and over.
Furthermore, there is no incentive to target a mission runner by and large. They don't carry loot on them -- it is ISK and loyalty points. You can't gank it away from them.
When producing, you are a lucrative target. True -- you could hire freighter services to sustain the risk for you, but that will just bite into your profits over time, and eventually you should just transport yourself.
Serious industrialists undock. And they function as an ISK sink throughout. Not only do they undock -- but they pose a target that mission runners never will.
By screwing with highsec production without buffing nullsec production...and furthermore, basically leaving mission runner faucets untouched, all you do is increase inflation significantly. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
74
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 05:40:00 -
[52] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Not as much as you'd think. The really serious ones have Red Frog do it for them.
I'm going to bite into this because it just isn't true. After a certain point it is obviously more profitable to absorb the risk and haul yourself.
If anything, it is mostly the small/medium scale producers that rely on freighter services. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
74
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 05:51:00 -
[53] - Quote
and war deccing the NPC corps that are known to have many red frog freighter alts...
i am sure that would do nothing to prices. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
75
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 16:17:00 -
[54] - Quote
I think it's fairly well established that nullsec content generates wealth faster than highsec content.
Anybody who says otherwise doesn't actually play in nullsec. Of course, there is risk and logistics that can bite into the profits, but they are there to be taken. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
75
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 16:27:00 -
[55] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:S'No Flake wrote:Weaselior wrote:S'No Flake wrote: Because there are no intel channels in 0.0 alliances reporting any and every ship seen around. You just have to keep an eye on that blinky header and bubble the hell the gates for those ratting systems.
"what are defensive strategies made obsolete by changes in Rubicon, alex?" OMG a gang of inties are going to kill you after Rubicon? Neah, it's not a spike a players in local... a spike you could see it before when they used nullified T3s instead. I would love for CCP to do a SQL pull of ratting ships/freighters lost in null over a week, and ratting ships/freighters lost in high sec over the same week. Not that they could separate out ratting ships from PvP losses, but it would sure be interesting to really see where the dangerous space is, at least from the database's perspective, not some null sec cartel propagandists like their goon group.
In my experience, deep nullsec is about the safest area in the game, safer even than highsec (by a longshot) - simply due to the incredibly low population.
I am quite positive statistics would back this up. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
75
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 16:40:00 -
[56] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Pinky Hops wrote:
In my experience, deep nullsec is about the safest area in the game, safer even than highsec (by a longshot) - simply due to the incredibly low population.
I am quite positive statistics would back this up.
Your experience is wrong then lol. How can ANy space not protected by automated space police be safer than space where automated space police will come in and shoot you if you do the wrong thing. The whole idea that any part of null is "safer" than high sec is offensively dumb. The poster Infinity Ziona proved the potential danger of deep null by taking ONE badly fit tech3 ship (lol Shield Proteus) out there and killing a bunch of ratters single handedly, (that same tech3 ship would not have been able to gank 1 single high sec mission boat before being CONCORDED). High Sec makes people insane.
Perhaps because you can just camp gates and cargo scan people until you see one worth suicide ganking, then do it up?
People do this all the time. I was talking to a goon the other day who was bragging to me about how they PLEX fairly easily by just suicide ganking in highsec.
Go into the map and filter by "ships destroyed in the last hour" and glance at where those ship kills are.
Now go over to the deep portions of nullsec. Strangely there are almost no ship kills! Funny how that is. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
78
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 22:42:00 -
[57] - Quote
Jump freighters have accomplished two things:
1) Assisted in power concentration in nullsec by being a massive boon to medium/semilarge scale logistics.
2) Since transporting goods to highsec has become so trivial, people just load their JF full of **** and take it to highsec. There's no reason to bother manipulating the goods more than you need to. Straight to highsec in the JF winboat, and sell it there.
So yeah, I do agree that the balance of JF is pretty much off - the problem is, if you nerfed them, you would be obligated to nerf Titans as well, and that made not sit well with everybody. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
80
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 23:09:00 -
[58] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Even so, anwser the question, why do an expensive ship in null for the same isk you can make with the same ship in high sec rotected by logistics ships?
Look. Clearly you don't enjoy nullsec. So go live in highsec, which you think is so much "better."
Those of us who enjoy nullsec, and enjoy actively playing EVE and not running repetitive missions over and over, will continue to live and play in nullsec and make plenty enough ISK doing so. |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
80
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 23:35:00 -
[59] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Pinky Hops wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:Even so, anwser the question, why do an expensive ship in null for the same isk you can make with the same ship in high sec rotected by logistics ships? Look. Clearly you don't enjoy nullsec. So go live in highsec, which you think is so much "better." Those of us who enjoy nullsec, and enjoy actively playing EVE and not running repetitive missions over and over, will continue to live and play in nullsec and make plenty enough ISK doing so. LOL Translation: The imbalance doesn't matter, it's all about fun! Sorry, I have plenty of fun in null, and high and low. We aren't talking about fun, we're talking about balance, because good game balance fosters more fun. If you don't want to discuss that balance honestly, that's ok, but don't pretned I'm the problem. The problem is some of you guys agenda, bent on maintaining a status quo that benefits you to the detriment of your EVE playing peers.
But I don't believe there is any significant imbalance.
I find nullsec to be hilariously profitable.
Also: CCP doesn't have to listen to these insane claims. They can just straight look at the data and actuality of the situation. Don't they have a PhD economist working with them?
How much ISK do you need, really? 10b? 100b? a trillion? What are you going to do with it? |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA Apex.
84
|
Posted - 2013.12.04 03:32:00 -
[60] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Ah, confirming you haven't seen the price of machariels lately.
EVE IS DOOMED
Jenn aSide wrote:The above is so far removed from reality it should be it's own video game
Indeed.
|
|
|
|
|