Sure, I'll take a crack at it.

At their very core, the carebear is made of 2 things, that may or may not be in equal proportion.

Those things are Fear and Greed. Greed for assets, always more, always increasing. Fear of real players, who might not have strictly better combat skills, but more importantly have the will and ability to use them.

These two things combine together to create a mindset that quite simply cannot handle loss of the imaginary assets we all play with. But most especially, they cannot countenance that loss coming from another player. This both frightens and enrages them simultaneously, hence the bile and vitriol that comes out of them when they are confronted with loss.

This is called "tears", and due to a segment of the playerbase finding this misplaced rage to be hilarious, the extraction of said tears has become a primary industry in EVE Online. That segment that enjoys the verbal flailing of the carebears even does such things as put their various collections online, sharing stories and trading these tears among one another for amusement.

The carebears are not unaware of this, which only heightens their sense of being persecuted.

But for some reason, their behavior doesn't change. They don't see negative consequences arising as a result of their actions, but instead shift all the blame onto the existence of other players. They are unable to consider that they have done anything "wrong".

Which is why so very many of them are bound and determined to act as though this is a single player game.

I really isn't particularly controversial, unless you're a forums alt who stirs up **** without basis for disagreement, that highsec PVE-only players contribute nothing to the game except their continuous injection of ISK into the economy, causing inflation. They don't produce content. They just leach off what the game provides. About the only positive thing that can be said is that they still pay a sub fee (or buy PLEX which is basically the same).

I blame them as partially responsible for the poor newbie turnaround rate and overall poor new player experience.

Right around 80% of botting occurs in just 9 HS regions.

To me, that sounds like botters have pretty much abandoned Null.

Where in my post did you find me blaming anyone for anything? I'm just saying that the evidence supports the assertion that "botters have pretty much abandoned Null."

Botters put their bots where they can make the most profit. HS offers them several advantages over null (some general, and some bot specific), and no significant disadvantages since the income is about the same.

There are hundreds of empty manufacturing slots within 5 jumps of Jita.

We do, that's the problem. We want to build our things in our space but we are punished if we do that by the game mechanics.

We ARE entitled to the best.

It's not humor, it's the truth. The significantly greater amount of organization, work, resources, and time we have to put in to make industry work in nullsec entitles us to better than what you can get for nothing in highsec.

Your point being?

Or do you actually think I should let them ruin the way I play the game instead? Because, and no mistake, they're trying to. They've been trying to since before I even started playing.

Concord, crimewatch, insurance nerfs, nerf after nerf after nerf, and all to make the way I play the game harder and harder, tightening the noose without end.

And I'm supposed to believe that they couldn't manage to take a nerf themselves? I'm supposed to believe that they deserve to be left alone at this point? That I shouldn't seize every opportunity to hang them with their own rope? That I'm supposed to "live and let live" while they try to legislate me out of existence?

And all because they say "I'll quit" if the slightest talk of tipping the scales in my favor occurs? Because they say they'll flip over the checkerboard if they don't win?

**** no.

They are out here for more reasons than isk and some do think that you earn more in null.

Tell me, if null earns people more why do 80% of bots live in high sec?

Harder actually. In high sec you have to get the bot to do each mission, in null they only need to shoot the red crosses and dock/cloak when a neut enters local.

Whats that rage article about carrier fleets got to do with bots?

Pretty much the same in my case.

I see people all the time tell me that the way I (and many others) like to play shouldn't be allowed. I see changes to that effect having been implemented over and over in the past and even recently (ToS Gate, which they did their best to sweep under the rug with no resolution).

And I'd like some of that rolled back. Because compromise doesn't mean one side getting what they want all the time, ever. Which is what highsec has become, and surprise surprise, they still want more, like this.

I'm not a null sec player. Not anymore, anyway. Haven't been for a long while.

Can't you have an intelligent one?

I think you're confusing "it's possible to do it" with "it makes sense to do it".
It might be possible, sure, if we fill every single system with a factory outpost. But don't ******* tell me that requiring us to do so in order to get a decent industrial base is good game balance.

So it's not hard enough to live in null, CCP should definitely make it harder.
That will fix null industry.


...Are you ********?

Can I ask you to stop cherry picking and spinning of the facts? I play since 2007 and L4s, loot, salvage, etc was nerfed several times.

Nope.

The meta 0 nerf was to help industrialists who could not compete in the level 1 mod market due to drops.

The scrap nerf was to help miners who were being out mined by mission runners.

These nerfs happened in all areas of space.

Sorry man but there is a train wreck headed your way.

CCP has released figures that show that 80% of bots have, in fact, been found in High Sec. That release has been posted on other threads of this nature. Right now, someone is digging it up for you.

However, I don't know that the data supports that the player utilizing the bot is a full-time High Sec resident. Meaning that the bot owner could very well be a Null resident using the bot in High Sec to fund their other endeavors in Null.

I would support doing something about hi-sec profits. I do not support the suggestions of lowering profits across the board though.

I think getting rid of the insane hi-sec profiteering and promoting low/null/WH profiteering is best achieved by limiting number of accounts logged in at once. There has been a 12-barge botting setup that moved to my system recently and has pretty much taken over. No one can get a fair share of ores in the system as these bots are on right after DT, and finished within a few hours.

Remove the ability to open up more than, say, 3 characters at once. Bye bye hi-sec botting.

Amoms = 90 mil/hr on average

High sec level 4 missions = 100-120 mil/hr (Missions go up to 180 mil/hr)

Incursions 150 mil+/hr

Haha risk.

You are.

We will min max to get the most out of anything.

For example, we found out it was possible to make tens of billions in a matter of hours with FW when it was on sisi, CCP and everyone else it wasn't possible. We abused the living hell out of it, CCP nerfed it soon after when word got out how to do it.

100-120 is doable for a good chunk of level 4 agents, 180 is SOE and that might be going up a bit more when the BS arrive (depending on its stats).

Null has seen nerf after nerf to its income that have only impacted null. This has resulted in anom income falling year after year until it dipped below level 4 missions.

The level should be LS isk/hr + a risk % = HS isk/hr

They should be equal if you account for the added risk. That way people are free to choose where to go.

Though this still does not solve the way the big NS alliances have been/are treating people.

If by love you mean hate, pick on the smallest possible part and argue over it trying to bury the sensible analysis in pages of drivel, probably right.

CCP do have all the figures also I agree, but sometimes players need to see the figures themselves to understand things.

Another old, terrible, and defeated argument from a highsec pubbie.

"You just want to push people into null."

No I don't care where people live, I want it to be balanced. People who want to avoid pvp at all costs are not going to leave highsec and I have no intention of trying to get them to leave either.

How wonderful the ISDs or the forum ate my post about methods after I left to go do ~things~.

Kimmi that is a good start but the sample is way too small. We can make some inferences from it but, its not as useful as it could be.

Ideally you'd do something along these lines:

-Run missions for X amount of time per day,

-Run the missions at the same time per day,

-Do it for Y amount of days, Y should be >3.

-Pick the highest LP/isk corporation,

-Post a spoilered EFT text block of the skills and fit you're using,

-Record time to complete missions and travel time separately,

-Record isk reward, bounty reward, and LP reward separately,

-Do four different runs, blitzing and salvaging, full clear and salvaging, blitzing without salvaging, and full clear without salvaging.



This looks like a lot of work and it is but, good science takes good effort. Oh yeah finally put all this into a spreadsheet and post it for us.

I have no clue what your pubbie whine is about here. Do you have a problem with science?

There would be more targets and generally people would have much more fun if there was a larger incentive to live in low/null/whs. The only way this can happen is through the rebalancing of highsec, whether it's by making highsec worse or by making every other area of the game better, which essentially is making highsec worse.

Nah its more your "grr goons" and personal blinders that puts you off from doing anything in nullsec.

So basically you have plenty of repressed "grr goons" and its preventing you from visiting nullsec because.

CCP is right, even when they contradict themselves.

I don't think you do, especially if you cannot read that sheet where it shows exactly how much each anomaly was worth. This is literal intellectual dishonesty coming out of you. I posted the average of the anomalies, the exact amount of the anomalies, the total time, and the average time.

You're arguing with a scientist here now and you're calling it bad testing. I posted my method and the tools I used so it is 100% reproducible. I posted what controls need to be done both a negative: belt ratting and a positive: active battleship/carrier ratting. I constructed the data table so anyone can read it no jargon. Its 100% accessible and 100% reproducible experiment. Its a good test.

You're whining about an ESS which I will not use for this testing at all because it will negatively impact others in the CFC that also use the system and there is no ESS in highsec. You can easily convert the LP gained per hour to isk hour so there isn't a problem with it either. This also is discounting that I vaguely remember CCP stating that maybe 1000 ESS have been deployed, so most of nullsec is not using the ESS in the first place.

E: As of this time now you still have not looked at the sheet.

E2: Its the closest to blitzing L4s without loot/salvage that we can get with a nullsec test.

Where's the ego in the post you quoted?

Is "Irrelevant" in any way a synonym for "egotistical"?

Well, at least part of that is because it's fun. Remember fun?

just me or did 2 pages of this just disappear while i was reading it?