And that won't change no matter how much Jenn and Baltec gets CCP to nerf HS income.

So all we are really talking about here is nerfing HS just because some people think life should be fair.

Your thinking process about what's good for Eve always results in a nerf to hi-sec. It would be bad for the Eve player base if such thoughts ever infest their way into the minds of the Devs. You've been playing Eve too long baltec to be able to view Eve from the perspective of new Eve players or casual players who wishes to play only in hi-sec.

You're only thinking of yourself. I know this may shock you, but believe me when I say that not everyone thinks the way you do. How many others do you think would agree with you for wanting to get rid of afking anoms in null sec? Eve is all about adapting to the current meta and it seems you are having trouble with this part. So instead of YOU adapting to Eve, YOU want Eve to adapt to YOU. I suggest you grab a dictionary and look up the words selfishness and self-centered.

So all we are really talking about here is nerfing HS just because some people think life should be fair.

I mostly play in highsec and I want a plex every time I log in! for overall game balance when it comes to what I (or really any individual player) want the devs are typically better off not listening. There are a few examples where players have posted good requests with good ideas behind them and some of those the devs have listened to and eve is usually better for it. However if they listened to some of the "players" ganking would be gone, solo pown mobiles would have been introduced years ago, and probably hundreds of other ridiculous requests I can't think of off the top of my head.

the head of the highsec carebear is one of the easiest to understand, and probably the last one that should be used when it comes to game balance. insert Finding Nemo seagulls here: mine mine mine I'll even link the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-3e0EkvIEM

looks like Jenn hit a nerve <- The laughing one, stupid non-gif emoticons.

2nd best, wormholes exist now. But yea, nothing one can say will convince certain folk of the rightness of good game design if that game design doesn't serve high sec. The fact that the status quo actually serves something other than high sec is lost on them.

adaptation is easy, in this case it is way too easy and makes for an uninteresting game... I have trouble seeing how pointing that out is selfish. and games that can be afk'd don't really make for good games, might as well go for high score on a screensaver

looks like Jenn hit a nerve <- The laughing one, stupid non-gif emoticons.

Baltec wants to remove faction missions from hi-sec to low-sec without another form of compensation for producing that level of income in hi-sec.

Lack of foresight in full display here. Most players play in hi-sec today because they are relatively new to the experience of Eve and are not ready to take on the challenge of low sec or players who prefer casual gameplay due to lack of dedicated time.

The only activity there is to do in hi-sec is mostly PVE, BUT do you think even this activity would be conducted if all you could make was a lousy 30 mill an hour? Hi-Sec players doing lev 4 missions should be capable of making 50-80 mill an hour per char. Anything less than this then it would start to feel like a 2nd part time job that doesn't pay enough.

Then un-blue some people.

Like I said way back at the start of this thread, null sucks and you're blaming it on HS instead of taking your leaderships to task on why null sucks.

We've already seen what happens when null income is the best, most consistent and easily farmable in the game; giant blue rental empires and rampant RMTing. Currently it's only a mild problem because the content can still be farmed with multiboxing but any buffs to nullsec (as have started creeping into the nullies posts) will worsen it again. Jenn's entire argument depends on multiboxing not existing. Multiboxing 3 alts in null will net you more isk but that's apparently 'not fair'. It's fair that you can make double the isk with 3 alts in null than people can running the content normally with 3 alts in HS. It's fair that you can just add more alts and make double the isk I will ever be able to make in HS. But people are lazy and risk averse in null and suddenly it's unfair what hisec is able to do.

The only metric that matters is how much isk a player(not character) can make because that will dictate the level of abuse possible for that content. So why is it every time I bring multiboxing up it's immediately dismissed or ignored?

We've already seen what happens when null income is the best, most consistent and easily farmable in the game; giant blue rental empires and rampant RMTing. Currently it's only a mild problem because the content can still be farmed with multiboxing but any buffs to nullsec (as have started creeping into the nullies posts) will worsen it again. Jenn's entire argument depends on multiboxing not existing. Multiboxing 3 alts in null will net you more isk but that's apparently 'not fair'. It's fair that you can make double the isk with 3 alts in null than people can running the content normally with 3 alts in HS. It's fair that you can just add more alts and make double the isk I will ever be able to make in HS. But people are lazy and risk averse in null and suddenly it's unfair what hisec is able to do.

The only metric that matters is how much isk a player(not character) can make because that will dictate the level of abuse possible for that content. So why is it every time I bring multiboxing up it's immediately dismissed or ignored?

We've already seen what happens when null income is the best, most consistent and easily farmable in the game; giant blue rental empires and rampant RMTing.

Because you can multibox incursions in highsec and make a staggering sum of isk that dwarfs any other pve activity.

Funny thing is I don't give a single care about incursions, I've only ever pointed out that excessive, or the wrong kind of nerfs has in the past backfired and CCP has had to undo them. None of the suggested changes (as few and far in between as they are) are sane and most of them will have knock on effects that will harm the game. Besides they're already changing incursions. What's the point of baying for blood if we don't even know what effect the planned changes will have in the first place?

There's that dishonesty again, as if I said the words 'not fair'.

There is, in the above post, a great bit of ignorance. To wit:

The "blue donut" problem formed AFTER 2009 ie after null sec was no longer the best place to make personal wealth. This is why, CCP did previously buff null by making anomalies persistent, but 90% of null anomalies suck and paid less than level 4 missions. But then CCP nerfed the anomalies system by tieing what spawned to system sec. Instead of turning null into something worth fighting for, it turned null into a RENTAL DESERT only worth taking so we could rent to people to dumb to really know how to generate wealth.

It worked that way because (like now) we had options. Instead of fostering conflict, the change CCP made fostered more people in faction warfare, more people in wormholes and WAY longer high sec incursion waitlists. In other words, CCPs efforts to revitalize the heart of EVE (war) were thwarted because CCP has given people way to many safe wealth generating options

The blue donut is what happens when sov null isn't worth fighting for, but still marginally worth cooperating (blue donut) over. Anize Onamara would do well to learn a bit of game history before making proclamations about things. Self serving proclamations at that.


Lastly. The multiboxing thing is dumb. Greedy people always think it's about total amount of isk (ie they think everyone is after the top amount of isk). Wrong, it's about isk vs time vs effort. WHY would I multibox 3 characters in null to make more that 220 mil when I can run ONE toon in space where I don't have to worry about watching local and make enough to make a plex (using plex for example) in a reasonable amount of time? THIS IS WHY lots of us have high sec (AND FW alts)., multiboxing isn't hard, but having to multibox while trying to protect THREE plus characters at the same time gets old. So off to high sec we go, because we have that "lower effort for about the same isk" option.

The mental lengths these people will go to to justify their abuse of broken mechanics is incredible. It's literally high sec lvl 5s all over again.

"lower effort for about the same isk"

Another bit of dishonest preaching, made worse by the fact that you're asserting this out of ignorance too. Not only that but that you're so hypocritical in what information and proof you choose to believe. You haven't managed to get to 250mill/h solo blitzing lv4s and burners but you take my word as gospel that it can be done. However when I say that doing so means you can't do anything else, that it requires as much if not more effort than multiboxing 3 characters in null you call me all kinds of nast, nasty names and slander my person up and down these threads. Extremely disappointing.

Talk about self-serving and self centered. I can't take a word you say serious util you can give me proof that you're able to get to 250mill/h solo blitzing lv4s. Until that time I have to unfortunately consider everything coming out of your mouth as self serving dishonestly and lies.

Which nerfs would those be? The most damaging things have always been buffs and new overpowered content. Tracking titans, tech moons, level 5 missions, original FW mechanics, original incursion income, anom buffs. All of them were delt with via nerfs of some kind or another. Nerfs infact tend to be the best answer to game issues.

Salvage nerf comes to mind. Concord LP (and the ability to exchange it). Super easy scanning mechanics which caused a rise in the exploration community effectively lowering the value of faction and deadspace mods/ships. It also made combat scanning so easy that you saw an increase in mission ganking/flipping. Removal of drone loot.

Kind of ironic that some hisec carebears come up with ways to min/max mission rewards, and nullbears who whine about it; trying to make it out that this is the norm.

OP made 108mil isk per hour using 3 toons. Three toons. 3 toons in nullsec flying AFK Ishtars make more than that in 1 hour of gaming with less effort involved. I can chain some FW L4 missions and make more than that. I can join an incursion and make more isk than that.

Bittervets. Get over yourselves and adapt. Lest the Dark Lord Jar Jar Binks decides to destroy you.

Salvage nerf comes to mind. Concord LP (and the ability to exchange it). Super easy scanning mechanics which caused a rise in the exploration community effectively lowering the value of faction and deadspace mods/ships. It also made combat scanning so easy that you saw an increase in mission ganking/flipping. Removal of drone loot.

Kind of ironic that some hisec carebears come up with ways to min/max mission rewards, and nullbears who whine about it; trying to make it out that this is the norm.

OP made 108mil isk per hour using 3 toons. Three toons. 3 toons in nullsec flying AFK Ishtars make more than that in 1 hour of gaming with less effort involved. I can chain some FW L4 missions and make more than that. I can join an incursion and make more isk than that.

Bittervets. Get over yourselves and adapt.

All of those things happened in low an null space too and all but scanning were very much needed and far from bad for the game.


Its players from null based groups that have figured out the vast bulk of the best ways to exploit the mechanics in highsec.


We have adapted, hence the problems. We have turned highsec into the cashcow that supports our nullsec linemembers.

A guide to specialized blitzing techniques. Takes a year to train to do it, and requires several billions of isk to get it rolling. Training for a stealth bomber takes less time and cost to start running FW L4s, but I don't see you complaining about it. Not to mention, training for a logi or DPS ship for Incursions takes less time and will net lot more isk, and you're not complaining about your preferred hisec activity.

And technically if you were to take Anize's guide and apply it to lowsec and nullsec npc space, then you would make a lot more, barring interruptions; but you know, if you got some good peeps you can easily overcome that.

And yet, you continue to whine.

If the various alliances weren't so tainted, one might be inclined to take some of what's being said at face value. It's hard to take claims of "high-sec PvE is too lucrative" seriously when these same alliances are literally drowning in ISK and supercapitals. Not a week goes by without some CSM, Alliance Tournament, Kickstarter, RMT or other scandal being brought to the forefront - so you'll have to forgive me if a lot of what's being proposed sounds and comes across as suspect.

High-sec Incursions are only run by a select (elite) few, yet the topic keeps rearing its ugly head time and time again. Why? Because they're near impossible to gank (or at least too much effort), and that makes null-sec alts sad.

And yet, you continue to whine.

This is the 1st mistake. We are individual PVErs. We are talking about individual pve, not about what alliances have or do.

Looking at a group rather than the individuals that make up that group is how prejudices work. I'm not TEST Alliance, I'm one guy who likes to pew pew npcs. If you don't believe what we are saying about imbalances, you can always take a ship to null when the owners aren't there (for instance, the Detorid Region when Russians are sleep) and see for yourself.

I don't know why what I'm about to say next is hard to understand. WHY WOULD WE GANK OURSELVES? I know I have an incursion alt, and if you go to TVP's teamspeak and ask, lots of people will tell you "yea, I play in null, this is how I get isk".

The rest of this is again dripping with the types of prejudices that are the real enemy of discussion.

And yet, you continue to whine.

null sec has a severe lack of content and that is something worth talking about. Press F10, and select pilots in space. I see a lot of empty wasted space. Players could be out there doing things, which creates more content as players are content for other players

if most players see that running missions in highsec is the main content worth doing... well there isn't really a point to eve any more.

I thought the appeal of null-sec was supposed to be player-driven content? Is it possible that null-sec in fact deserves the reputation and fate that befell it? Blue donuts, rental and moon goo empires, supercapital proliferation... There's one alliance in particular that seems to serve no purpose other than to further a real-world media empire and several others that would appear to be operated as thinly-veiled RMT schemes.

null sec has a severe lack of content and that is something worth talking about. Press F10, and select pilots in space. I see a lot of empty wasted space. Players could be out there doing things, which creates more content as players are content for other players

if most players see that running missions in highsec is the main content worth doing... well there isn't really a point to eve any more.

Except over the past year HS population has dropped severely and NS had a small increase...

So what is the problem other than whinny Null babies? They want people out of High Sec and it is happening. Just not fast enough for them?