EVE Search - 100mil/h+ Lv4s, Breakdown

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Missions & Complexes

100mil/h+ Lv4s, Breakdown

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4703	Posted - 2015.10.27 21:37:04 - [1] - Quote First and foremost, check this thread out. I can't hold a candle to Anize, so kudos. This is pretty much the gold standard for blitzing L4s... This is what is achievable running standard Lv4 missions (no Burners) in a 0.6 system through non-SoE Factions. All missions were accepted (none were declined except Enemy). Minimal salvage (basically any juicy implant that drops). The results were based on a runtime of 1:22 with three characters all running Faction battleships and Ascendancy implants (so there was a few billion ISK invested). Security V and Negotiation IV. I started the clock from the time all three characters were logged in, so this includes time to form-up as well as any prep such as loading ammunition, accepting the first mission, etc. Yes, I do realize that I'm not "doing it right". Not everyone likes Burner missions, not everyone runs in true 0.5 systems and not everyone runs for SoE (again, see above link). And I do realize I'm using three characters, but that's kind of the point since dredging through standard Lv4s in a single character is rather monotonous. ..... ISK total: 99,377,780 (after a few million ISK in repairs because I was lazy). This includes a 20m ISK implant (single Storyline less the 2.5m ISK for the Kernite) and a chance Crimson Harvest where I sold a Blood Raider Abaddon SKIN for 2m ISK. I sold the salvage for market value @Jita (again, because I was lazy). Munitions costs were negligible (maybe 1-2m ISK). LP total: ~40,000 (approximate). Conversion rate with the Faction I'm using is about 1200 ISK/LP, so definitely on the low side although not abysmally low like some Factions. I'm fairly sure I could play around with various LP rewards to get this higher, but I'm erring on the side of what is easily achievable. Moving to a 0.5 system would bump up the LP compensation as well. Grand Total: 147m ISK / 1:22 or 108m ISK/hour. This is a list of missions (10) I was able to complete in the 1:22 timeframe: Pirate Invasion The Anomaly 1/2/3 Unauthorized Military Presence Gone Beserk Worlds Collide Pirate Invasion The Rogue Slave Trader Downing The Slavers I'm going to keep running this over the course of the evening to see if I can improve upon it. I know if I take a few MTUs along and come back later (provided they survive) I'll easily add another 25-50m ISK in salvage. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 481	Posted - 2015.10.27 22:30:07 - [2] - Quote I will be the first to admit that I blatantly cheat by running burners But this is good, more numbers gives a lot of context to what is possible in Hi-Sec. Especially useful to show people that want to blanket nerf Hi-Sec what's actually possible with the different HS income streams. Interested to see more numbers definitely! A guide to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1knVqZEH8qFY0eT44nMEFwcKd3t4PbgcZeuv58SVUxsI/edit?usp=sharing
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4707	Posted - 2015.10.27 23:29:42 - [3] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: I will be the first to admit that I blatantly cheat by running burners It's not cheating if you're doing it right. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4707	Posted - 2015.10.27 23:56:31 - [4] - Quote Here is an addition update based on an extended run of 1:53. A few caveats: First, I made a few dumb mistakes by going after the wrong mission objective in one mission and had a few unfortunate incidents where I bounced one or more ships off the acceleration gates (it happens). Second, I got rid of my light drones because I wasn't sure if they were having much of an impact due to lengthy lock times on frigates (turns out it did have a minor effect). Third, I didn't have optimal ammunition for the last mission but decided to grind through anyway (that probably extended it more than normal considering it was 5 rooms). Mission list: GÇó Duo of Death (this is where I screwed up the objective) GÇó Stop The Thief GÇó The Guristas Spies GÇó Worlds Collide (I didn't actually go back and clear one of the second rooms) GÇó The Rogue Slave Trader GÇó Downing The Slavers GÇó The Wildcat Strike (didn't clear the second room as there's not really much point) GÇó Cargo Delivery (just got the Quafe) GÇó The Assault GÇó Angel Extravaganza (not the optimal ammo type; didn't do the bonus room) GÇó Evolution (Storyline, and drones are a btch on this one) GÇó Blood Raiders Beacon (Crimson Harvest) Loot consisted of a crappy implant in Angels (not really sure why I bother; they're almost always crappy implants), another Blood Raider Abaddon SKIN and an Admiral tag from the destroyed carrier in Evolution. No repair costs this time (I decided to spring for a pair of cheap inefficient large armor repairers) and minimal ammunition costs (<2m ISK). ISK total: 142,776,735 LP total: ~45,000 (1200 ISK/LP conversion) Grand total: 196.8m ISK / 1:53 or 104.5m ISK/hour So even with a few screw-ups 100m ISK/hour is still attainable. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.*
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4707	Posted - 2015.10.28 02:12:31 - [5] - Quote Made a few tweaks to two of the ships in my fleet to have a bit less tank and damage and more damage application overall, and added a flight of light drones to each (minimal use in 1 or 2 missions). Running time was 1:03 (the shortest segment) but the most profitable of the group. Finally got some decent implant drops in this one. Mission list (7): GÇó The Assaut GÇó Cargo Delivery (did kill everything this time) GÇó Dread Pirate Scarlet (killed absolutely everything, including Scarlet twice) GÇó The Rogue Slave Trader GÇó Downing the Slavers GÇó Massive Attack GÇó The Damsel In Distress (only looted 70m Zor implant; worth it chasing after this chick occasionally...) ISK total: 78,498,606 Loot: 80,300,000 LP total: ~32,500 (1200 ISK/LP conversion) Grand total: 197,798,606 ISK / 1:03 or 188.3m ISK/hour Taking the average of the last three sessions: GÇó 539.6m ISK total (197.8m ISK, 147.0m ISK and 194.8m ISK) GÇó 258 minutes total (1:22, 1:53 and 1:03) GÇó 2.09m ISK/minute or 125.5m ISK/hour I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
DeMichael Crimson Republic University Minmatar Republic 52128	Posted - 2015.10.28 16:47:44 - [6] - Quote Thank you for posting this info. I agree, not everyone runs missions for SOE in 0.5 systems, declining a majority of missions in order to get Burner missions. Also not everybody does mission blitzing. In my opinion what you posted is much more feasible, basically the normal average for most players who run level 4 missions. Thanks again. DMC 'The Plan' \| California Eve Players \| Proposal - The Endless Battle
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 488	Posted - 2015.10.28 17:18:47 - [7] - Quote Choosing to do it this way is one thing, and that's down to how you want to play. More power to you for making an informed decision. However denial that a certain something is even possible is something completely different. You are free to choose what is 'normal', within the realm of possibility and nothing and no one is stopping you, only yourself. A guide to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1knVqZEH8qFY0eT44nMEFwcKd3t4PbgcZeuv58SVUxsI/edit?usp=sharing
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4714	Posted - 2015.10.28 20:07:58 - [8] - Quote Are the gates more golden on the other (SoE) side? I was understandably curious, so I ran a little experiment. I choose a 0.5 SoE hub way out in the middle of nowhere (or at least it sure felt like it) and spent the next hour ferrying various assets to their new forward operating base. Here were the results in a rather short running time of 0:41. Total ISK: 51,118,687 Total Salvage: 8,330,000 (one implant) Total LP: ~23,000 (1400 ISK/LP conversion) Grand Total: 91,648,687 / 0:41 or 134.1m ISK/hour All missions were within 1-4 jumps of port with the same "shoot everything" premise. Here was the short list: GÇó Dread Pirate Scarlet (looted implant) GÇó Stop The Thief GÇó Vengeance (this one took forever and probably skewed the results) Why the small list? Two words: travel time (I was almost starting to nod off in warp)... Even with a warp speed that exceeded 4.0 AU/s and a 6-second align time, I spent what felt like an eternity travelling (even to the 1-jump missions). From what I recall about the main SoE hub that most players frequent, this hub offers missions with fewer jumps on average. Unless you have a very fast ship (minimum warp speed of 4.0 AU/s), you're going to find these very frustrating. So are the SoE gates really more golden? Yes, it would seem that you can earn at least an additional 10-25m ISK/hour more in SoE space (provided you can meet the travel component). There is a trade-off, of course - namely that you'll be sacrificing damage application, tank and capacitor (among others) for warp speed. And you'll be quite a ways off the major trading hubs, which means you'll need a relatively fast transport to ferry your munitions and loot. As SoE systems are substantially more populated, there is a higher risk of ganking if you're running any blingy fits. And "shoot and loot" scenarios will find that there are more than a few players who have made a career of actively scanning down stray MTUs and killing them. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4714	Posted - 2015.10.29 01:04:37 - [9] - Quote Sacrificed some damage and damage application for a 20% boost in warp speed and inertia. Despite getting four (4) Zazzmatazz and Damsel missions I didn't get the juicy implant. Sometimes you get Bob; sometimes Bob gets you... Mission completion list (rounded up to nearest 30 seconds): GÇó 2x Zazzmatazz (0:04 and 0:4:30 to complete) GÇó Stop the Thief (0:05) GÇó Zazzmatazz (0:04:30) GÇó Attack of the Drones (0:07:30) GÇó Gurista Spies (0:07:00) GÇó Angel Extravaganza (0:19:00) GÇó Damsel (0:07:00) ISK total: 59,553,186 Salvage total: 1,050,000 LP total: 39,467 (x1200 ISK/LP) Grand total: 107.9m ISK/ 00:59 or 109.7m ISK/hour. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Ion Kirst KIRSTONE ALLIANCE 163	Posted - 2015.10.29 01:15:45 - [10] - Quote So let me see if I got this right. You used 3 players to make about 100M ISK? It seems like to me each player, or character, earned about 33M ISK. That may be another way to look at it, but that's what I see. -Kirst Always remember Tovil-Toba, and what was done there.

Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4714	Posted - 2015.10.29 02:15:06 - [11] - Quote Ion Kirst wrote: So let me see if I got this right. You used 3 players to make about 100M ISK/ hour? It seems like to me each player, or character, earned about 33M ISK / hour. That may be another way to look at it, but that's what I see. Correct. That's definitely one way to look at it. Another is that the other two characters boost your ISK/hour as you'd only be capable of achieving less than half this with a single character for this particular play style. Even with the loot and salvage route it's hard to break the 60m ISK/hour mark. Still another way is that if I play for an hour each day I'm able to easily PLEX the cost of the two additional characters. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Garrett Osinov Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 20	Posted - 2015.10.29 10:44:39 - [12] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Ion Kirst wrote: So let me see if I got this right. You used 3 players to make about 100M ISK/ hour? It seems like to me each player, or character, earned about 33M ISK / hour. That may be another way to look at it, but that's what I see. Correct. That's definitely one way to look at it. Another is that the other two characters boost your ISK/hour as you'd only be capable of achieving less than half this with a single character for this particular play style. Even with the loot and salvage route it's hard to break the 60m ISK/hour mark. Still another way is that if I play for an hour each day I'm able to easily PLEX the cost of the two additional characters. If you enjoy doing those missions, then I guess it is ok. But if you do those missions to make isk, this is completely wrong. It is been said many many times: BLITZ and do burners. You can make way more then you do even in high sec.
Ion Kirst KIRSTONE ALLIANCE 163	Posted - 2015.10.29 14:36:00 - [13] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Ion Kirst wrote: So let me see if I got this right. You used 3 players to make about 100M ISK/ hour? It seems like to me each player, or character, earned about 33M ISK / hour. That may be another way to look at it, but that's what I see. Correct. That's definitely one way to look at it. Another is that the other two characters boost your ISK/hour as you'd only be capable of achieving less than half this with a single character for this particular play style. Even with the loot and salvage route it's hard to break the 60m ISK/hour mark. Still another way is that if I play for an hour each day I'm able to easily PLEX the cost of the two additional characters. OK, I understand that those three characters are all yours, so you made about 100M ISK per hour. That is using 3 characters! Sorry I'm kinda underwhelmed. With only one character, I average about 56M ISK per hour. Which in itself is no big deal either. What am I not seeing(?) -Kirst Always remember Tovil-Toba, and what was done there.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 489	Posted - 2015.10.29 15:05:03 - [14] - Quote This is just information. Threads like these are there to inform, to say if you do X you get Y. That way newer players, or players who don't have that information can make an informed decision on what they want to do. Or even what's possible if you don't want to run burners/blitz/own a machariel, or if you have multiple characters, or if you don't want to run missions in certain areas etc. That said if you don't agree with Y you can go try and do X and see if you get something different. Put your time where your mouth is A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4717	Posted - 2015.10.29 19:42:42 - [15] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: This is just information. Threads like these are there to inform, to say if you do X you get Y. That way newer players, or players who don't have that information can make an informed decision on what they want to do. Or even what's possible if you don't want to run burners/blitz/own a machariel, or if you have multiple characters, or if you don't want to run missions in certain areas etc. Exactly this. In fact, I'd welcome and look forward to ways to improve upon any results. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4728	Posted - 2015.11.11 00:56:00 - [16] - Quote Updated this with a newer run. Here are the results: Standard non-SOE L4 missions (0.6 system). No blitzing or Burners - kill everything (even turrets). Minimal looting (only where there's a chance to drop an implant). Triple Rattlesnake setup in mostly T2 fits (you need to be "Johnny on the Spot" in selecting targets and applying damage). Note that the total is a bit lower as two of the characters only had Security/Negotiation III. ISK: 94.18m Salvage: 85.2m LP: 38,406 (1200 ISK/LP) Grand total: 225.48m / 1:28 = 153.73m ISK/hour Cons: Takes three characters. Pros: You can make a lot more ISK/hour with three characters - period. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 229	Posted - 2015.11.11 06:38:09 - [17] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: This is just information. Threads like these are there to inform, to say if you do X you get Y. That way newer players, or players who don't have that information can make an informed decision on what they want to do. Or even what's possible if you don't want to run burners/blitz/own a machariel, or if you have multiple characters, or if you don't want to run missions in certain areas etc. Exactly this. In fact, I'd welcome and look forward to ways to improve upon any results. What he's saying is that he can make that 100 mill an hour running anoms in null sec using only one Rattlesnake. It's still good that high-sec does have a income stream. The cons are is that it requires multi-chars and not completely consistent unlike null sec that provides a constant isk faucet running anoms while making 100 mill isk an hour using only one char.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4728	Posted - 2015.11.11 07:28:53 - [18] - Quote Well, it comes down to risk vs. reward. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 16903	Posted - 2015.11.11 11:23:59 - [19] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: What he's saying is that he can make that 100 mill an hour running anoms in null sec using only one Rattlesnake. It's still good that high-sec does have a income stream. The cons are is that it requires multi-chars and not completely consistent unlike null sec that provides a constant isk faucet running anoms while making 100 mill isk an hour using only one char. If you blitz highsec level 3 missions using a t2 fitted mach you can hit 80-90 mil an hour and you can do this all day every day without interruptions like you get in null. The best income right now via shooting comes from highsec, the only reason anoms are done is because you can run them afk although afk income will take a large hit when carriers lose their ability to use drones next year. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 542	Posted - 2015.11.11 11:32:47 - [20] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: What he's saying is that he can make that 100 mill an hour running anoms in null sec using only one Rattlesnake. It's still good that high-sec does have a income stream. The cons are is that it requires multi-chars and not completely consistent unlike null sec that provides a constant isk faucet running anoms while making 100 mill isk an hour using only one char. If you blitz highsec level 3 missions using a t2 fitted mach you can hit 80-90 mil an hour and you can do this all day every day without interruptions like you get in null. The best income right now via shooting comes from highsec, the only reason anoms are done is because you can run them afk although afk income will take a large hit when carriers lose their ability to use drones next year. We've actually been having trouble hitting the 80-90mill mark with lv3s. Lv4s/burners can net you 200mill+ but requires about 3-4 times the initial isk capital that a carrier would and unless you want to replace ships regularly you can only run a single character. more and you'd end up exploding ships due to mistakes. The advantage in null is you can stack toons without much penalty. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier

Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 702	Posted - 2015.11.11 13:05:32 - [21] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: What he's saying is that he can make that 100 mill an hour running anoms in null sec using only one Rattlesnake. It's still good that high-sec does have a income stream. The cons are is that it requires multi-chars and not completely consistent unlike null sec that provides a constant isk faucet running anoms while making 100 mill isk an hour using only one char. If you blitz highsec level 3 missions using a t2 fitted mach you can hit 80-90 mil an hour and you can do this all day every day without interruptions like you get in null. The best income right now via shooting comes from highsec, the only reason anoms are done is because you can run them afk although afk income will take a large hit when carriers lose their ability to use drones next year. And in Null you and your alts can run anoms semi-afk making 100mil per hour of direct isk never having to deal with markets, LP conversions, building, hauling and you always know when someone comes into local they are there to kill you, instead of the anonymity of the masses that comes with guessing who the gank alt is in high sec. So tell me again what they are doing to nerf Rattlesnakes? CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 16903	Posted - 2015.11.11 13:13:33 - [22] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: And in Null you and your alts can run anoms semi-afk making 100mil per hour of direct isk never having to deal with markets, LP conversions, building, hauling and you always know when someone comes into local they are there to kill you, instead of the anonymity of the masses that comes with guessing who the gank alt is in high sec. So tell me again what they are doing to nerf Rattlesnakes? To hit that income in null requires a ratting carrier or pimp vindicator and no interruption. Converting LP takes no time at all, building is automatic and takes all of 5 minutes to set up, hauling also takes very little time once a week or even once a month and selling can be done remotely while you run missions. Chances of being ganked in highsec are next to nill unless you officer fit. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 542	Posted - 2015.11.11 13:28:13 - [23] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: And in Null you and your alts can run anoms semi-afk making 100mil per hour of direct isk never having to deal with markets, LP conversions, building, hauling and you always know when someone comes into local they are there to kill you, instead of the anonymity of the masses that comes with guessing who the gank alt is in high sec. So tell me again what they are doing to nerf Rattlesnakes? To hit that income in null requires a ratting carrier or pimp vindicator and no interruption. Converting LP takes no time at all, building is automatic and takes all of 5 minutes to set up, hauling also takes very little time once a week or even once a month and selling can be done remotely while you run missions. Chances of being ganked in highsec are next to nill unless you officer fit. Quite a few errors there. I thought Goons prided themselves on accuracy. First off, while converting of LP does indeed not take any time it still needs to be shipped to the market. I myself am happy to take a hit to my isk/h and have other people do the hauling but that is something to take into account. Hauling ships regularly get ganked between the various mission hubs, I tend to see multiple wrecks on gates any time I go off to Amarr or Jita, dodged a few attempts myself as well. Remember, in HS you're not protected, you're avenged. In NS you're protected. Big difference If you look at the best system to do these kinds of things, Lanngisi for example, it is not in the same region as either of the two biggest trade hubs (Amarr and Jita) so no, you can't do selling remotely either. Ganking of faction and dedspace fit mission boats is a regular occurrence, as in daily. No really check the killboards. Don't need officer fit ships to become a gank target. Nullsec income is almost exclusively raw isk while Lv4 ission blitzing is almost no raw isk once you convert the LP/isk into faction modules. This is ok though because of the somewhat more difficult moving of stuff from null to high. It does make it a dangerous proposition to just flat out increase isk rewards in null. You also haven't addressed the issue that to reach the 200mill+ you're looking at 6-8bill in initial capital while in null you're only looking at a 2bill to 2.5bill ratting carrier for 100mill was it? just add more alts, that's what makes null different and that's ok too. While I appreciate the fine art of Goon misdirection and misinformation and propaganda, all of the arguments have been covered dozens of times and is not what this thread is about. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 702	Posted - 2015.11.11 13:44:08 - [24] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: And in Null you and your alts can run anoms semi-afk making 100mil per hour of direct isk never having to deal with markets, LP conversions, building, hauling and you always know when someone comes into local they are there to kill you, instead of the anonymity of the masses that comes with guessing who the gank alt is in high sec. So tell me again what they are doing to nerf Rattlesnakes? To hit that income in null requires a ratting carrier or pimp vindicator and no interruption either from enemy ships entering local or competition from blues for the limited anoms. Converting LP takes no time at all, building is automatic and takes all of 5 minutes to set up, hauling also takes very little time once a week or even once a month and selling can be done remotely while you run missions. Chances of being ganked in highsec are next to nill unless you officer fit. With two characters in T2 Rattles you can easily hit 80-100mil isk per hour each in Null running Anoms. That initial investment is well under that to run Burners in efficiency and a fraction of the fit needed to run Incursions well. You will also make as much as both of those activities. Burners require you to be at the mercy of the LP market and Jita market. It requires a little more critical thinking and effort. Null sec gives direct wallet ticks. Incursions end every few days and often there is a period where there are none to run. Also if you get unlucky with your contests you end up simply fueling some other guys numbers instead of your own. It also requires you to deal with LP and markets. So, spin it anyway you want. You have the ability to make easier, less effort isk in relative safety of your intel channels and blue donut pacts with lesser investment and the occasional big score pay day. But you don't want to hear that, so I am talking to a rock. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 16903	Posted - 2015.11.11 18:30:43 - [25] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: Quite a few errors there. I thought Goons prided themselves on accuracy. First off, while converting of LP does indeed not take any time it still needs to be shipped to the market. I myself am happy to take a hit to my isk/h and have other people do the hauling but that is something to take into account. Hauling ships regularly get ganked between the various mission hubs, I tend to see multiple wrecks on gates any time I go off to Amarr or Jita, dodged a few attempts myself as well. Remember, in HS you're not protected, you're avenged. In NS you're protected. Big difference I use a speed fitted blockade runner, warps like an intercepter and its impossible to catch in highsec if flown correctly. Anize Oramara wrote: If you look at the best system to do these kinds of things, Lanngisi for example, it is not in the same region as either of the two biggest trade hubs (Amarr and Jita) so no, you can't do selling remotely either. Use an alt to sell, either on the same account or alt account. Doesn't even take 5 minutes to update sell orders. Anize Oramara wrote: Ganking of faction and dedspace fit mission boats is a regular occurrence, as in daily. No really check the killboards. Don't need officer fit ships to become a gank target. You dont need those mods, the only bling you ever need are faction damage mods and even those are optional. Bling is simply not needed and t2 mission running ships with a smattering of faction damage mods are simply not going to be a viable target. You are more likely to die by falling asleep running the mission than being ganked. Anize Oramara wrote: Nullsec income is almost exclusively raw isk while Lv4 ission blitzing is almost no raw isk once you convert the LP/isk into faction modules. This is ok though because of the somewhat more difficult moving of stuff from null to high. It does make it a dangerous proposition to just flat out increase isk rewards in null. To get the very best income you have to use the ESS, which rewards you partly in LP and unlike highsec it can be raided/blown up. Anize Oramara wrote: You also haven't addressed the issue that to reach the 200mill+ you're looking at 6-8bill in initial capital while in null you're only looking at a 2bill to 2.5bill ratting carrier for 100mill was it? just add more alts, that's what makes null different and that's ok too. While I appreciate the fine art of Goon misdirection and misinformation and propaganda, all of the arguments have been covered dozens of times and is not what this thread is about. To get the anoms requires holding sov and deploying infrastructure which are a lot more expensive plus you have to defend it, something highsec doesn't need to worry about. When you start defending your mission running system with 60 billion isk worth of assets then you can start comparing prices. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 16903	Posted - 2015.11.11 18:43:38 - [26] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: With two characters in T2 Rattles you can easily hit 80-100mil isk per hour each in Null running Anoms. That initial investment is well under that to run Burners in efficiency and a fraction of the fit needed to run Incursions well. You will also make as much as both of those activities. If you are earning the same then clearly burners and level 4s are the better option because you get concord protection while running them and no interruptions or competition. Market McSelling Alt wrote: Burners require you to be at the mercy of the LP market and Jita market. It requires a little more critical thinking and effort. Null sec gives direct wallet ticks. I have a tool that tells me instantly what to spend my LP on. Market McSelling Alt wrote: Incursions end every few days and often there is a period where there are none to run. Also if you get unlucky with your contests you end up simply fueling some other guys numbers instead of your own. It also requires you to deal with LP and markets. Yet incursion income dwarfs the total mission payouts despite the fact that only a fraction of people run incursions compared to missions. Market McSelling Alt wrote: So, spin it anyway you want. You have the ability to make easier, less effort isk in relative safety of your intel channels and blue donut pacts with lesser investment and the occasional big score pay day. But you don't want to hear that, so I am talking to a rock. When was the last time you fought a trillion isk war against someone else to control your highsec missions? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 543	Posted - 2015.11.11 18:50:32 - [27] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Use an alt to sell, either on the same account or alt account. Doesn't even take 5 minutes to update sell orders. If you use the same account then you can't update sell orders and mission at the same time. If you use an alt then your isk/h is halved whereas if you use an alt in null your isk is doubled. You're changing from what you originally said, moving the goalposts. baltec1 wrote: You dont need those mods, the only bling you ever need are faction damage mods and even those are optional. Bling is simply not needed and t2 mission running ships with a smattering of faction damage mods are simply not going to be a viable target. You are more likely to die by falling asleep running the mission than being ganked. I agree completely, you don't need those mods, however that's not the point now is it? Ships that are NOT officer fit are ganked daily in just the system I mission from. There are dozens of other mission hubs and the surrounding systems. You're changing from what you originally said, moving the goalposts. baltec1 wrote: To get the very best income you have to use the ESS, which rewards you partly in LP and unlike highsec it can be raided/blown up. I am well aware of the ESS and exactly how it functions, used it for months when I was in null. The LP is gives is a small amount and your income isn't impacted by much even if you decide to not use it. In fact your income is eventually increased if you use it long enough over what you were making before the ESS iirc. The majority of your income however is still in raw isk. baltec1 wrote: To get the anoms requires holding sov and deploying infrastructure which are a lot more expensive plus you have to defend it, something highsec doesn't need to worry about. When you start defending your mission running system with 60 billion isk worth of assets then you can start comparing prices. You're in an organized alliance with thousands of members with Tax, Moon goo, supers and all kinds of other toys that help support that infrastructure. I get it, null is different to HS, that's what I've been saying. Part of that is that it's easier to ramp up income to well over what is possible in HS. And that's FINE because you need to be able to do that. I'm not advocating a nerf to null so untwist those undies. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 12916	Posted - 2015.11.11 18:52:12 - [28] - Quote Firstly, nice seeing you the other night in Wicked Creek Baltec. I took a potshot at your Mega hoping to be on your kill mail, then you up and didn't die. Next time Baltec, next time... And second, I thing you know it's no use arguing with these people. Like Malcanis likes to say (which was lifted off some dead guy) GÇ£It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.GÇ¥ . The imbalance is well documented (even recently, with CCP Quant expressing surprise at how few people Incursion why also generating the 3rd largest isk faucet). I've described it myself time and again, but they don't want to hear it, because it doesn't fit their prejudices (against null sec). So i stopped talking to them about it, and started talking directly to CCP at player events. At the end of the day, randoms on some forum don't have to acknowledge objective reality. It would be nice to see some honesty for a change, but at the end of the day, it's not nessacary.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 543	Posted - 2015.11.11 18:57:56 - [29] - Quote baltec1 wrote: If you are earning the same then clearly burners and level 4s are the better option because you get concord protection while running them and no interruptions or competition. Concord is not protection, it's punishment. if someone wants to gank you concord will not stop them. Come on, this is basic Eve stuff. baltec1 wrote: Yet incursion income dwarfs the total mission payouts despite the fact that only a fraction of people run incursions compared to missions. Incursion income is a little messed up but while a small pool of people are profiting hugely from it (probably plenty of nullsec player's alts) the effect on eve as a whole is not bad enough to justify canning it completely. CCP is already working on it from what I've been able to gather. I have my doubts if it'll work since if the replacement to Sansha incursions aren't profitable enough then no one's gonna bother running them. baltec1 wrote: When was the last time you fought a trillion isk war against someone else to control your highsec missions? What, you mean as a solo player? Come on, you're not even comparing two different types of food here never mind apples to apples. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 543	Posted - 2015.11.11 19:03:06 - [30] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Firstly, nice seeing you the other night in Wicked Creek Baltec. I took a potshot at your Mega hoping to be on your kill mail, then you up and didn't die. Next time Baltec, next time... And second, I thing you know it's no use arguing with these people. Like Malcanis likes to say (which was lifted off some dead guy) GÇ£It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.GÇ¥ . The imbalance is well documented (even recently, with CCP Quant expressing surprise at how few people Incursion why also generating the 3rd largest isk faucet). I've described it myself time and again, but they don't want to hear it, because it doesn't fit their prejudices (against null sec). So i stopped talking to them about it, and started talking directly to CCP at player events. At the end of the day, randoms on some forum don't have to acknowledge objective reality. It would be nice to see some honesty for a change, but at the end of the day, it's not nessacary. That sure is an impressive amount of character attacks on the whole of hi-sec you managed there Jenn . A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier

Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 12916	Posted - 2015.11.11 19:06:26 - [31] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: Firstly, nice seeing you the other night in Wicked Creek Baltec. I took a potshot at your Mega hoping to be on your kill mail, then you up and didn't die. Next time Baltec, next time... And second, I thing you know it's no use arguing with these people. Like Malcanis likes to say (which was lifted off some dead guy) GÇ£It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.GÇ¥ . The imbalance is well documented (even recently, with CCP Quant expressing surprise at how few people Incursion why also generating the 3rd largest isk faucet). I've described it myself time and again, but they don't want to hear it, because it doesn't fit their prejudices (against null sec). So i stopped talking to them about it, and started talking directly to CCP at player events. At the end of the day, randoms on some forum don't have to acknowledge objective reality. It would be nice to see some honesty for a change, but at the end of the day, it's not nessacary. That sure is an impressive amount of character attacks on the whole of hi-sec you managed there Jenn. Definitely taking notes. Where exactly did i say anything about the whole of High Sec? Also, you realize this defensive reaction you just had prove my point right? You and the Alt (among others, again, no one is saying anything about all of high sec) aren't interested in the truth of the matter , a trivial matter regarding a video game to boot. Like I said, it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things (CCP is starting to recognize the situation we've been telling them about for years), just saying that sometimes it's nice when people can at least acknowledge that they understand they are profiting from something that's not quite right. Nice is not nessacary.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 16903	Posted - 2015.11.11 19:08:10 - [32] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: If you use the same account then you can't update sell orders and mission at the same time. If you use an alt then your isk/h is halved whereas if you use an alt in null your isk is doubled. You're changing from what you originally said, moving the goalposts. It takes 5 minutes to log out your main/alt, log on a market alt, change prices, log out and back onto the main. Anize Oramara wrote: I agree completely, you don't need those mods, however that's not the point now is it? Ships that are NOT officer fit are ganked daily in just the system I mission from. There are dozens of other mission hubs and the surrounding systems. You're changing from what you originally said, moving the goalposts. I said t2 ships dont get gabnked, said again t2 ships dont get ganked and I'll tell you again now, t2 ships wont get ganked. Dont put pointless bling on your ship and it will live forever. Anize Oramara wrote: I am well aware of the ESS and exactly how it functions, used it for months when I was in null. The LP is gives is a small amount and your income isn't impacted by much even if you decide to not use it. In fact your income is eventually increased if you use it long enough over what you were making before the ESS iirc. The majority of your income however is still in raw isk. 100 mil in LP is the same as 100 mil in isk. Infact the LP system is far better than being pain in raw isk as it adapts to inflation. Anize Oramara wrote: You're in an organized alliance with thousands of members with Tax, Moon goo, supers and all kinds of other toys that help support that infrastructure. I get it, null is different to HS, that's what I've been saying. Part of that is that it's easier to ramp up income to well over what is possible in HS. And that's FINE because you need to be able to do that. I'm not advocating a nerf to null so untwist those undies. It actually isn't possible to beat highsec for income. Even using a carrier you are earning only a little more from anoms than is possible from level 3 missions in highsec. Nullsec hasn't had the best income for 5 years now. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 543	Posted - 2015.11.11 19:10:44 - [33] - Quote Did you even bother to read what I said regarding incursions? Also I don't think there's much of anything I Alt agree on, ever. In fact lumping me and him into the same goup is probably the most telling and hilarious thing in your last two posts haha. Quote: These people A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 543	Posted - 2015.11.11 19:19:56 - [34] - Quote baltec1, you are crafting strawmans left and right and twisting words like a master wordsmith. Masterfully dodging everything I say too. Doesn't matter, the aim is never to convince you, only to put the facts on the table so others can make up their own minds. Once one party starts leaving the facts behind, the argument has lost it's purpose. Maybe Alt will play with you. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 12916	Posted - 2015.11.11 19:22:13 - [35] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: Did you even bother to read what I said regarding incursions? Incursions are no longer the most broken things in high sec. You've personally documented the thing that is, it's in your sig. Quote: Also I don't think there's much of anything I Alt agree on, ever. In fact lumping me and him into the same goup is probably the most telling and hilarious thing in your last two posts haha. You are agreeing right now. Further, You agree with him every time you take a page from his play book and gloss over the costs and context of pve in null vs what you do in high sec. ie you mention the costs in time and isk for skill training and acquiring ships needed to blitz missions for 200 mil isk per hour (side note, he only disagrees on the isk/hr thing because he doesn't want people to think you can actually make isk in high sec), while not acknowledging the ongoing and continual cost to null sec players in terms of either isk or real life money to maintain multiple alts to just barely reach the same isk.hr you do with one character... That's pure Market McSelling Alt thinking if ever there was such a thing.. Quote: These people And where did I say "those people"? Lying is also a Market McSelling Alt thing that you just did...
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 543	Posted - 2015.11.11 19:29:50 - [36] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Incursions are no longer the most broken things in high sec. You've personally documented the thing that is, it's in your sig. There is a hardcap to what I do, I've said that multiple times. Doing it with more than one character is asking for very, very expensive lossmails. Incursions and nullsec ratting (and even wormholes) is consistently multiboxed with a far higher isk cap. I mean I multiboxed them fine, all three. Quote: You are agreeing right now. Further, You agree with him every time you take a page from his play book and gloss over the costs and context of pve in null vs what you do in high sec. ie you mention the costs in time and isk for skill training and acquiring ships needed to blitz missions for 200 mil isk per hour (side note, he only disagrees on the isk/hr thing because he doesn't want people to think you can actually make isk in high sec), while not acknowledging the ongoing and continual cost to null sec players in terms of either isk or real life money to maintain multiple alts to just barely reach the same isk.hr you do with one character... That's pure Market McSelling Alt thinking if ever there was such a thing.. I already addressed the nullsec ongoing costs and the fact that you as part of a giant alliance have multiple income streams to cover them. Jenn aSide wrote: Quote: These people And where did I say "those people". Lying is also a Market McSelling Alt thing that you just did... Jenn aSide wrote: And second, I thing you know it's no use arguing with these people. Like Malcanis likes to say (which was lifted off some dead guy) GÇ£It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.GÇ¥ . The imbalance is well documented (even recently, with CCP Quant expressing surprise at how few people Incursion why also generating the 3rd largest isk faucet). A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 16903	Posted - 2015.11.11 19:31:21 - [37] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: [ Concord is not protection, it's punishment. if someone wants to gank you concord will not stop them. Come on, this is basic Eve stuff. They protect in the same way nukes do. Anize Oramara wrote: What, you mean as a solo player? Come on, you're not even comparing two different types of food here never mind apples to apples. Feel free to lump in as many highsec bears as you wish, Simple fact hre is this so called risk free null income comes on the back of not only hundreds of billions of isk worth of infrastructure but also spending trillions in ship replacements. Highsec set up and running costs are nothing in comparison. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 16903	Posted - 2015.11.11 19:32:35 - [38] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Firstly, nice seeing you the other night in Wicked Creek Baltec. I took a potshot at your Mega hoping to be on your kill mail, then you up and didn't die. Next time Baltec, next time... Got it out in 20% shields but died 7 jumps out to a random gang Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 12916	Posted - 2015.11.11 19:50:48 - [39] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: There is a hardcap to what I do, I've said that multiple times. Doing it with more than one character is asking for very, very expensive lossmails. Incursions and nullsec ratting (and even wormholes) is consistently multiboxed with a far higher isk cap. I mean I multiboxed There is a 'hard cap' to what you do maybe. There is no 'hard cap' (or a lot lower one) to other ways to maximize high sec pve isk making. I know, I was the guy running incursions while running FoF missile ravens and drakes for missions and high sec anomalies. The POINT being that what you do, in high sec, with one character with guaranteed CONCORD intervention is someone looks at you wrong, is extremely broken. It's simply, mechanically impossible to make what you make with one character in a sub cap in sov null or wormhole space. It is theoretically possible to do it (and better) in low sec and npc null till you consider the lack of CONCORD response. A more honest way to go would be to acknowledge how bad this is for the game (even bad for high sec itself, because many of those people abusing high sec and thus depressing the LP markets are null alts, same as in FW). But you can't do that. Quote: I already addressed the nullsec ongoing costs and the fact that you as part of a giant alliance have multiple income streams to cover them. What alliance gives you isk for plex for multiple isk making alts? When you can name one, I'll go there. Also, these <= Those.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4730	Posted - 2015.11.11 20:36:03 - [40] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: There is a hardcap to what I do, I've said that multiple times. Doing it with more than one character is asking for very, very expensive lossmails. Incursions and nullsec ratting (and even wormholes) is consistently multiboxed with a far higher isk cap. I mean I multiboxed them fine, all three. And I think I've established the upper limit of what you can achieve running non-Burner missions with up to 3 characters: It's about 150m ISK/hour with storyline missions and the occasional lucky Zor implant drop; 100m ISK/hour on the lower side with crappy mission draws and when Bob frowns upon you. With a single character you will be hard-pressed to break 50m ISK/hour with a combination of shooting/looting NPCs unless again, Bob smiles and you get a lucky Zor implant drop. And the 50m ISK/hour would be running something like a Golem (so not exactly a small hit on the wallet or skills). In order to routinely break that 200m ISK/hour ceiling you need to really get lucky with Burner mission draws or spend a lot of time accepting regular missions repairing your standings (even with V social skills). And there are more than a few Burner missions where if you screw up just once, you're effectively hooped (and get a ringside seat to watching your 100m+ ISK ship explode in flames). And then there are the Burner missions you draw that are just useless (Guristas base being a prime example). And let's not forget that the 200m+ ISK/hour more or less relegates you to SOE agents and systems, making you a prime ganking target regardless of fit (I've seen masses of Catalysts taking out T2-fit battleships just for shts and giggles to pad their killboard). With upwards of 100 mission runners in any system at any given time, it's a gank smorgasbord. I can't speak to low-sec, null-sec or wormhole income - but I would assume risk vs. reward comes into play. Ditto for high-sec Incursions, as I imagine a high rate of return entails running a rather blingy ship. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.*

Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 12917	Posted - 2015.11.11 20:58:55 - [41] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: There is a hardcap to what I do, I've said that multiple times. Doing it with more than one character is asking for very, very expensive lossmails. Incursions and nullsec ratting (and even wormholes) is consistently multiboxed with a far higher isk cap. I mean I multiboxed them fine, all three. And I think I've established the upper limit of what you can achieve running non-Burner missions with up to 3 characters: It's about 150m ISK/hour with storyline missions and the occasional lucky Zor implant drop; 100m ISK/hour on the lower side with crappy mission draws and when Bob frowns upon you. With a single character you will be hard-pressed to break 50m ISK/hour with a combination of shooting/looting NPCs unless again, Bob smiles and you get a lucky Zor implant drop. And the 50m ISK/hour would be running something like a Golem (so not exactly a small hit on the wallet or skills). In order to routinely break that 200m ISK/hour ceiling you need to really get lucky with Burner mission draws or spend a lot of time accepting regular missions repairing your standings (even with V social skills). And there are more than a few Burner missions where if you screw up just once, you're effectively hooped (and get a ringside seat to watching your 100m+ ISK ship explode in flames). And then there are the Burner missions you draw that are just useless (Guristas base being a prime example). And let's not forget that the 200m+ ISK/hour more or less relegates you to SOE agents and systems, making you a prime ganking target regardless of fit (I've seen masses of Catalysts taking out T2-fit battleships just for shts and giggles to pad their killboard). With upwards of 100 mission runners in any system at any given time, it's a gank smorgasbord. Oddly, what you find you can make in high sec is not that far off what you can make in null with the exact same number of characters. The BEST subcapital ratting ship (The Vindicator) in the best possible situation (a Guristas system with multiple rock/pirate gate havens, ring sanctuims and/or forsaken hubs) can maybe crack 100mil solo if you are paying strict attention. For the rest (Machs, Rattlesnakes, RHML Fleet Phoons etc), 25 mil ticks (75 mil per hour) is the norm. You get occasional escalations and commander spawns that are then subject to the RNG Gods. And thats just GOOD PVErs, the scrubs are making 45-60 mil per hour and thinking they are banking lol. And that's the point. I went back to null because CCP accidentally fixed null (for me, not for everyone) by upping the escalation chances, so even though it's hit or miss I can make the kind of isk I like. But I could still be in high sec making WAY easier isk on the same level, with fewer characters and WAY less chance of interference, which is why so much if high sec (and faction warfare) are null sec isk making alts in disguise. Quote:* I can't speak to low-sec, null-sec or wormhole income - but I would assume risk vs. reward comes into play. Ditto for high-sec Incursions, as I imagine a high rate of return entails running a rather blingy ship. I can speak for those places (and high sec), I have literally spent the last 8 years of my life PVEing everywhere I can in EVE. There arte so many ways to get rich, many of them aren't that fun though (carrier blitzing lvl 5s is awesome isk but damn it it's tedious and boring). To be honest, it irks the hell out of me that you get people who have never expanded much outside of their PVE niche trying to tell others what's what when they barely know themsevles (not you Arthur lol). Honest PVE jocks with broad based experience recognize (and admit) the terrible rewards imbalances this game has. That doesn't mean we don't exploit them, I still have an alt in Lanngisi that has Jump Clones in Apanake and Osmon (useful for when I exhaust all the reasonable buy orders in Lann, which I have done lol) and I still have another alt sitting in my incursion Vindi. I 'live' in null because it's more fun, and fighting for my PVE space makes it worth while (if you go to a killboard I'm on, you will see that most fighting I do is in one constellation in Wicked Creek). On a side note, history repeats itself. Back when there was a bug that allowed for high sec lvl 5 missions, you had people totally arguing that it was totally not unbalanced. You could usually find those high sec lvl 5 proponents in Rattlesnakes doing high sec lvl 5 missions while they posted on this forum about how they were totally not unbalanced lol.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4730	Posted - 2015.11.11 21:22:09 - [42] - Quote As an aside, I should note that there's a way to break 600m+ ISK/hour if you cherry-pick a specific series of L4 missions. The downside is that you will absolutely, positively destroy opposing Empire standings in the process - as well as severely damage your own declining mission after mission to get it. I'm referring of course to the 'Enemies Abound' mission series for Caldari (and Empire equivalents). Mission rewards and salvage alone typically exceed 170m ISK per run, so with LP you're easily over 200m per character. With 3 characters you can easily blitz all three sets in roughly an hour. 600m+ ISK. Voila. However, this should be considered a burst in income - and isn't sustainable unless you regularly pray at the Altar of Bob (you could literally get two 'Enemies' back-to-back or decline 50 missions and not get a single one...). You will also need at least one Golem to pull this off (ideally 2 or 3), if only for the salvaging/cargo capabilities. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 16903	Posted - 2015.11.11 21:43:59 - [43] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: As an aside, I should note that there's a way to break 600m+ ISK/hour if you cherry-pick a specific series of L4 missions. The downside is that you will absolutely, positively destroy opposing Empire standings in the process - as well as severely damage your own declining mission after mission to get it. I'm referring of course to the 'Enemies Abound' mission series for Caldari (and Empire equivalents). Mission rewards and salvage alone typically exceed 170m ISK per run, so with LP you're easily over 200m per character. With 3 characters you can easily blitz all three sets in roughly an hour. 600m+ ISK. Voila. However, this should be considered a burst in income - and isn't sustainable unless you regularly pray at the Altar of Bob (you could literally get two 'Enemies' back-to-back or decline 50 missions and not get a single one...). You will also need at least one Golem to pull this off (ideally 2 or 3), if only for the salvaging/cargo capabilities. If you want staggering income you need to try bomber blitzing FW level 4 missions. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4730	Posted - 2015.11.11 21:47:39 - [44] - Quote baltec1 wrote: If you want staggering income you need to try bomber blitzing FW level 4 missions. I've heard it can be insanely lucrative. But how staggering are we talking about? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2017	Posted - 2015.11.11 21:58:41 - [45] - Quote Null blows, and has for years. Best isk making content should be out there, and as far as I can tell at the individual scale it hasn't been for as long as I've been playing. Burners could probably pay out about half of what they do in highsec, and highsec would still probably be on top. I do like highsec content as I can log in and mess around for a short period, as I often have times where I can't play much, and that makes it hard to join a null corp. I'm sure there are plenty that would take me, but I'm not sure I'd want to join with limited time. My main idea I've posted before is to add some group pve in null that is good income. How exactly to do that and have it pay out I haven't fully thought out. probably leave anoms mostly as they are so people can do solo activities if they have limited time, or semi afk. Looking at corp/alliance level isk making opportunities is something isn't something I've really done. Obviously moon mining can be huge, but looking at corp taxes, Custom offices, and station income would be interesting. I imagine corp/alliance income trickles down in the form of SRP and other incentives for pilots. Plus there are people to play with. If I was getting SRP I don't know that it would matter as much to me if I was making 100 or 200 mil/hour. in many ways LP is nice as it is a self balancing system. too easy to farm -> prices go down. if it is more difficult to get, or something becomes in high demand values should go up. I am unsure how I feel about concord LP as it can be converted to empire LP at a rate of 1 -> 0.8 In some cases this prevents huge surges, and provides volume on corps that don't have good agents, but also makes running for some corps not really worth it as the LP is effectively capped. I just isn't worth it to leave optimal conditions for a minor LP bump, but maybe it would be for a 50% lp bump. as far as dual boxing goes I would think a tick/tock style of play might work. fight a burner while traveling on another character. it isn't too much effort to reach over and click jump on the next gate while fighting the current burner. Just don't try fighting 2 burners at once, unless you are damn good. Regarding isk sinks/faucets I wrote this for another post but it was going a bit off topic there, maybe a little more useful here: With burners LP is somewhere between 50-66% of the payout including bounty, reward, and bonuses, My reward ratio is roughly 100mil isk to 100k lp. HQ Incursions pay out 45m isk and 10k LP * the ratio looks like 70% in highsec with a 40man fleet? 22-44%. Both calculated using 1000-2000 isk/lp for the high and low end. In conventional stores each LP cashed in sinks ~400 isk for most items, and Implants sink 1000isk/lp, concord store is mostly implants and most items in there follow that rate. so for every 100mil liquid generated by burners I sink 40mil cashing out lp. using the incursion ratio for every 100mil liquid made in an incursion 22.2mil isk is sunk @ChainsawPlankto
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 859	Posted - 2015.11.11 22:03:28 - [46] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: baltec1 wrote: If you want staggering income you need to try bomber blitzing FW level 4 missions. I've heard it can be insanely lucrative. But how staggering are we talking about? See: http://www.factionwarfare.com/faction-warfare-guide-missions/ His chart does not factor in social skills. I remember running L4 FW missions and getting about 80K LP when at Tier 3. That's 80k LP from ONE mission.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 16903	Posted - 2015.11.11 22:14:00 - [47] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: I've heard it can be insanely lucrative. But how staggering are we talking about? Off hand I think its 1mil+ LP for 3 hours work in a hound. I have seen claims of 600 mil/hr a few times by people but I honestly haven't tried to do that myself. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2018	Posted - 2015.11.12 05:59:49 - [48] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Then again, incursion abuse can still happen. I like umm what!? I'm almost too impressed to care. @ChainsawPlankto
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 231	Posted - 2015.11.13 03:00:00 - [49] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: What he's saying is that he can make that 100 mill an hour running anoms in null sec using only one Rattlesnake. It's still good that high-sec does have a income stream. The cons are is that it requires multi-chars and not completely consistent unlike null sec that provides a constant isk faucet running anoms while making 100 mill isk an hour using only one char. If you blitz highsec level 3 missions using a t2 fitted mach you can hit 80-90 mil an hour and you can do this all day every day without interruptions like you get in null. The best income right now via shooting comes from highsec, the only reason anoms are done is because you can run them afk although afk income will take a large hit when carriers lose their ability to use drones next year. Carriers would still be able to use drones with even better bonuses at the expense of losing their logi capabilities.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 231	Posted - 2015.11.13 04:48:56 - [50] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Arthur Aihaken wrote: As an aside, I should note that there's a way to break 600m+ ISK/hour if you cherry-pick a specific series of L4 missions. The downside is that you will absolutely, positively destroy opposing Empire standings in the process - as well as severely damage your own declining mission after mission to get it. I'm referring of course to the 'Enemies Abound' mission series for Caldari (and Empire equivalents). Mission rewards and salvage alone typically exceed 170m ISK per run, so with LP you're easily over 200m per character. With 3 characters you can easily blitz all three sets in roughly an hour. 600m+ ISK. Voila. However, this should be considered a burst in income - and isn't sustainable unless you regularly pray at the Altar of Bob (you could literally get two 'Enemies' back-to-back or decline 50 missions and not get a single one...). You will also need at least one Golem to pull this off (ideally 2 or 3), if only for the salvaging/cargo capabilities. If you want staggering income you need to try bomber blitzing FW level 4 missions. Looking into this, but I think you need to join a FW corp to do this if I'm mistaken which I'd really hate to do. NPC corps are simply the best.

Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2023	Posted - 2015.11.13 04:54:45 - [51] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: Carriers would still be able to use drones with even better bonuses at the expense of losing their logi capabilities last I heard.....unless CCP changed their minds again from that last blog. Drones no, fighters yes (and fighters are getting some sort of revamp too) will they be effective at ratting I have no idea, but if they are I highly doubt they will be afkable. @ChainsawPlankto
Hasikan Miallok Republic University Minmatar Republic 1640	Posted - 2015.11.13 04:57:14 - [52] - Quote The two carriers to do the job of one thing seems another move designed to push people into getting more alts.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2023	Posted - 2015.11.13 05:11:48 - [53] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: Looking into this, but I think you need to join a FW corp to do this if I'm mistaken which I'd really hate to do. NPC corps are simply the best. kinda the whole point of FW Hasikan Miallok wrote: The two carriers to do the job of one thing seems another move designed to push people into getting more alts. well that plus cap reps only being "effective" in triage, plus a refitting nerf. I dunno about the more alts thing, but something is up. @ChainsawPlankto
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 16922	Posted - 2015.11.13 10:26:29 - [54] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: Carriers would still be able to use drones with even better bonuses at the expense of losing their logi capabilities last I heard.....unless CCP changed their minds again from that last blog. Carriers are losing drones and fighters need to be manually used, the age of AFK carriers is at an end. You also cant refit with a weapons timer or use capital reps without the new dedicated logi capitals without large drawbacks so current defensive tactics are also taking a large hit. Ratting carriers can still work but you will need new fits, tactics and you cant be afk in them. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4733	Posted - 2015.11.13 12:33:03 - [55] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Carriers are losing drones and fighters need to be manually used, the age of AFK carriers is at an end. You also cant refit with a weapons timer or use capital reps without the new dedicated logi capitals without large drawbacks so current defensive tactics are also taking a large hit. Ratting carriers can still work but you will need new fits, tactics and you cant be afk in them. Ratting Dreadnoughts? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 704	Posted - 2015.11.13 12:48:54 - [56] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: Carriers would still be able to use drones with even better bonuses at the expense of losing their logi capabilities last I heard.....unless CCP changed their minds again from that last blog. Carriers are losing drones and fighters need to be manually used, the age of AFK carriers is at an end. You also cant refit with a weapons timer or use capital reps without the new dedicated logi capitals without large drawbacks so current defensive tactics are also taking a large hit. Ratting carriers can still work but you will need new fits, tactics and you cant be afk in them. Oh god forbid you have to actually be at your computer while you get the largest wallet ticks available in the game. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 16922	Posted - 2015.11.13 13:45:25 - [57] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Ratting Dreadnoughts? Possible, I'm more interested in nano dreads Market McSelling Alt wrote: Oh god forbid you have to actually be at your computer while you get the largest wallet ticks available in the game. This is already the case. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4733	Posted - 2015.11.13 14:16:35 - [58] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Possible, I'm more interested in nano dreads OK, you perked my interest. Any details you'd care to share? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 554	Posted - 2015.11.13 14:34:16 - [59] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: baltec1 wrote: Possible, I'm more interested in nano dreads OK, you perked my interest. Any details you'd care to share? Capital sized MWDs/ABs with nanofibers/rigs and High Angle Guns, controlling transversal like an over-sized Machariel. It'd depend on the damage the HAG can put out out of siege. Last I heard in siege it'd be what, 3k dps? Ratting Rev with Scotch? Swaglfar with Hail? Null Moros? I wonder if they'll do RCML (Rapid Cruise Missile Launchers)? A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 16923	Posted - 2015.11.13 18:01:30 - [60] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: baltec1 wrote: Possible, I'm more interested in nano dreads OK, you perked my interest. Any details you'd care to share? I have heard numbers such as 500m/s with the capital MWD which if I am correct means I should be able to get a dread up fast enough to keep up with AB cruiser fleets. Challenge is going to be cap usage as I don't have any info on the new capital cap mods. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship

Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4733	Posted - 2015.11.13 18:03:20 - [61] - Quote baltec1 wrote: I have heard numbers such as 500m/s with the capital MWD which if I am correct means I should be able to get a dread up fast enough to keep up with AB cruiser fleets. Challenge is going to be cap usage as I don't have any info on the new capital cap mods. Will that be with or without Hyperspacial rigs? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 16923	Posted - 2015.11.13 18:30:09 - [62] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: baltec1 wrote: I have heard numbers such as 500m/s with the capital MWD which if I am correct means I should be able to get a dread up fast enough to keep up with AB cruiser fleets. Challenge is going to be cap usage as I don't have any info on the new capital cap mods. Will that be with or without Hyperspacial rigs? I already have that part sorted Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
DeMichael Crimson Republic University Minmatar Republic 52439	Posted - 2015.11.21 17:54:39 - [63] - Quote Well, this thread topic didn't take long to derail into a 'nerf high sec / buff null sec' thread, thanks to a few posters who just had to ride that train here. Just the usual Meta-game tactic. Gotta give props though, placing a bug in CCP's ear at Eve Player Events is another aspect that definitely helps, especially when it's done by a few different players. Unbelievable, the lengths some players will go to....... DMC 'The Plan' \| California Eve Players \| Proposal - The Endless Battle
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17021	Posted - 2015.11.22 02:42:01 - [64] - Quote DeMichael Crimson wrote: Well, this thread topic didn't take long to derail into a 'nerf high sec / buff null sec' thread, thanks to a few posters who just had to ride that train here. Just the usual Meta-game tactic. Gotta give props though, placing a bug in CCP's ear at Eve Player Events is another aspect that definitely helps, especially when it's done by a few different players. Unbelievable, the lengths some players will go to....... DMC The only meta gaming going on here if from yourself, we have the hard numbers that show PVE is in a mess when looking at the way risk and effort is rewarded all across EVE and its not as black and white as you might assume. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 12999	Posted - 2015.11.23 15:16:12 - [65] - Quote DeMichael Crimson wrote: Well, this thread topic didn't take long to derail into a 'nerf high sec / buff null sec' thread, thanks to a few posters who just had to ride that train here. And this of course is a lie. Null doesn't need buffing (in fact it needs to be less afk-able) and no one I know of is advocating that. Quote: Just the usual Meta-game tactic. Gotta give props though, placing a bug in CCP's ear at Eve Player Events is another aspect that definitely helps, especially when it's done by a few different players. Unbelievable, the lengths some players will go to....... DMC The lengths needed to fix a broken PVE environment, one that creates adverse incentives (such as "make/buy high sec alt for income instead of bothering to fight for one's own space")? You are darn right about that, and if what we are saying isn't the actual truth, CCP won't do anything. But if what we are saying is true (and it is), then CCP will see that they can improve their game by fixing it. What, exactly, do you have against PVE working better than it does now?
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 878	Posted - 2015.11.23 18:25:24 - [66] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: DeMichael Crimson wrote: Well, this thread topic didn't take long to derail into a 'nerf high sec / buff null sec' thread, thanks to a few posters who just had to ride that train here. And this of course is a lie. Null doesn't need buffing (in fact it needs to be less afk-able) and no one I know of is advocating that. Quote: Just the usual Meta-game tactic. Gotta give props though, placing a bug in CCP's ear at Eve Player Events is another aspect that definitely helps, especially when it's done by a few different players. Unbelievable, the lengths some players will go to....... DMC The lengths needed to fix a broken PVE environment, one that creates adverse incentives (such as "make/buy high sec alt for income instead of bothering to fight for one's own space")? You are darn right about that, and if what we are saying isn't the actual truth, CCP won't do anything. But if what we are saying is true (and it is), then CCP will see that they can improve their game by fixing it. What, exactly, do you have against PVE working better than it does now? I think we need to be clear here. Getting the high returns from mission running involves alts, some players don't have alts. So before people go using these threads for "nerf highsec income because people can make X amount of isk" propaganda, they need to remember that this isn't a single player (no alts) making this type of income. So let's be clear..... Making the high returns on mission running needs the following: 1. Alts 2. Multiple Bling ships 3. Little bit of luck. 4. Prep and setup (Investment and time getting standings setup) So while some players will be able to do this, the initial entry to do this is high.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13000	Posted - 2015.11.23 19:18:21 - [67] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: DeMichael Crimson wrote: Well, this thread topic didn't take long to derail into a 'nerf high sec / buff null sec' thread, thanks to a few posters who just had to ride that train here. And this of course is a lie. Null doesn't need buffing (in fact it needs to be less afk-able) and no one I know of is advocating that. Quote: Just the usual Meta-game tactic. Gotta give props though, placing a bug in CCP's ear at Eve Player Events is another aspect that definitely helps, especially when it's done by a few different players. Unbelievable, the lengths some players will go to....... DMC The lengths needed to fix a broken PVE environment, one that creates adverse incentives (such as "make/buy high sec alt for income instead of bothering to fight for one's own space")? You are darn right about that, and if what we are saying isn't the actual truth, CCP won't do anything. But if what we are saying is true (and it is), then CCP will see that they can improve their game by fixing it. What, exactly, do you have against PVE working better than it does now? I think we need to be clear here. Getting the high returns from mission running involves alts, some players don't have alts. So before people go using these threads for "nerf highsec income because people can make X amount of isk" propaganda, they need to remember that this isn't a single player (no alts) making this type of income. So let's be clear..... Making the high returns on mission running needs the following: 1. Alts 2. Multiple Bling ships 3. Little bit of luck. 4. Prep and setup (Investment and time getting standings setup) So while some players will be able to do this, the initial entry to do this is high. Nope Quote: With the introduction of Burner missions to Lv4 mission agents it has become somewhat trivial to consistently make well in excess of 200million isk per hour with just a little bit of training and preparation. This can be done on a single, well trained character in the relative safety of Hi-Sec, indefinitely. That guide works btw. Not that it's necessary at all. My alt flying a mach or TFI in Lanngisi, declining burners and selling only to existing buy orders makes more in an hour than the 75 to 90 mil my deadspace machariel in null sec will. This can be tested by anyone easily. The point of all this is that inverse incentives are bad for the game. They create situations where people like me (who prefer to live outside of high sec) end up getting pulled back because the content is to good to ignore. While we're doing that, we aren't PVEing (except in afktar fashion) in the places we live. We are "importing isk/wealth" from a source that is hard to counter ( a single guy in a cloaky ship can disrupt a null system somewhat, a single guy can't pop a MOM). My highest hope is that Drifter Incursions replace the Sansha ones (even if they keep the same kind of income potential), encouraging people to fly less expensive ships and run the actual risk of losing them. not only will that be more fun than "Keep AAA at range, shoot appropriate tag, take gate when FC says so", but it will justify the existence of the things.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 607	Posted - 2015.11.23 19:48:46 - [68] - Quote 2. Multiple Bling ships 3. Little bit of luck. 4. Prep and setup (Investment and time getting standings setup) These are correct however, especially no2 and 3, like holy damn is it a lot of prep work to get everything set up and at minimum 1y of skill training to actually reach 200mill/h. You get unlucky sometimes with a lost ship and a bad string of missions that, while it wont nuke your standing, will lower your income a little by forcing you to run more normal lv4s but in general luck isn't a huge factor. In null it takes what, not even a month and your alt is in a decently fit Gila/Myrmadon/Vexor/etc so you can supplement your dps? The other problem I'm finding with the blitzing is it's pretty hard to really effectively run more than one character at a time, especially if it's two burners. I mean I'm working towards getting my 35mill SP alt to run missions too to really see how far you can push it but it's another 6 months before that. Is missing most of the necessary skills Also so far only a tiny part of the HS mission running crowd is making more than 100mill/h on a GOOD day. Nerf missions and you nerf everyone from mr 2 month old new player (screw the NPE amirite!) to mr casual semi-afk full clear. With incursions, because it's so organized, everyone is getting a pretty decent income even if some fleets don't ever get the omg amazing once in a while 150mill/h. Null has some organization but I figure it's a bit more variable depending on the organization level. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13000	Posted - 2015.11.23 20:43:58 - [69] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: 2. Multiple Bling ships 3. Little bit of luck. 4. Prep and setup (Investment and time getting standings setup) In null it takes what, not even a month and your alt is in a decently fit Gila/Myrmadon/Vexor/etc so you can supplement your dps? See, that's what I said before. Somehow you maximze all the tings that you need to do to make it in high sec, while minimaizing the things yo have to do elsewhere. That's a dodge, basically view facts through a biased lens to make it seem like the thing you are supporting isn't somehow unbalanced. You do know that that Gila or Vexor (you mentioning a Mrym demonstrates your lack of understanding byw) is not only a loss waiting to happen, it's addition to your isk/hr is a 'diminishing returns' situation becaus eof how the bounty system works. Mission runners aren't nearly as at the mercy of the bounty system and incursion runners have a different rewards system altogether. How about this. How about you take the ships in your guide, move them all to null and use them and tell us then how hard it is living in high sec? I'll do the same with your guide, at the end we'll compare notes? I'm game if you are. Quote: Also so far only a tiny part of the HS mission running crowd is making more than 100mill/h on a GOOD day. Nerf missions and you nerf everyone from mr 2 month old new player (screw the NPE amirite!) to mr casual semi-afk full clear. With incursions, because it's so organized, everyone is getting a pretty decent income even if some fleets don't ever get the omg amazing once in a while 150mill/h. Null has some organization but I figure it's a bit more variable depending on the organization level. Closing the super-blitzing loopholes you abuse does nothing to the average mission runner, as they (by your own admission) don't do what you do. And 150 mil is not amazing in an incursion, a fleet that can't do 4 HQ sites in a hour must be some AUTZ screw it fleet.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 607	Posted - 2015.11.23 21:17:42 - [70] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: 2. Multiple Bling ships 3. Little bit of luck. 4. Prep and setup (Investment and time getting standings setup) In null it takes what, not even a month and your alt is in a decently fit Gila/Myrmadon/Vexor/etc so you can supplement your dps? See, that's what I said before. Somehow you maximze all the tings that you need to do to make it in high sec, while minimaizing the things yo have to do elsewhere. That's a dodge, basically view facts through a biased lens to make it seem like the thing you are supporting isn't somehow unbalanced. You do know that that Gila or Vexor (you mentioning a Mrym demonstrates your lack of understanding byw) is not only a loss waiting to happen, it's addition to your isk/hr is a 'diminishing returns' situation becaus eof how the bounty system works. Mission runners aren't nearly as at the mercy of the bounty system and incursion runners have a different rewards system altogether. You're either misunderstanding or twisting what I'm saying so I'll assume it's just misunderstanding. - There is no way around the 1y limit. I checked, double checked and then triple checked. Even then you're running with the minimum required to blitz normal lv 4s (Meta 4 guns on the mach and having to use a cap booster instead of getting to use a sebo). Your burners dps also wont be maxed out so slower there too. Doing what my guide explains is kinda knife edge and faction/DED gear makes up for a lot of lacking skills. The difference between Caldari cruiser 4 and Caldari cruiser 5 when it comes to the Blood Base burner for example is DOUBLE the time. I tested it many, many times. - My point regarding getting an ALT and training an ALT to help you run nullsec anoms is that that's how that kind of conent is best run, in my experience. You can't really do the whole ALT thing with blitzing lv4s it just doesn't work from what I've been able to test. You can have 4 alts or heck almost as many as you want in the same site (or hell different sites once they hit 6 months old whatever) and it won't have much of an impact on your isk per character; 60mill on the low end, 240mill/h total for 4 toons. I tested this as well when I WAS ratting in null. Do you get this point yet or do I have to explain it in more detail? HS and Null is different, get over it. - Yes my alt was actually in a Myrm (a **** one at that, all Meta 4) while my main was in a navy typhoon (Meta sentries and meta cruise launchers). I was racking in 100 mill/h in sansha space in a ** system too. I could do 24mill ticks solo and do 16mill+ per character per tick when dual boxing. We were in a warzone and I never lost a ship. The potential is there easily. Quote: How about this. How about you take the ships in your guide, move them all to null and use them and tell us then how hard it is living in high sec? I'll do the same with your guide, at the end we'll compare notes? I'm game if you are. I want to say you're better than this strawman BS but you've used them on me before so at this point I'll just point it out and leave it at that. Quote: Quote:** Also so far only a tiny part of the HS mission running crowd is making more than 100mill/h on a GOOD day. Nerf missions and you nerf everyone from mr 2 month old new player (screw the NPE amirite!) to mr casual semi-afk full clear. With incursions, because it's so organized, everyone is getting a pretty decent income even if some fleets don't ever get the omg amazing once in a while 150mill/h. Null has some organization but I figure it's a bit more variable depending on the organization level. Closing the super-blitzing loopholes you abuse does nothing to the average mission runner, as they (by your own admission) don't do what you do. And 150 mil is not amazing in an incursion, a fleet that can't do 4 HQ sites in a hour must be some AUTZ screw it fleet. Incursion fleet income changes from one FC to the next (hilariously so sometimes) and as people cycle in and out. Every now and then theres luls where we're waiting for dps or logi. occasionally there a fleet contesting, there's a wall of bad sites and sometimes walls of good sites. Sometimes you're heavy on machs and light on vindies (Making the structure grind take longer). It evens out to a decent consistent isk/h sure but whe I ran incursions I wasn't that impressed with the isk/h. The wait time and travel time also suuuuuuuuuuuuucks. Oh and good incursion runners tip the boosters. I can appreciate how absolutely stupidly long it takes to train a full fleet booster. Oh and let me tell about how BS some of the myths around wormholes are some time. Spent a good 6 months in various C5s and C6s, big corps and small ones. The gas was good though. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03

baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17040	Posted - 2015.11.23 22:22:21 - [71] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: - There is no way around the 1y limit. I checked, double checked and then triple checked. Best check again. You can be operating a level 3 blitz mach in a month and earning more than an afktar in null. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 710	Posted - 2015.11.24 02:28:15 - [72] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: - There is no way around the 1y limit. I checked, double checked and then triple checked. Best check again. You can be operating a level 3 blitz mach in a month and earning more than an afktar in null. No no you can't And because I know you know better I am going to just have to call you a liar. In fact you can belt rat at a higher clip than a lvl 3 blitzer AND you don't have to ever deal with LP. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2087	Posted - 2015.11.24 05:14:05 - [73] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: - There is no way around the 1y limit. I checked, double checked and then triple checked. Best check again. You can be operating a level 3 blitz mach in a month and earning more than an afktar in null. the "1y limit" was specifically for lv4 blitzing and burners. I haven't looked at 1 month characters for 3 blitzing, but can very easily imagine it, +/- a little bit of time. although should at the keyboard play in highsec be greater than or less than afk play in null? I don't think they are directly comparable. If it was lv3 blitz mach vs at the keyboard null mach I'd want the null mach to be ahead but in that case I think it is a lot closer. But then there are other highsec income sources that are higher. @ChainsawPlankto
DeMichael Crimson Republic University Minmatar Republic 52575	Posted - 2015.11.24 05:36:16 - [74] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: DeMichael Crimson wrote: Well, this thread topic didn't take long to derail into a 'nerf high sec / buff null sec' thread, thanks to a few posters who just had to ride that train here. And this of course is a lie. Null doesn't need buffing (in fact it needs to be less afk-able) and no one I know of is advocating that. The only one lying here is you. This thread was originally about making a specific amount of ISK doing level 4 missions in high sec space, then all of a sudden you and Baltic jump in talking about how it's unbalanced compared to Null Sec and how you found a sympathetic ear with a CCP Dev at Player Events who is now working on changing the current status-quo.. Jenn aSide wrote: DeMichael Crimson wrote: Just the usual Meta-game tactic. Gotta give props though, placing a bug in CCP's ear at Eve Player Events is another aspect that definitely helps, especially when it's done by a few different players. Unbelievable, the lengths some players will go to....... DMC The lengths needed to fix a broken PVE environment, one that creates adverse incentives (such as "make/buy high sec alt for income instead of bothering to fight for one's own space")? You are darn right about that, and if what we are saying isn't the actual truth, CCP won't do anything. But if what we are saying is true (and it is), then CCP will see that they can improve their game by fixing it. What, exactly, do you have against PVE working better than it does now? Broken ? You flip flop your statements more than a fish does when it's out of water. Just because you play this game a certain way doesn't mean everyone else has to play the same way. That's what a sandbox is all about. The only thing that's actually broken here is CCP catering to a vocal minority that constantly claims high sec makes too much ISK for little to no risk. DMC 'The Plan' \| California Eve Players \| Proposal - The Endless Battle
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17040	Posted - 2015.11.24 06:07:38 - [75] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: - There is no way around the 1y limit. I checked, double checked and then triple checked. Best check again. You can be operating a level 3 blitz mach in a month and earning more than an afktar in null. No no you can't And because I know you know better I am going to just have to call you a liar. In fact you can belt rat at a higher clip than a lvl 3 blitzer AND you don't have to ever deal with LP. Yes, you can. All you need is the ability to fly the mach, fit large autos, fit warp speed rigs, and operate a medium armour rep. People have been running level 4 missions in ravens at one month old for a decade now. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Hasikan Miallok Republic University Minmatar Republic 1669	Posted - 2015.11.24 06:35:23 - [76] - Quote If we are talking about the reason why new players hang around hisec instead of running off to SOV null to mine for some renter corp - I very much doubt mission/incursion returns are a big issue. If the discussion is about why nullsec people spend more time in highsec alts then they do actually in null - PvE income is definitely one of the factors.
Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 367	Posted - 2015.11.24 06:36:35 - [77] - Quote DeMichael Crimson wrote: Broken ? You flip flop your statements more than a fish does when it's out of water. Just because you play this game a certain way doesn't mean everyone else has to play the same way. That's what a sandbox is all about. The only thing that's actually broken here is CCP catering to a vocal minority that constantly claims high sec makes too much ISK for little to no risk. DMC Agree with everything but signing off your post with some kind os signature (its weird) I tried doing hisec PVE with alts, can get close to about 20m hour with 1 character, this min/max crap never took my fancy coz its boring with no risk. Best i got in Null was 15m a tick (every 15 mins?), 2 ticks in a row (30m) before a neutral showed up. longest i ratted in null consecutively was about 45 mins. Thing is in null, if im taking some dudes on a roam, i Use Dotlan NPC kills Map to see who is ratting in null, then we just head there & go fishing. This isnt a new thing, dotlan has been out for a while now, its **** easy to use. there was a guy used to live in fountain core, used to log off in anoms & log in and kill nerds for instance. one afk cloaker can shutdown a high NPC kill system to zero activity. High sec = uninterrupted but boring coz easy / no risk / lp Null = semi/ Regularly interrupted im glad hisec ppl have worked out howto make isk but yeh zero risk in a t2 fit.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 609	Posted - 2015.11.24 07:41:20 - [78] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: - There is no way around the 1y limit. I checked, double checked and then triple checked. Best check again. You can be operating a level 3 blitz mach in a month and earning more than an afktar in null. No, no you can't. We tried it and I tested it in a fully skilled warp speed fit Tengu. I wanted to get over 100mill/h but I couldn't, no one could. And what I meant with the 1y limit (Because again, you seem to misunderstand or twist my words) is to blitz burners, to get over 200mill/h. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17040	Posted - 2015.11.24 08:10:42 - [79] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: - There is no way around the 1y limit. I checked, double checked and then triple checked. Best check again. You can be operating a level 3 blitz mach in a month and earning more than an afktar in null. No, no you can't. We tried it and I tested it in a fully skilled warp speed fit *Tengu. I wanted to get over 100mill/h but I couldn't, no one could. And what I meant with the 1y limit (Because again, you seem to misunderstand or twist my words) is to blitz burners, to get over 200mill/h. Found your problem. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship*
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 609	Posted - 2015.11.24 08:17:20 - [80] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: - There is no way around the 1y limit. I checked, double checked and then triple checked. Best check again. You can be operating a level 3 blitz mach in a month and earning more than an afktar in null. No, no you can't. We tried it and I tested it in a fully skilled warp speed fit *Tengu. I wanted to get over 100mill/h but I couldn't, no one could. And what I meant with the 1y limit (Because again, you seem to misunderstand or twist my words) is to blitz burners, to get over 200mill/h. Found your problem. Tengu has better speed, range, application and is in general better at blizing lv3 missions than a mach. and Yet a fullt skilled 13au/s Tengu can't reach 100mill/h but you want a 1month old Machariel to do it? BAHAHAHAHA. Here is an interesting way to look at it however. A near fully skilled rattlesnake does close to 1500 dps, Typhoon Fleet should get decently close to it and so should some of the faction blaster boats. Even a Max skilled Mach should get 1400. In null that should get you very close to 100mill/h but lets go with 75mill/h per character. This thread has Arthur use 3 faction battleships with ascendencies to run Lv4 missions and he's making at most 150mill/h. With those 3 ships he should be breaking 225mill/h in null easily, consistently and infinitely. And best part is you can just add more characters. Heck put them in different systems so when one gets camped you can continue to rat somewhere else. In my case I realistically can't run more than one character doing what I do, it's just not feasible to run at that speed without making mistakes. How is that fair? Because it's Null. That's the point, Null works differently than Hi-Sec. If you're having trouble in Null you're doing it wrong* just like how anyone not getting over 100mill/h in HS is doing it wrong (if the aim is isk/h otherwise do whatever ) You're comparing Hyper optimized 8 billion isk invested operations (Focussed on ONE character. Every character you add is another 8bill) to a single afktar in null (That shares the huge investment with a 40k user alliance and additional alts is the cost of a single ship). At the very least what I'm doing is worth a fully set up deathstar pos in a fully upgraded system and a ratting carrier. Start there and see what's easier to expand, what gives the most return the fastest and what has the higher cap; the null operation by adding alts or the Hi-sec operation by adding alts? But you know all this, or you should... A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03

baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17041	Posted - 2015.11.24 09:52:04 - [81] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: Tengu has better speed, range, application and is in general better at blizing lv3 missions than a mach. and Yet a fullt skilled 13au/s Tengu can't reach 100mill/h but you want a 1month old Machariel to do it? BAHAHAHAHA. Did I say 100 mil? Anize Oramara wrote: Here is an interesting way to look at it however. A near fully skilled rattlesnake does close to 1500 dps, Typhoon Fleet should get decently close to it and so should some of the faction blaster boats. Even a Max skilled Mach should get 1400. In null that should get you very close to 100mill/h but lets go with 75mill/h per character. This thread has Arthur use 3 faction battleships with ascendencies to run Lv4 missions and he's making at most 150mill/h. With those 3 ships he should be breaking 225mill/h in null easily, consistently and infinitely. And best part is you can just add more characters. Heck put them in different systems so when one gets camped you can continue to rat somewhere else. He isn't blitzing the sites. Anize Oramara wrote: In my case I realistically can't run more than one character doing what I do, it's just not feasible to run at that speed without making mistakes. Think again Anize Oramara wrote: You're comparing Hyper optimized 8 billion isk invested operations (Focussed on ONE character. Every character you add is another 8bill) to a single afktar in null (That shares the huge investment with a 40k user alliance and additional alts is the cost of a single ship). At the very least what I'm doing is worth a fully set up deathstar pos in a fully upgraded system and a ratting carrier. Start there and see what's easier to expand, what gives the most return the fastest and what has the higher cap; the null operation by adding alts or the Hi-sec operation by adding alts? But you know all this, or you should... Best income by far is incursions if you are running multiple alts. if you only have the one account then running FW missions in a bomber. Highsec level 3s in a mach worth less than a billion (including the hull) will come close to matching carrier income in null anoms, level 4s in highsec will beat it. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 609	Posted - 2015.11.24 10:08:30 - [82] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Best income by far is incursions if you are running multiple alts. if you only have the one account then running FW missions in a bomber. Highsec level 3s in a mach worth less than a billion (including the hull) will come close to matching carrier income in null anoms, level 4s in highsec will beat it. This is the only thing worth replying to. No one has been able to post numbers that prove what you're saying (and plenty have tried), only numbers that refute what you're saying. I've not been able to aither, running for SOE with the best isk/lp with a far better setup than 1 month old mach. And yes, as soon as you say carrier income you're talking about 100mill/h + and yet: Quote: Did I say 100 mil? Try not to contradict yourself in the same post. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13002	Posted - 2015.11.24 13:27:52 - [83] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: - My point regarding getting an ALT and training an ALT to help you run nullsec anoms is that that's how that kind of conent is best run, in my experience. You can't really do the whole ALT thing with blitzing lv4s it just doesn't work from what I've been able to test. You can have 4 alts or heck almost as many as you want in the same site (or hell different sites once they hit 6 months old whatever) and it won't have much of an impact on your isk per character; 60mill on the low end, 240mill/h total for 4 toons. I tested this as well when I WAS ratting in null. Do you get this point yet or do I have to explain it in more detail? HS and Null is different, get over it. High and null are suppsoed to be diferent. The difference is that null is supposed to be the highest income potential (or now, since womrhole have been introduced, the 2nd highest) with the highest (or not 2nd highest) risk of losing a ship. But because CCP isn't very good at making or balancing PVE content, we have this situation of backwards incentives where someone like me can dual box 2 machariels in space where they are likely to be attacked and still make a lower income than if i'd just kept ONE Mach in Lanngisi bltizing non-burner missions and selling scan probes to sell orders. And you're ok with that because you benefit from it. That's human (in the worst sense of the word), and it's wrong. Quote: - Yes my alt was actually in a Myrm (a **** one at that, all Meta 4) while my main was in a navy typhoon (Meta sentries and meta cruise launchers). I was racking in 100 mill/h in sansha space in a **** system too. I could do 24mill ticks solo and do 16mill+ per character per tick when dual boxing. We were in a warzone and I never lost a ship. The potential is there easily. Yep. 2 characters. 30 bucks (us) per month, to make 100 mil per hour in unsafe space. OR you could just do this, in HIGH SEC, for half the real life cost while gathering wealth at a higher rate. But people like you will claim up and down that this is ok. This is called selfishness, it has no place in the adult world, or even in something as silly as a video game. Look, I'm done with you people (God bless Baltec for staying in the fight on the right side of the issue). Like i said before, it would be nice if you could understand and admit to these issues that negatively affect me and others you play the game with while you wallow in rewards staying safe behind CONCORD. But it's understandable that you won't. The fight for a return to PVE rewards sanity (it wasn't perfect prior to 2009, but it made more sense than this current crap) will be won with the developers, not by getting min/max zealots to admit they know their content is unbalanced.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17041	Posted - 2015.11.24 14:06:15 - [84] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: baltec1 wrote: Best income by far is incursions if you are running multiple alts. if you only have the one account then running FW missions in a bomber. Highsec level 3s in a mach worth less than a billion (including the hull) will come close to matching carrier income in null anoms, level 4s in highsec will beat it. This is the only thing worth replying to. No one has been able to post numbers that prove what you're saying (and plenty have tried), only numbers that refute what you're saying. I've not been able to aither, running for SOE with the best isk/lp with a far better setup than 1 month old mach. And yes, as soon as you say carrier income you're talking about 100mill/h + and yet: Quote: Did I say 100 mil? Try not to contradict yourself in the same post. You seem to have a big problem with context and following conversations. Yes you can hit 84-90 mil/hr using a blitz mach in level 3s. It has been tested and verified several times including in the pirate battleship rebalance thread. No a month old pilot cant do that but I never said they could. I said a month old mach pilot blitzing level 3 missions in highsec will beat an afktar running null anoms. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 881	Posted - 2015.11.24 15:30:32 - [85] - Quote Nullies also get the odd deadspace/faction drop when ratting belts and anoms. Of course you can't really factor that into your hourly equation, but it is an additional factor in ratting income.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 610	Posted - 2015.11.24 16:04:30 - [86] - Quote baltec1 wrote: No a month old pilot cant do that but I never said they could. I said a month old mach pilot blitzing level 3 missions in highsec will beat an afktar running null anoms. And I've tested it, with my alt, this month and this is not true. Can't even make that in lv4s with my alt because I can't skip as many missions since he cant run burners yet so I HAVE to grind through a angel extrav or a blockade or some of the worse missions like buzzkil, silence the informant, the score, saboteurs, mordus, etc etc etc. every now and then. Quote: High and null are suppsoed to be diferent. The difference is that null is supposed to be the highest income potential (or now, since womrhole have been introduced, the 2nd highest) with the highest (or not 2nd highest) risk of losing a ship. But because CCP isn't very good at making or balancing PVE content, we have this situation of backwards incentives where someone like me can dual box 2 machariels in space where they are likely to be attacked and still make a lower income than if i'd just kept ONE Mach in Lanngisi bltizing non-burner missions and selling scan probes to sell orders. Null IS the highest income potential, that's the whole point I've been making. Not just on a single player level (easiest content to multibox) but the bigger the corp/alliance the higher the potential. It requires more alts, alts that in a war situation you use for cynos, boosting, logi (reps), logistics, capitals but the point is null has the highest INCOME POTENTIAL at all levels except solo character play. I blitzed lv4s with the mach before starting on burners, I wish I could find the posts I made before I started running burners but I DO have isk per minute numbers for my lv4 missions. This includes travel time to and from the station. A quick calc shows on average I'd be maxing out at 120-150mill per hour or between 2 to 3 mill/minute for most blitz type missions with a nearly maxed out Mach. This is T2 guns, BS5 and a head full of billions of isk worth of implants. 2 Machariels might be able to match that in null, 3 will definitely out pace it. Income Potential. End of the day though, SOE probe launchers, probes and ships are rising in price. Not enough people are running lv4 missions, or running them fast/effectively enough to keep the price down. DEDspace modules on the other hand are stupidly cheap but lets not go there. If lv4s are so do dang lucrative why isn't the mission hubs swarming with mission runners? There used to be well over a 100 mission runners in Lanngisi at the times when I was running missions. Now? 40, maybe 50. I'm throwing my guide everywhere I can, theoretically this should be to my detriment, more mission runners means worse LP rates and yet the opposite is happening. Explain it to me. For that matter if you guys are so GRR Missionrunners why aren't you guys ganking the heck out of all the blingy ships? See this is exactly what I'm saying, can't be arsed to lift a finger to fix a perceived problem, just whine whine whine to CCP to fix it when you can do something about your problem yourself. I though that's what Eve was about, I thought that was what the nullsec corps were about, kicking over other people's sandcastles. I saw a problem; almost no one was Doing It Right(tm) and I dang well am trying to fix it and all you two can do is whine and moan about how unfair it all is. Quote: And you're ok with that because you benefit from it. That's human (in the worst sense of the word), and it's wrong. That, that right there is what you're reduced to doing, and it's not even accurate. How am I benefiting by writing a public guide and spreading it wherever I can? Disappoint A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13002	Posted - 2015.11.24 16:26:16 - [87] - Quote From your own guide: Quote: With the introduction of Burner missions to Lv4 mission agents it has become somewhat trivial to consistently make well in excess of 200million isk per hour with just a little bit of training and preparation. This can be done on a single, well trained character in the relative safety of Hi-Sec, indefinitely. Somehow, you understand the idea of overhead when ti comes to your own activity, but can't understand why what you are saying about null (brushing off the requirement for ALTS) proves the point I'm making. Oh well, we don't need you to be honest about it, in the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter that you can't do it. But palyer to player, I'm just making sure you know what you are doing..
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13002	Posted - 2015.11.24 16:30:08 - [88] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: Nullies also get the odd deadspace/faction drop when ratting belts and anoms. Of course you can't really factor that into your hourly equation, but it is an additional factor in ratting income. That's true, and you can make a lving in null. The whole point is that the game as it stands creates the backwards incentive to not do that. WHY do that (if isk for other things like PLEX is part of the goal of doign the content) would you do null PVE when you could spend less time achieving the same goal from high sec. That means that people like me (who would prefer to do pve in null) have to make the choice between "do what I like but attain goal slower, or do what I don't like as much but attain goal faster" In my case it's rat in null, or run incursions and make that plex or get that isk for that New Barghest I want to fly quicker. IMO it's nonsense. Not the end of the world, but still nonsense.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17041	Posted - 2015.11.24 17:14:27 - [89] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: And I've tested it, with my alt, this month and this is not true. Can't even make that in lv4s with my alt because I can't skip as many missions since he cant run burners yet so I HAVE to grind through a angel extrav or a blockade or some of the worse missions like buzzkil, silence the informant, the score, saboteurs, mordus, etc etc etc. every now and then. No, you haven't tested it. If you had you would know just how silly easy it is to do. The blockade for example is super easy. Shoot the stasis tower, pop destroyer trigger, kill the singleton in the three waves, kill Tribunus, warp out. Anize Oramara wrote: I blitzed lv4s with the mach before starting on burners, I wish I could find the posts I made before I started running burners but I DO have isk per minute numbers for my lv4 missions. This includes travel time to and from the station. A quick calc shows on average I'd be maxing out at 120-150mill per hour or between 2 to 3 mill/minute for most blitz type missions with a nearly maxed out Mach. This is T2 guns, BS5 and a head full of billions of isk worth of implants. 2 Machariels might be able to match that in null, 3 will definitely out pace it. Income Potential. You just made my point for me, in order to beat highsec income you have to roll multiple alts. Anize Oramara wrote: For that matter if you guys are so GRR Missionrunners why aren't you guys ganking the heck out of all the blingy ships? See this is exactly what I'm saying, can't be arsed to lift a finger to fix a perceived problem, just whine whine whine to CCP to fix it when you can do something about your problem yourself. I though that's what Eve was about, I thought that was what the nullsec corps were about, kicking over other people's sandcastles. I saw a problem; almost no one was Doing It Right(tm) and I dang well am trying to fix it and all you two can do is whine and moan about how unfair it all is. You don't fix game imbalances by tossing away billions of isk in useless ganking. You fix the problem. Anize Oramara wrote: That, that right there is what you're reduced to doing, and it's not even accurate. How am I benefiting by writing a public guide and spreading it wherever I can? Disappoint You are benefitting from an income far higher than you should for the level of risk, effort and investment you put in. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13002	Posted - 2015.11.24 17:25:08 - [90] - Quote baltec1 wrote: You just made my point for me, in order to beat highsec income you have to roll multiple alts. I love it when that happens. Market McSelling Alt did that for me once (before CCP Quants DEVBLOG verifying it), saying how incursions only had a few people then posting a graph showing bounties as the #1 isk faucet while not noticing that #3 was Incursion isk pay outs (thus proving the imbalance he was arguing didn't exist). I sat in front of my computer and laughed till i cried on that one. Another example is "you can make more with a carrier in null" means you need a CAPITAL SHIP to match what you can do with a sub cap in safer space (again proving the imbalance). They will do anything to deflect and deny the truth, and frankly I find it disturbing, if they'll do that in a video game then......

Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 881	Posted - 2015.11.24 17:47:41 - [91] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: Nullies also get the odd deadspace/faction drop when ratting belts and anoms. Of course you can't really factor that into your hourly equation, but it is an additional factor in ratting income. That's true, and you can make a lving in null. The whole point is that the game as it stands creates the backwards incentive to not do that. WHY do that (if isk for other things like PLEX is part of the goal of doign the content) would you do null PVE when you could spend less time achieving the same goal from high sec. That means that people like me (who would prefer to do pve in null) have to make the choice between "do what I like but attain goal slower, or do what I don't like as much but attain goal faster" In my case it's rat in null, or run incursions and make that plex or get that isk for that New Barghest I want to fly quicker. IMO it's nonsense. Not the end of the world, but still nonsense. I have no dog in this fight. I can care less either way as I don't rely on missions for my sole isk generation, but I don't think missions are the main reason people stay in hisec. The main detractor of living in null for me, is logistics. The market sucks there, and unless you are in a good alliance, ship replacement can be a royal pain. Oh, and ship replacement usually only applies to certain activities in certain areas. Can't use expensive implants, unless you want to spend billions to replace every time you lose them. You have to have an alt. Ratting/Anom running/mission running gets put on hold whenever a neutral enters the area or a CTA is called. Mission running in null can be done, but it really isn't worth it. The payout isn't worth it. So really what is the incentive of living in nullsec? Why would a day old toon want to make the move to null? Of course, the solution is to nerf hisec income; because no one who lives in null wants to actually put some effort into making null look attractive again. Nullies just want to take the easy path and nerf hisec because it works better for them.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13002	Posted - 2015.11.24 18:35:36 - [92] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: Of course, the solution is to nerf hisec income; because no one who lives in null wants to actually put some effort into making null look attractive again. Nullies just want to take the easy path and nerf hisec because it works better for them. If you had a problem with your car's battery, would you fix it (replace the battery) or would you work on every other part of the car that wasn't the battery. High Sec is the problem, so high sec gets fixed. Nothing i do or can do will make my ships in null make the same kind of isk per hour with one character as what is possible via Anize Onamara's missions blitzing guide. Incursions don't come around often, and if I stuff 40 people into anoms we all might make 9 mil isk per hour because of how the bounty system pays out (unlike the incursion system). The only way I make the same as Anize Onamara does is if you use multiple characters. Do you understand what that means? It means that people in high sec get to pay 15 bucks a month and make more wealth than I would paying CCP 45 bucks per month, all because I choose to live in space not protected by police npcs. (The adaptation I and others have made to this imbalance is to have high sec mission/incursions and FW alts to make isk with, the game just about forces us to do this, and this is wrong, imagine the outcry if high sec people had to have null sec alts to make decent isk with, there would be a riot). How exactly are we (in null) supposed to fix that? Without hacking CCPs database that is.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 610	Posted - 2015.11.24 18:45:32 - [93] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: Of course, the solution is to nerf hisec income; because no one who lives in null wants to actually put some effort into making null look attractive again. Nullies just want to take the easy path and nerf hisec because it works better for them. If you had a problem with your car's battery, would you fix it (replace the battery) or would you work on every other part of the car that wasn't the battery. False premise/straw man. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13002	Posted - 2015.11.24 19:13:09 - [94] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: Of course, the solution is to nerf hisec income; because no one who lives in null wants to actually put some effort into making null look attractive again. Nullies just want to take the easy path and nerf hisec because it works better for them. If you had a problem with your car's battery, would you fix it (replace the battery) or would you work on every other part of the car that wasn't the battery. False premise/straw man. Denial-ism (self interested denial-ism at that).
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 881	Posted - 2015.11.24 19:59:08 - [95] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: Of course, the solution is to nerf hisec income; because no one who lives in null wants to actually put some effort into making null look attractive again. Nullies just want to take the easy path and nerf hisec because it works better for them. If you had a problem with your car's battery, would you fix it (replace the battery) or would you work on every other part of the car that wasn't the battery. I'd make sure the battery was the problem. It would be kind of foolish if I replaced the battery and then ended up replacing it again and again, only to learn the problem was really bad wiring or a bad alternator. Hisec was nerfed previously with the removal of L5s in hisec, and moving them exclusively to lowsec. Did this cause the desired effect? No. People just learned how to efficiently do L4s. At least until Incursions came along, then Incursions became the cash cow of hisec. Now the best cash cow in the game, besides C5-C6 WHs, is FW L4 missions. What does nullsec have? Better ores? Better ratting? Better anoms? Moon mining? Not enough income generation, and certainly not quality income generation as far as I am concerned. I have missioned in hisec, I have missioned in lowsec, and I have missioned in nullsec. The payout for missioning in lower security space is not as lucrative as it should be. The payouts should be more. The bounties should be more. Oh and some of the best income that lowsec and nullsec had, got extremely nerfed when CCP thought it would be a great idea to make exploration so super easy. Sure it gave ya'll more targets in lowsec and nullsec, but it also took away some good income. If it was me, I'd want CCP to remove Incursions from Hisec. Lowsec and Nullsec only. Increase the reward multiplier for doing mission in lower security space. Fix FW missions so you can not do missions in a stealth bomber. Make ships equipped with warp stabs unable to capture FW plexes. Revert exploration back to 2011 mechanics.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13003	Posted - 2015.11.24 20:51:48 - [96] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: Hisec was nerfed previously with the removal of L5s in hisec, and moving them exclusively to lowsec. Did this cause the desired effect? Don't tell me you're one of those people who don't understand that lvl 5 missions in high sec was a bug. CCP didn't move them out of high sec to get people to move, the fix a bug that disallowed them in high sec, because they were never designed to be in high sec the 1st place. They said this over and over again when they fixed the bug. Quote: If it was me, I'd want CCP to remove Incursions from Hisec. Lowsec and Nullsec only. Increase the reward multiplier for doing mission in lower security space. Fix FW missions so you can not do missions in a stealth bomber. Make ships equipped with warp stabs unable to capture FW plexes. Revert exploration back to 2011 mechanics. I agree with most of that except removing incursions from high sec. They are good content, they are just to damn farmable. I hope Drifer Incursions replace them. Sov null has no mission agents, we should not have to rely on far away NPC null mission agents to live. The onyl thing needing changing in sov null is anoms need to not be afkable, other than that, the income you get from them is fine. Close the 'bltizing loopholes' in high sec (and all sec) missioning, fix incursions, nerfbat FW missions and make null anoms un-afkable so if anom runners want isk they have to actually play. That's what my perfect PVE scene right there.
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 881	Posted - 2015.11.24 22:09:14 - [97] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: Hisec was nerfed previously with the removal of L5s in hisec, and moving them exclusively to lowsec. Did this cause the desired effect? Don't tell me you're one of those people who don't understand that lvl 5 missions in high sec was a bug. CCP didn't move them out of high sec to get people to move, the fix a bug that disallowed them in high sec, because they were never designed to be in high sec the 1st place. They said this over and over again when they fixed the bug. Quote: If it was me, I'd want CCP to remove Incursions from Hisec. Lowsec and Nullsec only. Increase the reward multiplier for doing mission in lower security space. Fix FW missions so you can not do missions in a stealth bomber. Make ships equipped with warp stabs unable to capture FW plexes. Revert exploration back to 2011 mechanics. I agree with most of that except removing incursions from high sec. They are good content, they are just to damn farmable. I hope Drifer Incursions replace them. Sov null has no mission agents, we should not have to rely on far away NPC null mission agents to live. The onyl thing needing changing in sov null is anoms need to not be afkable, other than that, the income you get from them is fine. Close the 'bltizing loopholes' in high sec (and all sec) missioning, fix incursions, nerfbat FW missions and make null anoms un-afkable so if anom runners want isk they have to actually play. That's what my perfect PVE scene right there. See, Sov null should have some option to have mission agents in the new Citadel city. Sansha Incursions being replaced by Drifters would be ideal. Superweapon and all.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 610	Posted - 2015.11.24 22:09:47 - [98] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: Of course, the solution is to nerf hisec income; because no one who lives in null wants to actually put some effort into making null look attractive again. Nullies just want to take the easy path and nerf hisec because it works better for them. If you had a problem with your car's battery, would you fix it (replace the battery) or would you work on every other part of the car that wasn't the battery. False premise/straw man. Denial-ism (self interested denial-ism at that). The interesting thing about this little fantasy scenario you've created for yourself where I'm this big bad evil self interested bad guy is that it falls apart when you try and explain why I would go to all the trouble to write a guide and to help people to get the most out of Hi-Sec. According to you, if it's really such a bad thing, wouldn't it be in your interest to get as many people to 'abuse' lv4 missions? That should get CCP on it pronto right? Not to mention the more people that do what I do the lower my own profits. But then these little fantasy worlds do tend to break down when scrutinized. Not to mention all the other issues you refuse to face that I've brought up. But that's neither here nor there I guess. I await with bated breath what insult you'll throw at me next. Maybe something with a fascism slant to it this time. Those are always good. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
Hasikan Miallok Republic University Minmatar Republic 1671	Posted - 2015.11.24 22:34:00 - [99] - Quote OK ... putting aside the whole 200 mill/hr in L4 missions versus xxx mill in lvl5 with a carrier etc discussions that go on ad nauseum. How would making L4 missions impossible to run solo or blitz or eliminating Sansha incursions from highsec or for that matter any other reduction in highsec income increase the income of someone else ratting in null ?
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 881	Posted - 2015.11.24 22:45:10 - [100] - Quote Hasikan Miallok wrote: OK ... putting aside the whole 200 mill/hr in L4 missions versus xxx mill in lvl5 with a carrier etc discussions that go on ad nauseum. How would making L4 missions impossible to run solo or blitz or eliminating Sansha incursions from highsec or for that matter any other reduction in highsec income increase the income of someone else ratting in null ? It doesn't it just makes them feel more superior.

Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13005	Posted - 2015.11.24 23:26:23 - [101] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: The interesting thing about this little fantasy scenario you've created for yourself where I'm this big bad evil self interested bad guy is that it falls apart when you try and explain why I would go to all the trouble to write a guide and to help people to get the most out of Hi-Sec. According to you, if it's really such a bad thing, wouldn't it be in your interest to get as many people to 'abuse' lv4 missions? That should get CCP on it pronto right? Not to mention the more people that do what I do the lower my own profits. But then these little fantasy worlds do tend to break down when scrutinized. I didn't say you were a bad person for making a guide. I say that you are in denial about the fact that what your guide shows in unbalanced. You show your denial by clinging to the idea that everything is fine because people elsewhere can "just use alts", which means that you know it's unbalanced, but can't bring yourself to admit it. Like I said, it's understandable because people who benefit from a broken thing tend to rationalize why it's ok. It human, it's just not noble or right. When something is broken, I admit it. I told CCP about the high sec lvl 5 bug. Didn't stop me from running them, but honesty is important. Same goes for me now, I run incursions when my null space is too hot (sometimes dual boxing with my navy raven toon in Lanngisi). But nothing has ever made me want to deny that the things are broken, too much isk for that kind of safety. When I knew people who were suing tracking Titans to make 400 mil per hour in null sec, I talked about that too,, that was also bad for the game. I do FW too when the conditions are right, and that's even more broken than anyhitng in high sec. But you, deny a problem even exists, and somehow I'm the bad guy for pointing this out to you. Work on your integrity then lets talk about things. Quote: Not to mention all the other issues you refuse to face that I've brought up. But that's neither here nor there I guess. I await with bated breath what insult you'll throw at me next. Maybe something with a fascism slant to it this time. Those are always good. Telling someone who is not telling the truth that they are not telling the truth is not an insult. Its the truth. As I say, you are not alone, there is a whole thread full of incursion runners in GD claiming that their activity that generates 8.3 Trillion isk per month (third biggest isk faucet in the game) but only has 1.5% of players participating in the activity on any given day is perfectly balanced 'because incursions require organization'. With them, as with you, honesty would preferred, but not required.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13005	Posted - 2015.11.24 23:37:38 - [102] - Quote Hasikan Miallok wrote: OK ... putting aside the whole 200 mill/hr in L4 missions versus xxx mill in lvl5 with a carrier etc discussions that go on ad nauseum. How would making L4 missions impossible to run solo or blitz or eliminating Sansha incursions from highsec or for that matter any other reduction in highsec income increase the income of someone else ratting in null ? I don't know why the things being said here are hard to understand. Null income doesn't need increasing. increasing it would be bad for the game, and some of us aren't selfish enough to want to see that happen just to enrich us. The current situation creates a backwards incentive for high end pve players to "go isk up in high sec" rather than be out in the places they actually live. Hell, right this moment i'm considering logging in my incursion alt because INIT is roaming around my constellation looking for kills, making ratting a risky proposition. My choice right this second is warp my ratting mach to a site and hope I can get out, or my mate can get to me before I pop. OR log off this toon, log in incursion alt on same account, and not een glance at local at all. If no incursions, log in Navy Raven pilot in Lanngisi and chill for the rest of the evening. High Sec should not be so enticing. Going back to high sec for someone like me should be a compromise. "Well, I'm tired of the disruptions of null and low sec, ill go back to high and chill, and I accept Ill make a little less isk per hour but hey, i'll be safer" is how that should work. But that's not how it works it works like "well, tired of the disruptions of null, guess i'll log on in high sec AND BE REWARDED FOR THAT DECISION with not ony more safety, but more income as well". Anize Onamara provided the proof, used to rat in null with 2 characters for 16 mil per character per tick (32 mil total), and now has a guide about how to make twice as much isk in an hour using 1 toon and 'some set up costs' lol. How can grown people be so dishonest as to see the above words and not say "you know, that sounds unbalanced".
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 610	Posted - 2015.11.24 23:56:57 - [103] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Anize Onamara provided the proof, used to rat in null with 2 characters for 16 mil per character per tick (32 mil total), and now has a guide about how to make twice as much isk in an hour using 1 toon and 'some set up costs' lol. How can grown people be so dishonest as to see the above words and not say "you know, that sounds unbalanced". Speaking of dishonesty, that was with meta fit typhoon fleet and a extremely poorly skilled meta fit myrmadon. I was doing about as much dps as a single max skilled Rattlesnake and less than a carrier. I made as much clear but it's convenient to leave that out. In null you have alts anyways. Hell I have an alt in HS anyways. If I went back to null right now I'd be able to probably get close to 200mill/h without adding another account to my monthly costs. I can even watch a movie while I'm doing it, something I can't do while blitzing. NO you cant make 200mill with two afktars but with two actively piloted rattlesnakes, you know actually putting effort into it like I do with blitzing, actually focused attention and energy, yea probably. If it's so easy then why aren't I in null right now? Because null sucks and it has absolutely nothing to do with the income sources in HS and everything to do with the people living there. I don't blame anyone that would rather spend time in HS and not have to deal with the BS of nullsec. The fact that you'd log off rather than engage those roaming gangs is the problem. But HS is easy to blame, always has been. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 372	Posted - 2015.11.25 01:06:44 - [104] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: The fact that you'd log off rather than engage those roaming gangs is the problem. But HS is easy to blame, always has been. lawl, im sure when you are wardecced, you will stop what you want to do & just fight them off hey?
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 610	Posted - 2015.11.25 01:53:34 - [105] - Quote Jerry T Pepridge wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: The fact that you'd log off rather than engage those roaming gangs is the problem. But HS is easy to blame, always has been. lawl, im sure when you are wardecced, you will stop what you want to do & just fight them off hey? If I had a couple hundred or more corp mates I might consider it. Heck just getting a decently sized gang together would be fun. Or when did Eve become about not blowing up space pixels? Edit: When it became to expensive apparently. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 372	Posted - 2015.11.25 02:12:49 - [106] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: Or when did Eve become about not blowing up space pixels? When you decided to compare HS & NS ratting incomes, while min maxing down to the last LP & saying "oh you are in nullsec, you just kill the gang with your corp mates blurf hurf." its not a balanced ledger, you know it, or you would still be in nullsec ratting & not in highsec. E: you were in AU TZ nullsec, you mean to tell me you could get 100 corpmates to stop ratting/do whatever to fight a gang off? like a race horse you have the blinkers on, melbourne cup has come and gone mate!
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13006	Posted - 2015.11.25 02:52:33 - [107] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: two actively piloted rattlesnakes Two Rattlesnakes. Risked in null sec where there is no CONCORD and where intel doesn't always work. Two characters. 30 bucks a month to CCP for playing in null sec compared to the 15 you need to pay (or 2 plex vs 1). It takes TWICE AS MUCH to match what you do in high sec in (from your own guide) "relative safety". You're unbelievable. You keep proving the point, yet you keep arguing. You can't just say "yea, I know there is an imbalance, im going to keep doing this till CCP nerfs it". That, at least, would be honest.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 610	Posted - 2015.11.25 08:51:52 - [108] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: two actively piloted rattlesnakes Two Rattlesnakes. Risked in null sec where there is no CONCORD and where intel doesn't always work. Two characters. 30 bucks a month to CCP for playing in null sec compared to the 15 you need to pay (or 2 plex vs 1). It takes TWICE AS MUCH to match what you do in high sec in (from your own guide) "relative safety". You're unbelievable. You keep proving the point, yet you keep arguing. You can't just say "yea, I know there is an imbalance, im going to keep doing this till CCP nerfs it". That, at least, would be honest. I have two accounts subbed, I don't use the other one to make isk because I can't realistically do that with mission running the way I do. That's how it's balanced. I am realistically limited to one account. In null I can use that other account to make isk (not to mention passive PI on both), and I can add more accounts for more isk for my real time invested. It's not my fault people aren't taking advantage of this. Maybe I should write a guide on it. You keep ignoring this simple fact and I will continue to bring it up until you acknowledge it; Nullsec has a higher isk/h cap (and this is fine!). I'm sure there is a point where too many clients running at the same time is just too many, maybe 4 or so comfortably for a normal person? Also no reply regarding manning up and keeping the space you own clean. The whole point of Null is you get to be concord but from looking at some of the recent news regarding null I guess that dream changed at some point in time. When did the dream die man, when did it die? A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 610	Posted - 2015.11.25 08:55:20 - [109] - Quote Jerry T Pepridge wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: Or when did Eve become about not blowing up space pixels? When you decided to compare HS & NS ratting incomes, while min maxing down to the last LP & saying "oh you are in nullsec, you just kill the gang with your corp mates blurf hurf." its not a balanced ledger, you know it, or you would still be in nullsec ratting & not in highsec. E: you were in AU TZ nullsec, you mean to tell me you could get 100 corpmates to stop ratting/do whatever to fight a gang off? like a race horse you have the blinkers on, melbourne cup has come and gone mate! Not AU TZ 'mate'. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 376	Posted - 2015.11.25 10:59:58 - [110] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: Jerry T Pepridge wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: Or when did Eve become about not blowing up space pixels? When you decided to compare HS & NS ratting incomes, while min maxing down to the last LP & saying "oh you are in nullsec, you just kill the gang with your corp mates blurf hurf." its not a balanced ledger, you know it, or you would still be in nullsec ratting & not in highsec. E: you were in AU TZ nullsec, you mean to tell me you could get 100 corpmates to stop ratting/do whatever to fight a gang off? like a race horse you have the blinkers on, melbourne cup has come and gone mate! Not AU TZ 'mate'. Also I like how I'm now responsible for the decline of Nullsec. I should go into politics with that kind of clout. no, you are responsible for the decline of this thread. now come on time is money minion, you just wasted 4.3m reading this.

Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 254	Posted - 2015.11.25 13:08:37 - [111] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Made a few tweaks to two of the ships in my fleet to have a bit less tank/damage and more damage application overall. Also added a flight of light drones to each (minimal use in 1 or 2 missions). Running time was 1:03 (the shortest segment) but the most profitable of the group. Finally got some decent implant drops in this one. Mission list (7): GÇó The Assaut GÇó Cargo Delivery (did kill everything this time) GÇó Dread Pirate Scarlet (killed absolutely everything, including Scarlet twice) GÇó The Rogue Slave Trader GÇó Downing the Slavers GÇó Massive Attack GÇó The Damsel In Distress (only looted 70m Zor implant; worth it chasing after this chick occasionally...) ISK total: 78,498,606 Loot: 80,300,000 LP total: ~32,500 (1200 ISK/LP conversion) Grand total: 197,798,606 ISK / 1:03 or 188.3m ISK/hour Taking the average of the last three sessions: GÇó 539.6m ISK total (197.8m ISK, 147.0m ISK and 194.8m ISK) GÇó 258 minutes total (1:22, 1:53 and 1:03) GÇó 2.09m ISK/minute or 125.5m ISK/hour This is running straight Lv4s and only declining Burner and Faction-averse standing missions. Kill everything and minimal salvage (mission objectives and implants). For those that think the Zor implant is a fluke, you have two chances to drop it: Damsel and Zazzmatazz. On average I seem to drop it once per session (and on the really rare occasion two). Scarlet implants are pretty much a guaranteed 8m ISK hike. And while I was lucky to snag a pair of Crimson Harvest sites, I didn't get any of the accelerator drops, either. How often does Damsel in Distress drops that 60m Zor Navigation implant?
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13006	Posted - 2015.11.25 13:21:10 - [112] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: I have two accounts subbed, I don't use the other one to make isk because I can't realistically do that with mission running the way I do. That's how it's balanced. I am realistically limited to one account. In null I can use that other account to make isk (not to mention passive PI on both), and I can add more accounts for more isk for my real time invested. It's not my fault people aren't taking advantage of this. Maybe I should write a guide on it. You keep ignoring this simple fact and I will continue to bring it up until you acknowledge it; Nullsec has a higher isk/h cap (and this is fine!). I'm sure there is a point where too many clients running at the same time is just too many, maybe 4 or so comfortably for a normal person? You wonder why I keep hammering on you. it's noting personal, but when I see someone in this much denial about something, it's irritating. We are talking about a balance situation, 1 character to 1 character. Talking about how much you can do with 2+ characters doesn't address the imbalance (side not, unlike you I have used multiple characters in null, you STILL can't make the same kind of isk you make in your guide using 2. 2 Rattlesnakes will at best pull 180 mil per hour, maybe 2oo if you stick to forsaken hubs and use each ship in individual sites to avoid overkill and if doubt that I don't mind getting 2 snakes over the course of the next week and making a video showing this to you). The only way you match what you can do in high sec is use two carriers. two carriers in some place where npcs won't help you if you get attacked, because the other thing you don't address here (but do adress in your guide with the words "Relative safety") is the fact that CONCORD provides you additional value. No one is telling you to stop doing what you are doing. What you are doing isn't against the EULA. It is unbalanced though, and it's ok if you can't admit that publicly, but stop getting mad at me for talking about it. Quote: Also no reply regarding manning up and keeping the space you own clean. The whole point of Null is you get to be concord but from looking at some of the recent news regarding null I guess that dream changed at some point in time. Go to Zkillboard. in the search bar in the upper right type in "Jenn aSide". Look at the part that tells you were my activity occurs and you will see that the vast bulk of the killmails I get on are in 2 constellations in Wicked Creek. After you've done that, tab back over to this page and read what you wrote again. understand that you are reacting the way you are not because I've been mean to you, but because I've told you a truth about your on opinions that make you uncomfortable. I don't mean any harm dude, but you are wrong, and from reading your excelent guide I know you are smart enough to not be wrong (which makes it worse, it you were some idiot I could dismiss you, but you actually seem to be a good PVEr) Quote: When did the dream die man, when did it die? It dies when you bascially turned into Market McSelling Alt jr and stopped being able to tell the truth about a video game issue. Stop doing that.
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 881	Posted - 2015.11.25 14:43:05 - [113] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Hasikan Miallok wrote: OK ... putting aside the whole 200 mill/hr in L4 missions versus xxx mill in lvl5 with a carrier etc discussions that go on ad nauseum. How would making L4 missions impossible to run solo or blitz or eliminating Sansha incursions from highsec or for that matter any other reduction in highsec income increase the income of someone else ratting in null ? Null income doesn't need increasing. increasing it would be bad for the game, and some of us aren't selfish enough to want to see that happen just to enrich us. I disagree a bit. It does need increasing if you want to entice people to go there. The way I see the game the isk generating mechanics should be consistent across all type of security space (minus WHs). For instance, missioning should be available in sov null; not just npc null. A mechanic is needed so Citadels/Starbases can have agents. Mission rewards in lowsec and nullsec are crap. No incentive to run them. This can be seen by people in npc null ratting more than they mission. Seriously, if I run a mission in a .2 system I expect a bit more of a reward that an extra 1mil isk and double my LP payout. Let me put it this way, if I get 2-3 missions done in lowsec and get rewarded in total 20mil isk and 35k LP, then on my way to my next mission I get caught and lose my ship; then I just lost isk. So why should I run L4 missions in lowsec or nullsec if the mission rewards are not going to be commiserate to replace my losses? Now most people would say, "You shouldn't be missioning in lowsec and nullsec. There are better ways to earn isk in those levels of space." They would be right, but I still say the mission rewards should be better than they are currently. PI scales pretty consistently, so should everything else. Also, if Incursions stay in hisec, then I say incrusion rats on stargates need to happen. If players have to deal with them in lowsec and nullsec, then hisec should be no different.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13009	Posted - 2015.11.25 15:09:21 - [114] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: I disagree a bit. It does need increasing if you want to entice people to go there. The way I see the game the isk generating mechanics should be consistent across all type of security space (minus WHs). Who ever said anything about enticing people to go somewhere? I don't want people to leave where they are (even if making them leave was possible, which it is not, this is game, people just log off rather than do something they don't want to). No, this isn't about making people move. It's about freeing those of us who already moved out of high sec from having to be in high sec (and FW). High sec should be a viable place to live for those who choose it, but it should not be so good as to entice people like me to make high sec isk making alts. Ideally, a PVE players living in null (or low) should only have an alt in high sec (or FW) because he/she actually likes high sec PVE (or FW missions), not because it offers so much better rewards than the space he/she lives in. Quote: For instance, missioning should be available in sov null; not just npc null. A mechanic is needed so Citadels/Starbases can have agents. Mission rewards in lowsec and nullsec are crap. No incentive to run them. This can be seen by people in npc null ratting more than they mission. Seriously, if I run a mission in a .2 system I expect a bit more of a reward that an extra 1mil isk and double my LP payout. Let me put it this way, if I get 2-3 missions done in lowsec and get rewarded in total 20mil isk and 35k LP, then on my way to my next mission I get caught and lose my ship; then I just lost isk. So why should I run L4 missions in lowsec or nullsec if the mission rewards are not going to be commiserate to replace my losses? Now most people would say, "You shouldn't be missioning in lowsec and nullsec. There are better ways to earn isk in those levels of space." They would be right, but I still say the mission rewards should be better than they are currently. PI scales pretty consistently, so should everything else. Also, if Incursions stay in hisec, then I say incrusion rats on stargates need to happen. If players have to deal with them in lowsec and nullsec, then hisec should be no different. I can agree with all of this. However the problem is that missions are blitzable and some "Null Version of Anize Onamara" will find a way to maximize it to the point where it becomes a problem (some people do this in npc null now). Even if it's LP or tags instead of isk, it's still the problem of too much wealth coming into the game.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 254	Posted - 2015.11.25 15:16:16 - [115] - Quote So in other words Jenn, you prefer to live in null sec where you are enjoying having to fight for you own space but are jealous of hi-sec cause the isk you can make there rivals what you're making in your fighting null sec with reduced risk. The bottom line is that you're just flat out jealous of the income potential in high-sec. I'm disappointed in you Jenn, I actually thought you were actually wanting to improve PVE content for purer reasons other than flat out jealousy. Not everyone has the audacity or experience yet to embark on your endeavors and yet you feel that such players shouldn't be able to make your level of income. One word describes that attitude and that is CONCEIT. You're a very conceited person you know that? Why would CCP take your ramblings seriously?
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 881	Posted - 2015.11.25 15:28:00 - [116] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: I disagree a bit. It does need increasing if you want to entice people to go there. The way I see the game the isk generating mechanics should be consistent across all type of security space (minus WHs). Who ever said anything about enticing people to go somewhere? I don't want people to leave where they are (even if making them leave was possible, which it is not, this is game, people just log off rather than do something they don't want to). No, this isn't about making people move. It's about freeing those of us who already moved out of high sec from having to be in high sec (and FW). High sec should be a viable place to live for those who choose it, but it should not be so good as to entice people like me to make high sec isk making alts. Ideally, a PVE players living in null (or low) should only have an alt in high sec (or FW) because he/she actually likes high sec PVE (or FW missions), not because it offers so much better rewards than the space he/she lives in. Quote: For instance, missioning should be available in sov null; not just npc null. A mechanic is needed so Citadels/Starbases can have agents. Mission rewards in lowsec and nullsec are crap. No incentive to run them. This can be seen by people in npc null ratting more than they mission. Seriously, if I run a mission in a .2 system I expect a bit more of a reward that an extra 1mil isk and double my LP payout. Let me put it this way, if I get 2-3 missions done in lowsec and get rewarded in total 20mil isk and 35k LP, then on my way to my next mission I get caught and lose my ship; then I just lost isk. So why should I run L4 missions in lowsec or nullsec if the mission rewards are not going to be commiserate to replace my losses? Now most people would say, "You shouldn't be missioning in lowsec and nullsec. There are better ways to earn isk in those levels of space." They would be right, but I still say the mission rewards should be better than they are currently. PI scales pretty consistently, so should everything else. Also, if Incursions stay in hisec, then I say incrusion rats on stargates need to happen. If players have to deal with them in lowsec and nullsec, then hisec should be no different. I can agree with all of this. However the problem is that missions are blitzable and some "Null Version of Anize Onamara" will find a way to maximize it to the point where it becomes a problem (some people do this in npc null now). Even if it's LP or tags instead of isk, it's still the problem of too much wealth coming into the game. Well, that can be fixed by CCP by allowing the Command Destroyers to use their Micro Jump Drive Generator in hisec. Can we say Incursion ganking? There are already a lot of isk faucets, but not enough isk drains. Need more people out there can/mission flipping too. Of course, if that were to happen people would be screaming on their hisec alts to make hisec even more safe. You know, because of self-entitlement and stuff.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13010	Posted - 2015.11.25 16:06:09 - [117] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: Well, that can be fixed by CCP by allowing the Command Destroyers to use their Micro Jump Drive Generator in hisec. Can we say Incursion ganking? There are already a lot of isk faucets, but not enough isk drains. I simply don't understand this thinking. No one wants to attack incursion runners. They aren't doing anything wrong, and we (folks like me) are among them. They aren't breaking any rules. The activity they do is the unbalanced thing. That's a CCP issue and they need to fix it (not destroy it). I think the thing underlying the idea about "just go attack them" is the idea that jealousy is a motivation here. It is not. My wallet is filled with incursion isk and my journal has 1 mil CONCORD LP that i haven't sold yet (I sell on the chat channel set up by TVP btw). I'm simply observing a broken thing and talking about how to fix it, again no one wants to attack incursion runners (or FW missions runners, or high sec mission blitzers).
The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 17	Posted - 2015.11.25 16:24:48 - [118] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: snip And second, I thing you know it's no use arguing with these people. Like Malcanis likes to say (which was lifted off some dead guy) GÇ£It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.GÇ¥ . The imbalance is well documented (even recently, with CCP Quant expressing surprise at how few people Incursion why also generating the 3rd largest isk faucet). I've described it myself time and again, but they don't want to hear it, because it doesn't fit their prejudices (against null sec). So i stopped talking to them about it, and started talking directly to CCP at player events. snip And yet it rolls onGÇª Jenn aSide wrote: snip Look, I'm done with you people snip Four pages later, still talkingGÇª I for one am not going to suggest it's balanced. I think Null sec should be able to provide higher ISK/hr than Hi sec, by quite a margin. But because of the mechanics of Null sec, I don't see it being implementable without trashing the rest of the game. It was mentioned earlier, why don't people go out into Null and fight for a piece of space of their own? Simple. Cos as soon as they do, all their stuff gets blown up by all the other people in Null. I can't go and fight for a corner of space to call my own without joining one of the major power blocs that already claim it. And that's not how I want to play this GAME. Which incidentally, I pay for with real money, not ISK, cos I think CCP have made a good game and deserve to be paid for it. You said it yourself Jenn, a single cloaked ship can enter a system and everyone will drop what they are doing and run and hide. I don't want to play like that. But I can't play the game the way I want to play it in Null because of the other people in Null, who seem to think I have to play the game the way they want to play or not at all. I see this behaviour in the playground when I pick my children up from school. But it's the way Null sec works. And it's fine if that's how you want to play. Maybe the rewards in Null should be raised (but then does it also need to be made less afk-able), maybe the rewards in High should be lowered (but then are we punishing the people who, like me, can't commit to Null sec because of ropey internet connection and the ever loving Spouse Aggro phenomenon, or who just don't want to PVP for whatever reason). People like Anize play PVE in a very specific way, which I frankly could not be arsed to do, and manage to nudge ahead of the ISK/hr curve by doing so. Is the game broken by this, does anybody else suffer or particularly care? No. I would like to go to Null and experience higher level PVE content, but at the moment it's not convenient. I'm not interested in making the max ISK I can, I have plenty of ISK to cover my simple needs, but I do not begrudge other people for playing this GAME any other way.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 611	Posted - 2015.11.25 17:01:25 - [119] - Quote If CCP can show that lv4 missions are harming the game then sure, nerf all they want. But there are far more people like the above poster, than there are people like me for now and probably for ever. Until you actually do what I do and manage to hit 250mill/h your opinion on the matter counts for very little. Same as my opinion would count for nothing on Capital ship PvP because I've never taken part in that part of the game. Currently your crusade is a crusade against a tiny part of a small group of mission runners than have min/maxed the content. However unlike incursions or the huge swathes of nullsec, it's all solo players, with solo characters, not multiple fleets of 40 (some multiboxers) or alliances of thousands (most multiboxing like you) doing it. Until a disproportionate effect is shown that is similar to the lopsided isk per person that incursions are, then the above poster does kinda maybe have a point about you. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13010	Posted - 2015.11.25 17:41:25 - [120] - Quote This is Anize Onamara's required level of evidence to believe anything.

Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 611	Posted - 2015.11.25 18:01:13 - [121] - Quote I stopped watching that video when people started pissing on each other. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 17	Posted - 2015.11.25 18:07:11 - [122] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: This is Anize Onamara's required level of evidence to believe anything. This is Jenn aSide's best effort. Seriously, what impact does a few mission blitzers making more ISK have? I'm quite sure it's not Anize's fault that Plex have quadrupled in price. Or that the price of pirate battleships have plummeted to near T1 levels. Maybe it is unbalanced. But there's other things that need to be looked at.
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 713	Posted - 2015.11.25 18:23:47 - [123] - Quote The Bigpuns wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: This is Anize Onamara's required level of evidence to believe anything. This is Jenn aSide's best effort. Seriously, what impact does a few mission blitzers making more ISK have? I'm quite sure it's not Anize's fault that Plex have quadrupled in price. Or that the price of pirate battleships have plummeted to near T1 levels. Maybe it is unbalanced. But there's other things that need to be looked at. The stupid part of Jenn's argument is that the game is already set up exactly as he wants it to be. You can make X amount of isk blitzing lvl 3s and 4s in High-Sec and you can make exactly 2x the same amount doing the same in Null Sec. The argument comes in that Jenn thinks Null Sec is more risk filled than High-Sec, and no amount of data is going to change his mind. So if you want to make 2x the High-Sec income and then some, run Mordus lvl 4s in 5Z or one of the pirate factions. The LP is double that of a High-Sec system and the LP is worth more. LP makes up more than 65% of the mission income per hour, so voila... Risk vs Reward. I can't help it you are a coward. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 254	Posted - 2015.11.25 18:43:19 - [124] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: I stopped watching that video when people started pissing on each other. This is what happens when you brag about how much you make in hi-sec with your blitzing. You provoke null crybabies like Jenn to start whining about nerfing hi-sec income blah blah. Jealousy is an ugly thing.
The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 18	Posted - 2015.11.25 18:43:53 - [125] - Quote Edit: wondered where my reply had gone, thought the forum ate it, reposted, realised Jenns post had probably been Oblitermoderated, decided to make this post about cats instead. Cats eh?
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13011	Posted - 2015.11.25 18:49:27 - [126] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: The stupid part of Jenn's argument is that the game is already set up exactly as he wants it to be. You can make X amount of isk blitzing lvl 3s and 4s in High-Sec and you can make exactly 2x the same amount doing the same in Null Sec. The argument comes in that Jenn thinks Null Sec is more risk filled than High-Sec, and no amount of data is going to change his mind. So if you want to make 2x the High-Sec income and then some, run Mordus lvl 4s in 5Z or one of the pirate factions. The LP is double that of a High-Sec system and the LP is worth more. LP makes up more than 65% of the mission income per hour, so voila... Risk vs Reward. Same goes for Incursions. You can have more in fleet, with little chance of being contested and make more per site in Null-Sec. Do what you preach. Run the content in Null that is already available that makes far more than you could ever hope to in High-Sec with the same content. I can't help it you are a coward. How does one be a coward in a video game? Liar, sure, coward, not possible. NPC null agents are pretty nice. notice I'm not talking about them Talking about them is a dodge, because it's an attempt to defelct from the actual issue. Same with null incursions, how stupid would a group have to be to invade someone to run PVe sites that pay like 13 or 14 mil per site per pilot than high sec ones. I do get where the opposition comes from (we're all human of course), we see it all the time in real life. In some cases it's self interest overpowering reason (ie your wallet is dependent on you not understanding). In other cases it's ideology overpower reason, some people are ideologically opposed to the kinds of people who 'live' outside high sec, and see any attempt to address balance issues as an attempt to strengthen people they don't like / weaken people they do like, or both. Both of the above are crazy as Rosie O'Donnell. We.are.talking.about.a.video.game. We are talking about measurable issues in that video game. We are talking about things you can experience for yourself. And yet you people would rather obfuscate, lie, misdirect. In a discussion about imaginary money in a game with imaginary spaceships. I find that in-freaking-credible. I've seen worse in real life, but that's real life where real stakes are involved. But this is pretty out there.. If it makes you happy to beleive what you belive about the game we're talking about, I won't stand in your way, but I mean really, i think some of you might actually need some help lol. Good Day, sirs.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13011	Posted - 2015.11.25 18:50:20 - [127] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: I stopped watching that video when people started pissing on each other. This is what happens when you brag about how much you make in hi-sec with your blitzing. You provoke null crybabies like Jenn to start whining about nerfing hi-sec income blah blah. Jealousy is an ugly thing. rofl, translation "damn it Anize, stop tellign the truth!!!!!".
ISD Max Trix ISD Community Communications Liaisons 57	Posted - 2015.11.25 18:51:45 - [128] - Quote Quote: 34. Posting of inappropriate content is prohibited. The posting of pornography, discriminatory remarks which are sexually explicit, harmful, threatening, abusive, defamatory, obscene, hateful, racially or ethnically offensive as well as excessive obscene or vulgar language, posts which discuss or illustrate illegal activity, or an instance of providing links to sites that contain any of the aforementioned is strictly prohibited on the EVE Online forums. A post and those referring to it was deleted for the above reason. ISD Max Trix Ensign Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department
The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 18	Posted - 2015.11.25 18:53:50 - [129] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: The stupid part of Jenn's argument is that the game is already set up exactly as he wants it to be. You can make X amount of isk blitzing lvl 3s and 4s in High-Sec and you can make exactly 2x the same amount doing the same in Null Sec. The argument comes in that Jenn thinks Null Sec is more risk filled than High-Sec, and no amount of data is going to change his mind. So if you want to make 2x the High-Sec income and then some, run Mordus lvl 4s in 5Z or one of the pirate factions. The LP is double that of a High-Sec system and the LP is worth more. LP makes up more than 65% of the mission income per hour, so voila... Risk vs Reward. Same goes for Incursions. You can have more in fleet, with little chance of being contested and make more per site in Null-Sec. Do what you preach. Run the content in Null that is already available that makes far more than you could ever hope to in High-Sec with the same content. I can't help it you are a coward. How does one be a coward in a video game? Liar, sure, coward, not possible. NPC null agents are pretty nice. notice I'm not talking about them Talking about them is a dodge, because it's an attempt to defelct from the actual issue. Same with null incursions, how stupid would a group have to be to invade someone to run PVe sites that pay like 13 or 14 mil per site per pilot than high sec ones. I do get where the opposition comes from (we're all human of course), we see it all the time in real life. In some cases it's self interest overpowering reason (ie your wallet is dependent on you not understanding). In other cases it's ideology overpower reason, some people are ideologically opposed to the kinds of people who 'live' outside high sec, and see any attempt to address balance issues as an attempt to strengthen people they don't like / weaken people they do like, or both. Both of the above are crazy as Rosie O'Donnell. We.are.talking.about.a.video.game. We are talking about measurable issues in that video game. We are talking about things you can experience for yourself. And yet you people would rather obfuscate, lie, misdirect. In a discussion about imaginary money in a game with imaginary spaceships. I find that in-freaking-credible. I've seen worse in real life, but that's real life where real stakes are involved. But this is pretty out there.. If it makes you happy to beleive what you belive about the game we're talking about, I won't stand in your way, but I mean really, i think some of you might actually need some help lol. Good Day, sirs. Says the person who approaches CCP employees to speak to them in person about these issues. Srsly?
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13011	Posted - 2015.11.25 18:58:56 - [130] - Quote The Bigpuns wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: The stupid part of Jenn's argument is that the game is already set up exactly as he wants it to be. You can make X amount of isk blitzing lvl 3s and 4s in High-Sec and you can make exactly 2x the same amount doing the same in Null Sec. The argument comes in that Jenn thinks Null Sec is more risk filled than High-Sec, and no amount of data is going to change his mind. So if you want to make 2x the High-Sec income and then some, run Mordus lvl 4s in 5Z or one of the pirate factions. The LP is double that of a High-Sec system and the LP is worth more. LP makes up more than 65% of the mission income per hour, so voila... Risk vs Reward. Same goes for Incursions. You can have more in fleet, with little chance of being contested and make more per site in Null-Sec. Do what you preach. Run the content in Null that is already available that makes far more than you could ever hope to in High-Sec with the same content. I can't help it you are a coward. How does one be a coward in a video game? Liar, sure, coward, not possible. NPC null agents are pretty nice. notice I'm not talking about them Talking about them is a dodge, because it's an attempt to defelct from the actual issue. Same with null incursions, how stupid would a group have to be to invade someone to run PVe sites that pay like 13 or 14 mil per site per pilot than high sec ones. I do get where the opposition comes from (we're all human of course), we see it all the time in real life. In some cases it's self interest overpowering reason (ie your wallet is dependent on you not understanding). In other cases it's ideology overpower reason, some people are ideologically opposed to the kinds of people who 'live' outside high sec, and see any attempt to address balance issues as an attempt to strengthen people they don't like / weaken people they do like, or both. Both of the above are crazy as Rosie O'Donnell. We.are.talking.about.a.video.game. We are talking about measurable issues in that video game. We are talking about things you can experience for yourself. And yet you people would rather obfuscate, lie, misdirect. In a discussion about imaginary money in a game with imaginary spaceships. I find that in-freaking-credible. I've seen worse in real life, but that's real life where real stakes are involved. But this is pretty out there.. If it makes you happy to beleive what you belive about the game we're talking about, I won't stand in your way, but I mean really, i think some of you might actually need some help lol. Good Day, sirs. Says the person who approaches CCP employees to speak to them in person about these issues. Srsly? \ I'll remember to not talk about the video game they make next time i go to a video game event hosted by video game makers. Thanks for the help, I never would have got that without you. (Who knew telling the truth about a measurable issue would generate so much hate lol).

The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 18	Posted - 2015.11.25 19:06:40 - [131] - Quote You keep talking about telling the truth. We'll keep pointing out when you're missing the point. And yes, blatant hypocrisy does count as missing the point. Thought you weren't talking to us any more? Cats eh?
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 881	Posted - 2015.11.25 19:16:46 - [132] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: Well, that can be fixed by CCP by allowing the Command Destroyers to use their Micro Jump Drive Generator in hisec. Can we say Incursion ganking? There are already a lot of isk faucets, but not enough isk drains. I simply don't understand this thinking. No one wants to attack incursion runners. They aren't doing anything wrong, and we (folks like me) are among them. They aren't breaking any rules. The activity they do is the unbalanced thing. That's a CCP issue and they need to fix it (not destroy it). I think the thing underlying the idea about "just go attack them" is the idea that jealousy is a motivation here. It is not. My wallet is filled with incursion isk and my journal has 1 mil CONCORD LP that i haven't sold yet (I sell on the chat channel set up by TVP btw). I'm simply observing a broken thing and talking about how to fix it, again no one wants to attack incursion runners (or FW missions runners, or high sec mission blitzers). Miners can be ganked. Mission Runners can be ganked. Haulers can be ganked. Almost any player ship in space can be ganked when enough effort is applied, except Incursion runners in aa incursion site. Why? Because when you try to warp in with a fleet of Smartbombing BS and turn on the SBs, the server lags badly, and by the time one SB gets off, Concord has arrived and killed everyone. This is wrong. Don't give me that crap that no one wants to attack incursion runners. Only when Incursion runners have to move to a new incursion system do their sphincters tighten up, because they know they are a prime gank target. People try to gank incursion runners all the time when they are moving and would love to gank a fleet, but currently the tools at hand are woefully lacking. Besides, putting in a method to gank Incursion fleets would add the appropriate amount of risk to their Incursion activities.
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 881	Posted - 2015.11.25 19:30:50 - [133] - Quote Technically you can make more isk in nullsec running missions than you do in hisec running missions. As long as you are unhindered/uninterrupted you will make a considerable more amount of isk running missions in nullsec. You can easily test this by logging onto to SISI and using the OPs method at a nullsec mission hub. Try it and post how much isk you make.
Hasikan Miallok Republic University Minmatar Republic 1675	Posted - 2015.11.25 22:58:19 - [134] - Quote I must admit, if burners offered double the LP in losec rather than just slightly more I would be tempted to go blitz them in the cheapest ship that gets the job done on the basis that the occasional PvP ship loss is acceptable if you are making 60 mill every few minutes. Aside from which some of the burners would be quite manageable in PvP capable ships.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2092	Posted - 2015.11.25 23:51:35 - [135] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: Technically you can make more isk in nullsec running missions than you do in hisec running missions. As long as you are unhindered/uninterrupted you will make a considerable more amount of isk running missions in nullsec. You can easily test this by logging onto to SISI and using the OPs method at a nullsec mission hub. Try it and post how much isk you make. I wouldn't be surprised if it was very similar or even less. One of the biggest things pushing up the value in lanngisi is the constellation layout. With some null mission corps yes you can get a better isk/lp ratio, but I really doubt you will be flying with ascendancy implants. And you are going to be going more jumps on average to get to your mission. add I don't even know how much more lp, and also 1000 isk/lp to the payout, and then change average time from 6 to 10 mins I'm not sure it is a very favorable trade off. Some napkin math says it could be favorable, but if you add any sort of risk premium I doubt it. I'm also not really sure about completion time, how much pimp would most people be willing to put on their null burner blitz ships? I also don't know what the maintenance missions would look like. in highsec many are just warp in MJD gank a few ships, warp out. most of those would be pretty safe to run in null as you are in mission for such a short period of time. If you undock and it is immediately hostile then yea probably best to call it off. but if you can get into the mission you can probably get it done before anyone can disturb you, unless you know the people probing you are damn good. although I have heard of people multiboxing 5 accounts and in that case perhaps if you can pull multiple burners in the same direction and then kill 3-4 each time you undock. but now I'm going off into speculation land. @ChainsawPlankto
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 611	Posted - 2015.11.26 00:21:21 - [136] - Quote Some quotes from a different place where I'm sharing my guide that might be applicable. Quote: It works in NPC null too btw; I've been messing around with it for a small while. If you think 0.5 sec burner missions give out tons of LP, take a look at 0.0 sec burner missions. Also, you don't have to copy-paste anti-burner fits blindly. The "Unified Daredevil" with 3 armor-repair rigs runs every single "Anomic Agent" mission perfectly well. It has the same completion time for the Daredevil Burner as the Hawk, and is only ~45 seconds slower than the Wolf against the Cruor. It's cool to see that someone independently came up with almost the exact same Polarized Garmur blitzing fit as me though. and Quote: Depends on the area, some places are more camped than others. L4 missions are usually 1 jump maximum with the better paying mission usually in the same system. Once you get high enough standings you can decline essentially any mission you want. and Quote: Look at PFP-GU for an example. I made my first 1bil blitzing missions there with a 6000 isk:LP ratio (back in 2013). Two L4 security agents and it's literally empty 22/7. In the ~3 months I spent there I only ran into two gate-camps, and only lost 1 ship (was trying to MJD-kite an Arazu). There's better examples of course, but that's a decent-enough one. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17041	Posted - 2015.11.26 00:26:44 - [137] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: Some quotes from a different place where I'm sharing my guide that might be applicable. Quote: It works in NPC null too btw; I've been messing around with it for a small while. If you think 0.5 sec burner missions give out tons of LP, take a look at 0.0 sec burner missions. Also, you don't have to copy-paste anti-burner fits blindly. The "Unified Daredevil" with 3 armor-repair rigs runs every single "Anomic Agent" mission perfectly well. It has the same completion time for the Daredevil Burner as the Hawk, and is only ~45 seconds slower than the Wolf against the Cruor. It's cool to see that someone independently came up with almost the exact same Polarized Garmur blitzing fit as me though. and Quote: Depends on the area, some places are more camped than others. L4 missions are usually 1 jump maximum with the better paying mission usually in the same system. Once you get high enough standings you can decline essentially any mission you want. and Quote: Look at PFP-GU for an example. I made my first 1bil blitzing missions there with a 6000 isk:LP ratio (back in 2013). Two L4 security agents and it's literally empty 22/7. In the ~3 months I spent there I only ran into two gate-camps, and only lost 1 ship (was trying to MJD-kite an Arazu). There's better examples of course, but that's a decent-enough one. there are no mission agents in the vest bulk of null. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 713	Posted - 2015.11.26 00:40:04 - [138] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: Some quotes from a different place where I'm sharing my guide that might be applicable. Quote: It works in NPC null too btw; I've been messing around with it for a small while. If you think 0.5 sec burner missions give out tons of LP, take a look at 0.0 sec burner missions. Also, you don't have to copy-paste anti-burner fits blindly. The "Unified Daredevil" with 3 armor-repair rigs runs every single "Anomic Agent" mission perfectly well. It has the same completion time for the Daredevil Burner as the Hawk, and is only ~45 seconds slower than the Wolf against the Cruor. It's cool to see that someone independently came up with almost the exact same Polarized Garmur blitzing fit as me though. and Quote: Depends on the area, some places are more camped than others. L4 missions are usually 1 jump maximum with the better paying mission usually in the same system. Once you get high enough standings you can decline essentially any mission you want. and Quote: Look at PFP-GU for an example. I made my first 1bil blitzing missions there with a 6000 isk:LP ratio (back in 2013). Two L4 security agents and it's literally empty 22/7. In the ~3 months I spent there I only ran into two gate-camps, and only lost 1 ship (was trying to MJD-kite an Arazu). There's better examples of course, but that's a decent-enough one. there are no mission agents in the vest bulk of null. There are no lvl 4 security agents in the vast bulk of High-Sec either... and 97% of the agents in High-Sec don't pay out enough in the right kind of LP to bust what you can make mining in Null. Most LP is worthless, most mission agents in High-Sec are worthless. There are very few worthless agents in Null. By the way, there are well over 200 Level 4 Security agents in Null sec. So you are pretty much wrong anyways. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17041	Posted - 2015.11.26 00:43:50 - [139] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: There are no lvl 4 security agents in the vast bulk of High-Sec either... and 97% of the agents in High-Sec don't pay out enough in the right kind of LP to bust what you can make mining in Null. Most LP is worthless, most mission agents in High-Sec are worthless. There are very few worthless agents in Null. By the way, there are well over 200 Level 4 Security agents in Null sec. So you are pretty much wrong anyways. Feel free to tell us where the level 4 agents are located in dek Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13012	Posted - 2015.11.26 00:54:07 - [140] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: There are no lvl 4 security agents in the vast bulk of High-Sec either... and 97% of the agents in High-Sec don't pay out enough in the right kind of LP to bust what you can make mining in Null. Most LP is worthless, most mission agents in High-Sec are worthless. There are very few worthless agents in Null. By the way, there are well over 200 Level 4 Security agents in Null sec. So you are pretty much wrong anyways. Feel free to tell us where the level 4 agents are located in dek I'm sure he will, while again not realizing that what he's saying helps us prove the point: High Sec is so unbalanced if you want to compete with it you can't even PVE in space you fought for, you have to stick to NPC space.

Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 381	Posted - 2015.11.26 01:27:27 - [141] - Quote I ran missions in syndicate 0.0 for transtellar shipping, was mad LP's, for the 5 mins i was able to undock in a PVE ship, without being interupted.
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 882	Posted - 2015.11.26 01:55:30 - [142] - Quote 1. I did mention in a previous post that Sov Null needed a way to add mission agents. 2. I also mentioned that mission rewards for the mission agents in nullsec are better than their hisec counterparts. 3. I also mentioned that if you can run missions without interruption in null, then the payout is better. Basically if you can replicate the same parameters in nullsec as you have in hisec, then the nullsec payout would be better due to the higher mission rewards. Unfortunately, you can't; which is why comparing L4 mission income with nullsec ratting is no comparison. Now, compare hisec ratting with nullsec ratting, and I think you will find the payout is way better in nullsec. To summarize, you are comparing 2 different activities; not the same activity.
Hasikan Miallok Republic University Minmatar Republic 1676	Posted - 2015.11.26 02:59:54 - [143] - Quote In an ideal sandbox game things like SOV null should have no ISK faucets at all just really good drops of loot that can be sold off to the SOV holder (who replaces the NPC corp as mission giver more or less) or even shipped back to hisec at a huge profit. I am not 100% seeing the logic of "move to null and get out of the PvE grind" and "null needs more PvE ISK faucets" at the one and same time.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13012	Posted - 2015.11.26 04:51:45 - [144] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: 1. I did mention in a previous post that Sov Null needed a way to add mission agents. 2. I also mentioned that mission rewards for the mission agents in nullsec are better than their hisec counterparts. 3. I also mentioned that if you can run missions without interruption in null, then the payout is better. Basically if you can replicate the same parameters in nullsec as you have in hisec, then the nullsec payout would be better due to the higher mission rewards. Unfortunately, you can't; which is why comparing L4 mission income with nullsec ratting is no comparison. Now, compare hisec ratting with nullsec ratting, and I think you will find the payout is way better in nullsec. To summarize, you are comparing 2 different activities; not the same activity. This is actually repeating the mistake CCP has made for years. In the beginning, CCP made high sec missions and low sec missions that paid more and null sec missions that paid the best. Then they did it with Incursions. What happened is that they simply did not understand that people seek safety, so high sec missions and incursions get done while the low/null versions mostly do not. And the made Anomalies the core of the null sec PVE scheme, which was a mistake because anomalies were never meant to be used like that. They were meant to be minor encounters that were easy to find and moderately easy to complete (as opposed to signature complexes, which were the major encounters). People have claimed for years that you can compare anoms to missions and incursions. The reason you can is because CCP were the ones who made anoms the centerpiece of Null/WH living. The more dangerous the space, the more lucrative it should potentially be. It was prior to 2009 when a single drop from a DED 10/10 was at minimum the equal of more than 15 missions (back then, 30 mil per hour was considered good, where as a 10/10 would drop a minimum of 500 mil in overseers effect, CCP nerfed that in 2009 to the current 212 mil minimum). PVE rewards need a good, bottom up review (along with a total change to how things like moons work, moon mining should be done by ships, not towers/structures). Of course, to the people making a killing under the current status quo, just saying that last sentence is some kind of blasphemy it seems.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13014	Posted - 2015.11.26 04:56:32 - [145] - Quote Hasikan Miallok wrote: In an ideal sandbox game things like SOV null should have no ISK faucets at all just really good drops of loot that can be sold off to the SOV holder (who replaces the NPC corp as mission giver more or less) or even shipped back to hisec at a huge profit. I am not 100% seeing the logic of "move to null and get out of the PvE grind" and "null needs more PvE ISK faucets" at the one and same time. You're not seeing the logic because you are taking things different people are saying and acting like it's coming from one source. People in null are individuals with different ideas about things, not some monolithic hive mind, no matter what people think of Goons lol. BTW, null DOES NOT need more or bigger isk faucets, people in null do not need more income. There is too much 'income' in this game now, and the new 'Tribute' system is more evidence of the fact that CCP doesn't really know how to provide pve rewards (point blank, they are a sandbox pvp company, look at how all the DEVS who used to be players are PVP players). ALL of PVE in EVE needs to be examined and in some cases reformed. I've said that to you before but for some reason you don't remember that, you keep thinking people need more isk or something..
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2094	Posted - 2015.11.26 08:20:02 - [146] - Quote ahh Jenn making me think of the old days where 3,000-5,000 isk/lp was possible and there were no incursion runners or fuzzworks to kill your markets. I found an old spreadsheet from early 2010 that says 83mil isk/hour, with a 3,500isk/lp ratio. and that was just running every mission that came up (stupid standings!), the list isn't really all that great and includes courier missions as agents could give those. LP/Min is the highlighted stat indicating that back then we* had realized LP was an important stat. I remember another spreadsheet where I pushed the numbers up, but I can't find it. I'm also not sure what character I was running on. Plankton would have probably brought the numbers up, but I think I was a bit more pirate focused then. I imagine I had more spreadsheets, I do remember doing a what if I ran missions like an idiot in a low skilled (I had awful missile skills for a really long time so I was a good candidate :p) cnr test run that would be fun to find. But I would assume they were on the laptop that took a hockey puck straight to the HDD :< * "we" as in whoever was active on the missions forums back in the day, as I doubt I would have realized that on my own. @ChainsawPlankto
The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 24	Posted - 2015.11.26 08:31:24 - [147] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Hasikan Miallok wrote: In an ideal sandbox game things like SOV null should have no ISK faucets at all just really good drops of loot that can be sold off to the SOV holder (who replaces the NPC corp as mission giver more or less) or even shipped back to hisec at a huge profit. I am not 100% seeing the logic of "move to null and get out of the PvE grind" and "null needs more PvE ISK faucets" at the one and same time. You're not seeing the logic because you are taking things different people are saying and acting like it's coming from one source. People in null are individuals with different ideas about things, not some monolithic hive mind, no matter what people think of Goons lol. BTW, null DOES NOT need more or bigger isk faucets, people in null do not need more income. There is too much 'income' in this game now, and the new 'Tribute' system is more evidence of the fact that CCP doesn't really know how to provide pve rewards (point blank, they are a sandbox pvp company, look at how all the DEVS who used to be players are PVP players). ALL of PVE in EVE needs to be examined and in some cases reformed. I've said that to you before but for some reason you don't remember that, you keep thinking people need more isk or something.. Once again, not understanding. Does all of pve need rebalancing? Is all of eve broken except null pvp? No. What has been said is that null income would exceed hisec income, except for having to avoid all the other people in null. Maybe pvp is broken, maybe it needs to be made more difficult to catch people in null (Jenn before you misunderstand again, I don't actually think that, just making a point). The problem is not that people can make lots of isk in hisec in a very extreme set of circumstances. The problem is that you can't effectively do it where you have chosen to live because of the people you have chosen to live with. It's like going to McDonald's and complaining that they don't use the colonels secret recipe.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17041	Posted - 2015.11.26 08:57:03 - [148] - Quote The Bigpuns wrote: Once again, not understanding. Does all of pve need rebalancing? Is all of eve broken except null pvp? No. What has been said is that null income would exceed hisec income, except for having to avoid all the other people in null. Maybe pvp is broken, maybe it needs to be made more difficult to catch people in null (Jenn before you misunderstand again, I don't actually think that, just making a point). The problem is not that people can make lots of isk in hisec in a very extreme set of circumstances. The problem is that you can't effectively do it where you have chosen to live because of the people you have chosen to live with. It's like going to McDonald's and complaining that they don't use the colonels secret recipe. No the problem is very much that PVE in all areas of space aside from WH is a mess. Over the years CCP have nerfed, buffed and added pve content without any thought of the overall picture which has resulted in a rather large game imbalance. Ratting in null sovs anoms using a subcap under the very best of circumstances will net you around the same as a mach blitzing level 3 missions in highsec. Greed is blinding people to the problems. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 255	Posted - 2015.11.26 09:19:19 - [149] - Quote baltec1 wrote: The Bigpuns wrote: Once again, not understanding. Does all of pve need rebalancing? Is all of eve broken except null pvp? No. What has been said is that null income would exceed hisec income, except for having to avoid all the other people in null. Maybe pvp is broken, maybe it needs to be made more difficult to catch people in null (Jenn before you misunderstand again, I don't actually think that, just making a point). The problem is not that people can make lots of isk in hisec in a very extreme set of circumstances. The problem is that you can't effectively do it where you have chosen to live because of the people you have chosen to live with. It's like going to McDonald's and complaining that they don't use the colonels secret recipe. No the problem is very much that PVE in all areas of space aside from WH is a mess. Over the years CCP have nerfed, buffed and added pve content without any thought of the overall picture which has resulted in a rather large game imbalance. Ratting in null sovs anoms using a subcap under the very best of circumstances will net you around the same as a mach blitzing level 3 missions in highsec. Greed is blinding people to the problems. So if CCP nerfs incursions payout and make hi-sec missions unblitzable would you be satisfied??
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17042	Posted - 2015.11.26 09:32:05 - [150] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: So if CCP nerfs incursions payout and make hi-sec missions unblitzable would you be satisfied?? No as there are a lot more issues than that, Anoms for example are deeply flawed and also cause issues for eve. They are very poor at hosting large populations, they inject too much raw isk, they devalue over the years due to inflation and they can be run AFK. Highsec isn't the only place that requires some kind of nerfs. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship

Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 612	Posted - 2015.11.26 09:32:55 - [151] - Quote baltec1 wrote: No the problem is very much that PVE in all areas of space aside from WH is a mess. Over the years CCP have nerfed, buffed and added pve content without any thought of the overall picture which has resulted in a rather large game imbalance. Ratting in null sovs anoms using a subcap under the very best of circumstances will net you around the same as a mach blitzing level 3 missions in highsec. Greed is blinding people to the problems. You keep saying this and there is no proof supporting it. In fact, all the numbers I've been able to gather on the subject (Personal experimentation as well as checking numbers with old corpmates in null) shows that this is a bald faced lie. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 24	Posted - 2015.11.26 09:36:38 - [152] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: baltec1 wrote: The Bigpuns wrote: Once again, not understanding. Does all of pve need rebalancing? Is all of eve broken except null pvp? No. What has been said is that null income would exceed hisec income, except for having to avoid all the other people in null. Maybe pvp is broken, maybe it needs to be made more difficult to catch people in null (Jenn before you misunderstand again, I don't actually think that, just making a point). The problem is not that people can make lots of isk in hisec in a very extreme set of circumstances. The problem is that you can't effectively do it where you have chosen to live because of the people you have chosen to live with. It's like going to McDonald's and complaining that they don't use the colonels secret recipe. No the problem is very much that PVE in all areas of space aside from WH is a mess. Over the years CCP have nerfed, buffed and added pve content without any thought of the overall picture which has resulted in a rather large game imbalance. Ratting in null sovs anoms using a subcap under the very best of circumstances will net you around the same as a mach blitzing level 3 missions in highsec. Greed is blinding people to the problems. So if CCP nerfs incursions payout and make hi-sec missions unblitzable would you be satisfied?? Satisfied? No, I couldn't care less. I'm not interested in grinding that much isk, like I said before, I cba to blitz. But of all the problems people raise, I don't think the solution is as easy as "nerf hisec pve". Edit: sorry, just noticed I don't think that was aimed at me, but I'll leave it as is for the point. Maybe pve overall is a mess, can't say I've done a detailed analysis of it all. But anize spent the time and effort doing a detailed of analysis of a particular thing that some people CAN do, but some people that WON'T do it cos they live in space populated by douchebags, and then complain the game is broken. No sympathy.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17042	Posted - 2015.11.26 09:51:21 - [153] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: baltec1 wrote: No the problem is very much that PVE in all areas of space aside from WH is a mess. Over the years CCP have nerfed, buffed and added pve content without any thought of the overall picture which has resulted in a rather large game imbalance. Ratting in null sovs anoms using a subcap under the very best of circumstances will net you around the same as a mach blitzing level 3 missions in highsec. Greed is blinding people to the problems. You keep saying this and there is no proof supporting it. In fact, all the numbers I've been able to gather on the subject (Personal experimentation as well as checking numbers with old corpmates in null) shows that this is a bald faced lie. We worked it out back when the pirate battleship balance pass happened, originally the goal was to beat isktar ratting in null anoms using a rapid heavy missile raven in highsec level 3s. When it was found that was possible a number of battleship specialists decide to see just how far we could take the concept and quickly found the mach could hit 84-90 mil/hr blitzing level 3 missions. Feel free to go read up on that thread. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 612	Posted - 2015.11.26 10:09:23 - [154] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: baltec1 wrote: No the problem is very much that PVE in all areas of space aside from WH is a mess. Over the years CCP have nerfed, buffed and added pve content without any thought of the overall picture which has resulted in a rather large game imbalance. Ratting in null sovs anoms using a subcap under the very best of circumstances will net you around the same as a mach blitzing level 3 missions in highsec. Greed is blinding people to the problems. You keep saying this and there is no proof supporting it. In fact, all the numbers I've been able to gather on the subject (Personal experimentation as well as checking numbers with old corpmates in null) shows that this is a bald faced lie. We worked it out back when the pirate battleship balance pass happened, originally the goal was to beat isktar ratting in null anoms using a rapid heavy missile raven in highsec level 3s. When it was found that was possible a number of battleship specialists decide to see just how far we could take the concept and quickly found the mach could hit 84-90 mil/hr blitzing level 3 missions. Feel free to go read up on that thread. I talked to an old corpmate in drone lands last night actually and he said he was getting 100mill with a Vexor Navy. He was getting this with less than perfect skills but looking at the dps output of a Vexor Navy its around 800 dps for All V. Now when it comes to Anoms, as you well know it's pretty much all about the dps and application thereof as opposed to blitzing where it's more about range, application, speed and a little about the actual dps. Since we're comparing pirate battleships, a similarly well skilled rattlesnake or even Mach for example should be pushing out 1400 dps. Now obviously an increase of around 75% in dps does directly translate into 75% increase in isk/h but it should be a very sizable bump up. Do you have any numbers what a T2 fit rattlesnake can make? More than a similarly skilled Mach blitzing lv3s, by a huge margin. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 612	Posted - 2015.11.26 10:16:41 - [155] - Quote Also would like to emphasize what you said here: Quote: Ratting in null sovs anoms using a subcap under the very best of circumstances will net you around the same as a mach blitzing level 3 missions in highsec. Greed is blinding people to the problems. An AFKtar is not the 'very best of circumstances'. You are comparing sub optimal semi-afk ratting with using the very best ship currently available in the game for the job and actively piloting (non-afk) it to boot. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17042	Posted - 2015.11.26 10:53:00 - [156] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: I talked to an old corpmate in drone lands last night actually and he said he was getting 100mill with a Vexor Navy. He was getting this with less than perfect skills but looking at the dps output of a Vexor Navy its around 800 dps for All V. That man is telling you lies, that is greater income than a pimp fitted vindicator and on par with an active carrier. Anize Oramara wrote: Now when it comes to Anoms, as you well know it's pretty much all about the dps and application thereof as opposed to blitzing where it's more about range, application, speed and a little about the actual dps. Since we're comparing pirate battleships, a similarly well skilled rattlesnake or even Mach for example should be pushing out 1400 dps. Now obviously an increase of around 75% in dps does directly translate into 75% increase in isk/h but it should be a very sizable bump up. Do you have any numbers what a T2 fit rattlesnake can make? More than a similarly skilled Mach blitzing lv3s, by a huge margin. Less. Issue with the rattle is the delay in both the missiles getting to the target and the delay in the drones either by heavies getting to the target or returning to scoop the sentries. It also has much slower warp speed times which are key. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17042	Posted - 2015.11.26 10:53:59 - [157] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: Also would like to emphasize what you said here: Quote: Ratting in null sovs anoms using a subcap under the very best of circumstances will net you around the same as a mach blitzing level 3 missions in highsec. Greed is blinding people to the problems. An AFKtar is not the 'very best of circumstances'. You are comparing sub optimal semi-afk ratting with using the very best ship currently available in the game for the job and actively piloting (non-afk) it to boot. I am comparing to the very best subcap which is the vindicator. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 612	Posted - 2015.11.26 11:12:54 - [158] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: I talked to an old corpmate in drone lands last night actually and he said he was getting 100mill with a Vexor Navy. He was getting this with less than perfect skills but looking at the dps output of a Vexor Navy its around 800 dps for All V. That man is telling you lies, that is greater income than a pimp fitted vindicator and on par with an active carrier. Anize Oramara wrote: Now when it comes to Anoms, as you well know it's pretty much all about the dps and application thereof as opposed to blitzing where it's more about range, application, speed and a little about the actual dps. Since we're comparing pirate battleships, a similarly well skilled rattlesnake or even Mach for example should be pushing out 1400 dps. Now obviously an increase of around 75% in dps does directly translate into 75% increase in isk/h but it should be a very sizable bump up. Do you have any numbers what a T2 fit rattlesnake can make? More than a similarly skilled Mach blitzing lv3s, by a huge margin. Less. Issue with the rattle is the delay in both the missiles getting to the target and the delay in the drones either by heavies getting to the target or returning to scoop the sentries. It also has much slower warp speed times which are key. Ah right so now he lies. People said the same thing to me when I initially claimed 200mill/h+ and now you and Jenn are using it as gospel. Again you are trying to marginalize the effectiveness of things counter to your argument by assuming worse possible scenarios. The 1400 dps was actually with heavy drones (not gecko), not sentries. Having the Rattlesnake stay close to the drones means that it's both close enough that there is a very small time between firing missiles and the missiles hitting the NPCs and that scooping drones is quick. Warping from one site to another is nothing compared to warping from station, through 1 or 2 gates, warping to the mission pocket (and sometimes acceleration gates) and then doing all that again on the way back. Travel time is near enough a non factor with anoms, unless you're in a carrier I guess. Still no reason you cant fit hypervelocities to the rattlesnake. Oh, and a Machariel gets 1400 dps too so your argument is irrelevant twice over. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 612	Posted - 2015.11.26 11:14:00 - [159] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: Also would like to emphasize what you said here: Quote: Ratting in null sovs anoms using a subcap under the very best of circumstances will net you around the same as a mach blitzing level 3 missions in highsec. Greed is blinding people to the problems. An AFKtar is not the 'very best of circumstances'. You are comparing sub optimal semi-afk ratting with using the very best ship currently available in the game for the job and actively piloting (non-afk) it to boot. I am comparing to the very best subcap which is the vindicator. baltec1 wrote: We worked it out back when the pirate battleship balance pass happened, originally the goal was to beat isktar ratting in null anoms using a rapid heavy missile raven in highsec level 3s. When it was found that was possible a number of battleship specialists decide to see just how far we could take the concept and quickly found the mach could hit 84-90 mil/hr blitzing level 3 missions. Feel free to go read up on that thread. Try and keep your story straight. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17042	Posted - 2015.11.26 11:27:35 - [160] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: Also would like to emphasize what you said here: Quote: Ratting in null sovs anoms using a subcap under the very best of circumstances will net you around the same as a mach blitzing level 3 missions in highsec. Greed is blinding people to the problems. An AFKtar is not the 'very best of circumstances'. You are comparing sub optimal semi-afk ratting with using the very best ship currently available in the game for the job and actively piloting (non-afk) it to boot. I am comparing to the very best subcap which is the vindicator. baltec1 wrote: We worked it out back when the pirate battleship balance pass happened, originally the goal was to beat isktar ratting in null anoms using a rapid heavy missile raven in highsec level 3s. When it was found that was possible a number of battleship specialists decide to see just how far we could take the concept and quickly found the mach could hit 84-90 mil/hr blitzing level 3 missions. Feel free to go read up on that thread. Try and keep your story straight. Are you even reading what I am typing? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship

baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17042	Posted - 2015.11.26 11:30:48 - [161] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: Ah right so now he lies. People said the same thing to me when I initially claimed 200mill/h+ and now you and Jenn are using it as gospel. Again you are trying to marginalize the effectiveness of things counter to your argument by assuming worse possible scenarios. The 1400 dps was actually with heavy drones (not gecko), not sentries. Having the Rattlesnake stay close to the drones means that it's both close enough that there is a very small time between firing missiles and the missiles hitting the NPCs and that scooping drones is quick. Warping from one site to another is nothing compared to warping from station, through 1 or 2 gates, warping to the mission pocket (and sometimes acceleration gates) and then doing all that again on the way back. Travel time is near enough a non factor with anoms, unless you're in a carrier I guess. Still no reason you cant fit hypervelocities to the rattlesnake. Oh, and a Machariel gets 1400 dps too so your argument is irrelevant twice over. Now factor in travel time of the heavy drones from target to target, also factor in travel time of the missiles and finally factor in travel time for the slower warping rattle. You seem to have no grasp at all about what I am talking about. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 612	Posted - 2015.11.26 12:23:03 - [162] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: Ah right so now he lies. People said the same thing to me when I initially claimed 200mill/h+ and now you and Jenn are using it as gospel. Again you are trying to marginalize the effectiveness of things counter to your argument by assuming worse possible scenarios. The 1400 dps was actually with heavy drones (not gecko), not sentries. Having the Rattlesnake stay close to the drones means that it's both close enough that there is a very small time between firing missiles and the missiles hitting the NPCs and that scooping drones is quick. Warping from one site to another is nothing compared to warping from station, through 1 or 2 gates, warping to the mission pocket (and sometimes acceleration gates) and then doing all that again on the way back. Travel time is near enough a non factor with anoms, unless you're in a carrier I guess. Still no reason you cant fit hypervelocities to the rattlesnake. Oh, and a Machariel gets 1400 dps too so your argument is irrelevant twice over. Now factor in travel time of the heavy drones from target to target, also factor in travel time of the missiles and finally factor in travel time for the slower warping rattle. You seem to have no grasp at all about what I am talking about. Are you serious? I literally addressed each and every single one of these things in the post you quoted. What the heck man. I even said the Machariel (That has one of the best align times and very best warp speed of all BS, equal to cruisers in fact) ALSO gets 1400 dps. This is hilarious. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 713	Posted - 2015.11.26 13:06:07 - [163] - Quote The bottom line here is that every single activity in this game that involves PVE pays out more in Null Sec than it does in High Sec, which is as intended. What pays more in Null is undisputable. Missions? Yes Ratting? Yes Anoms? Yes Exploration? Yes Incursions? Yes Mining? Yes Everything I don't want to hear one word from the "CCP shouldn't create or deny content, this is a sandbox!" crew that you can't run those in peace in Null sec... The ability to operate alone is not part of the equation here, the fact is payouts are plainly higher in Null. Can't run them in peace? You have no one to blame but yourself and the people you play this game with. So quit QQing more and play the darn game you tell everyone to enjoy or gtfo. On a side note, ever wonder how many missions you can safely run in High-Sec while under war dec? I still contend that running lvl 4s in Venal would be safer than running them in Osmon when you are under dec. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 613	Posted - 2015.11.26 13:16:31 - [164] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: The bottom line here is that every single activity in this game that involves PVE pays out more in Null Sec than it does in High Sec, which is as intended. What pays more in Null is undisputable. Missions? Yes Ratting? Yes Anoms? Yes Exploration? Yes Incursions? Yes Mining? Yes Everything I don't want to hear one word from the "CCP shouldn't create or deny content, this is a sandbox!" crew that you can't run those in peace in Null sec... The ability to operate alone is not part of the equation here, the fact is payouts are plainly higher in Null. Can't run them in peace? You have no one to blame but yourself and the people you play this game with. So quit QQing more and play the darn game you tell everyone to enjoy or gtfo. On a side note, ever wonder how many missions you can safely run in High-Sec while under war dec? I still contend that running lvl 4s in Venal would be safer than running them in Osmon when you are under dec. While all of this is technically true, there will be all the usual counter arguments that's all already been covered in this and about half a dozen other threads. Things like dodging war decs for hisec stuff, afk cloakers in null, roaming gangs, missions only in NPC null, risk, etc. However I have little sympathy for players belonging to any big alliances complaining. Isn't securing the space you want to make isk from part of the reason to belong to a big alliance in the first palce and part of what nullsec is all about or did I miss the memo? A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 713	Posted - 2015.11.26 14:15:29 - [165] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: The bottom line here is that every single activity in this game that involves PVE pays out more in Null Sec than it does in High Sec, which is as intended. What pays more in Null is undisputable. Missions? Yes Ratting? Yes Anoms? Yes Exploration? Yes Incursions? Yes Mining? Yes Everything I don't want to hear one word from the "CCP shouldn't create or deny content, this is a sandbox!" crew that you can't run those in peace in Null sec... The ability to operate alone is not part of the equation here, the fact is payouts are plainly higher in Null. Can't run them in peace? You have no one to blame but yourself and the people you play this game with. So quit QQing more and play the darn game you tell everyone to enjoy or gtfo. On a side note, ever wonder how many missions you can safely run in High-Sec while under war dec? I still contend that running lvl 4s in Venal would be safer than running them in Osmon when you are under dec. While all of this is technically true, there will be all the usual counter arguments that's all already been covered in this and about half a dozen other threads. Things like dodging war decs for hisec stuff, afk cloakers in null, roaming gangs, missions only in NPC null, risk, etc. However I have little sympathy for players belonging to any big alliances complaining. Isn't securing the space you want to make isk from part of the reason to belong to a big alliance in the first palce and part of what nullsec is all about or did I miss the memo? Player created denial of content has no bearing on this or any thread about Null-Sec vs High-Sec income. These people are asking for CCP to do something for them, while in the same breath complaining about people who they think want CCP to do something for them. Run the same content in Null as you would in High and you will make multitudes more isk, Period. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17042	Posted - 2015.11.26 16:00:31 - [166] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: Ah right so now he lies. People said the same thing to me when I initially claimed 200mill/h+ and now you and Jenn are using it as gospel. Again you are trying to marginalize the effectiveness of things counter to your argument by assuming worse possible scenarios. The 1400 dps was actually with heavy drones (not gecko), not sentries. Having the Rattlesnake stay close to the drones means that it's both close enough that there is a very small time between firing missiles and the missiles hitting the NPCs and that scooping drones is quick. Warping from one site to another is nothing compared to warping from station, through 1 or 2 gates, warping to the mission pocket (and sometimes acceleration gates) and then doing all that again on the way back. Travel time is near enough a non factor with anoms, unless you're in a carrier I guess. Still no reason you cant fit hypervelocities to the rattlesnake. Oh, and a Machariel gets 1400 dps too so your argument is irrelevant twice over. Now factor in travel time of the heavy drones from target to target, also factor in travel time of the missiles and finally factor in travel time for the slower warping rattle. You seem to have no grasp at all about what I am talking about. Are you serious? I literally addressed each and every single one of these things in the post you quoted. What the heck man. I even said the Machariel (That has one of the best align times and very best warp speed of all BS, equal to cruisers in fact) ALSO gets 1400 dps. This is hilarious. baltec1 wrote: Are you even reading what I am typing? Relevant No you addressed none of it. All you look at is dps charts and nothing else. Drones and missile ships are slower than gunships at shooting stuff because both have flight time on top of their cycle time and reloading. I am also not talking about cruiser warp speeds, you want the best possible warp speeds which with the mach is borderline interceptor warp speeds. Just by going off your last few posts it's clear you have never tried anything like this before. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13016	Posted - 2015.11.26 16:30:03 - [167] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: Also would like to emphasize what you said here: Quote: Ratting in null sovs anoms using a subcap under the very best of circumstances will net you around the same as a mach blitzing level 3 missions in highsec. Greed is blinding people to the problems. An AFKtar is not the 'very best of circumstances'. You are comparing sub optimal semi-afk ratting with using the very best ship currently available in the game for the job and actively piloting (non-afk) it to boot. theres that ignorance again. An Ishtar is not the best ship for that. Its convenient , not fast. My Mach in null will do about 30 mil ticks. That's 90 mil per hour. I've posted the fit before. That's 1.5 bil worth of mach in NULLSEC for 90 mil per hour. Or I could just do this with a mach that costs exactly half as much (750 mil) IN HIGH SEC blitzing lvl 3 missions and make 4 million isk less. (this does not even account for the fact that my null mach pilot had more expensive implant and hardwirings in that my high sec mach pilot I used to test Stoicfaux's mach blitzer). Can you sit there with a straight face Anize and tell me than you think and extra 4 million isk per hour is worth risking a deadspace fit mach in null? It's not, which is why last week after a close call I stopped doing it, I only use that mach for 10/10s now, I use Navy Vexors to rat while doing incursions . Will you tell me that you can look at what I just wrote and not see a problem?
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 613	Posted - 2015.11.26 16:43:18 - [168] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: Ah right so now he lies. People said the same thing to me when I initially claimed 200mill/h+ and now you and Jenn are using it as gospel. Again you are trying to marginalize the effectiveness of things counter to your argument by assuming worse possible scenarios. The 1400 dps was actually with heavy drones (not gecko), not sentries. Having the Rattlesnake stay close to the drones means that it's both close enough that there is a very small time between firing missiles and the missiles hitting the NPCs and that scooping drones is quick. Warping from one site to another is nothing compared to warping from station, through 1 or 2 gates, warping to the mission pocket (and sometimes acceleration gates) and then doing all that again on the way back. Travel time is near enough a non factor with anoms, unless you're in a carrier I guess. Still no reason you cant fit hypervelocities to the rattlesnake. Oh, and a Machariel gets 1400 dps too so your argument is irrelevant twice over. Now factor in travel time of the heavy drones from target to target, also factor in travel time of the missiles and finally factor in travel time for the slower warping rattle. You seem to have no grasp at all about what I am talking about. Are you serious? I literally addressed each and every single one of these things in the post you quoted. What the heck man. I even said the Machariel (That has one of the best align times and very best warp speed of all BS, equal to cruisers in fact) ALSO gets 1400 dps. This is hilarious. baltec1 wrote: Are you even reading what I am typing? Relevant No you addressed none of it. All you look at is dps charts and nothing else. Drones and missile ships are slower than gunships at shooting stuff because both have flight time on top of their cycle time and reloading. I am also not talking about cruiser warp speeds, you want the best possible warp speeds which with the mach is borderline interceptor warp speeds. Just by going off your last few posts it's clear you have never tried anything like this before. baltec, honestly what are you talking about. Missile flight time in no way at all affects actual dps. It delays the APPLICATION of that dps by the time it takes for the first volley to hit. This is important so you need to pay attention, it delays, not reduces the dps. Since this is not pvp and the rats wont warp off grid, the dps does not change. This is where volley counting comes in and it looks like you might be unfamiliar with it. This is the technique whereby you know how many volleys it takes to kill something, so you preemptively stop firing your launchers and switch target. The great thing about PvE rats in eve is they have the same stats every single time. One of the few redeeming qualities of missiles is that they will always do the same damage to the same rat going at the same speed if your fit and skills stay constant. Thus you know that rat X, with your dps and application, will die in 4 volleys. Again, there is no reduction in dps, only a single delay of maybe 5 to 10 seconds over the entire site. That said this can be mitigated or even eliminated by flying real close to the enemy rats. So that way you wont have to count volleys. On the upside to this is the fact that if you're using heavy drones, they will be close to you so you can scoop them easily. The other advantage of an anom is that for the most part the rats all spawn in a nice tight ball. Very little travel time required for you or your drones. Of course Sentries and long range sniping is also a very viable tactic with the rattlesnake because again, missile damage applying same damage regardless of range. Just make sure to practice your volley counting. And yes, I have plenty of experience with the above, I ratted for many months in null with a Typhoon fleet. If you're unfamiliar with that ship it can fit cruise missiles and use 5 sentries so I had a decent amount of practice on counting volleys and using drones to finish off NPCs so you dont have overkill either. Dank efficiency. Then theres the Machariel. While it doesn't quite have the application at range of a missile boat it has decently tracking ACs that can hit battleships at point blank very effectively, applying most of its 1400 dps (Small part of that is drones, either sentries of Hevaies) Now, regarding the warp speed. You're going to need to read both paragraphs this time otherwise you're going to say something silly again. An ishtar has a base warp speed of 3.3 while a Machariel has a base warp speed of 3. However, the ishtar has only two rig slots, while the Mach has 3. This means the Machariel can actually go faster than the ishtar. 5 au/s vs 5.2 au/s. With High-Grade Ascendencies it's 8.1 au/s for the ishtar (a cruiser) and 8.5 au/s for the Mach. I however do not think it is worth spending that much for something that gives such a tiny effect when it comes to ratting. The rattlesnake, granted, is a bit of a slowpoke at only 4 au/s and 5.6 au/s with implants. There's also align time but that's 3 seconds of difference between a cruiser and the Mach so meh. That said however, this actually matter far more when it comes to missions than it ever will with anoms. Since it's a single, in system warp from site to site (Where you spend 90% or more of your time in the site so warp speed effect on income is reduced over time) while in the case of blitzing missions far less than half the time is actually spent in site and more than half is spent in warp. Now the fact that you didn't know any of the above is a little distressing baltec1, since you are giving advice as if you know a lot about this stuff. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
DeMichael Crimson Republic University Minmatar Republic 52676	Posted - 2015.11.26 16:50:42 - [169] - Quote Everyone knows Null Sec space is way more safer than High Sec space, especially in the heart of Alliance controlled areas. Infrastructure Upgrades are basically an ISK printing press. Alliance Intel channels give advance notice of any enemy ships entering the area. I just can't see how one lone AFK Cloaker can disrupt and shut down activity in an Alliance controlled system, especially a system that's been upgraded. DMC 'The Plan' \| California Eve Players \| Proposal - The Endless Battle
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 613	Posted - 2015.11.26 16:51:15 - [170] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: Also would like to emphasize what you said here: Quote: Ratting in null sovs anoms using a subcap under the very best of circumstances will net you around the same as a mach blitzing level 3 missions in highsec. Greed is blinding people to the problems. An AFKtar is not the 'very best of circumstances'. You are comparing sub optimal semi-afk ratting with using the very best ship currently available in the game for the job and actively piloting (non-afk) it to boot. theres that ignorance again. An Ishtar is not the best ship for that. Its convenient , not fast. My Mach in null will do about 30 mil ticks. That's 90 mil per hour. I've posted the fit before. That's 1.5 bil worth of mach in NULLSEC for 90 mil per hour. Or I could just do this with a mach that costs exactly half as much (750 mil) IN HIGH SEC blitzing lvl 3 missions and make 4 million isk less. (this does not even account for the fact that my null mach pilot had more expensive implant and hardwirings in that my high sec mach pilot I used to test Stoicfaux's mach blitzer). Can you sit there with a straight face Anize and tell me than you think and extra 4 million isk per hour is worth risking a deadspace fit mach in null? It's not, which is why last week after a close call I stopped doing it, I only use that mach for 10/10s now, I use Navy Vexors to rat while doing incursions . Will you tell me that you can look at what I just wrote and not see a problem? I'm going to tell you the same thing I tell anyone that gets less than 100mill running missions: You're doing it wrong. The reply I usually get is that they like doing it that way and that I should bugger off. It's the exact same thing. I can tell you how to do it right but you'll complain it's not fair and you shouldn't have to do X Y and Z. It's the exact same thing. People don't want to have to run burners to make 200mill/h. People don't want to have to deal with LP stores, people want to be able to do it without having to grind standings, people want to be able to do it afk, people want to not have to pay attention, people don't want to lose ships, people don't want to effort, etc, etc, etc. It's a whole bunch of entitlement and that's all I hear coming from you. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03

baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17042	Posted - 2015.11.26 17:15:02 - [171] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: baltec, honestly what are you talking about. Missile flight time in no way at all affects actual dps. It delays the APPLICATION of that dps by the time it takes for the first volley to hit. This is important so you need to pay attention, it delays, not reduces the dps. Since this is not pvp and the rats wont warp off grid, the dps does not change. This is where volley counting comes in and it looks like you might be unfamiliar with it. This is the technique whereby you know how many volleys it takes to kill something, so you preemptively stop firing your launchers and switch target. The great thing about PvE rats in eve is they have the same stats every single time. One of the few redeeming qualities of missiles is that they will always do the same damage to the same rat going at the same speed if your fit and skills stay constant. Thus you know that rat X, with your dps and application, will die in 4 volleys. Again, there is no reduction in dps, only a single delay of maybe 5 to 10 seconds over the entire site. That said this can be mitigated or even eliminated by flying real close to the enemy rats. So that way you wont have to count volleys. On the upside to this is the fact that if you're using heavy drones, they will be close to you so you can scoop them easily. The other advantage of an anom is that for the most part the rats all spawn in a nice tight ball. Very little travel time required for you or your drones. Of course Sentries and long range sniping is also a very viable tactic with the rattlesnake because again, missile damage applying same damage regardless of range. Just make sure to practice your volley counting. And yes, I have plenty of experience with the above, I ratted for many months in null with a Typhoon fleet. If you're unfamiliar with that ship it can fit cruise missiles and use 5 sentries so I had a decent amount of practice on counting volleys and using drones to finish off NPCs so you dont have overkill either. Dank efficiency. Then theres the Machariel. While it doesn't quite have the application at range of a missile boat it has decently tracking ACs that can hit battleships at point blank very effectively, applying most of its 1400 dps (Small part of that is drones, either sentries of Hevaies) Now, regarding the warp speed. You're going to need to read both paragraphs this time otherwise you're going to say something silly again. An ishtar has a base warp speed of 3.3 while a Machariel has a base warp speed of 3. However, the ishtar has only two rig slots, while the Mach has 3. This means the Machariel can actually go faster than the ishtar. 5 au/s vs 5.2 au/s. With High-Grade Ascendencies it's 8.1 au/s for the ishtar (a cruiser) and 8.5 au/s for the Mach. I however do not think it is worth spending that much for something that gives such a tiny effect when it comes to ratting. The rattlesnake, granted, is a bit of a slowpoke at only 4 au/s and 5.6 au/s with implants. There's also align time but that's 3 seconds of difference between a cruiser and the Mach so meh. That said however, this actually matter far more when it comes to missions than it ever will with anoms. Since it's a single, in system warp from site to site (Where you spend 90% or more of your time in the site so warp speed effect on income is reduced over time) while in the case of blitzing missions far less than half the time is actually spent in site and more than half is spent in warp. Now the fact that you didn't know any of the above is a little distressing baltec1, since you are giving advice as if you know a lot about this stuff. You are quite correct in saying you don't understand what I am talking about. You need to go research this stuff. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17042	Posted - 2015.11.26 17:18:44 - [172] - Quote DeMichael Crimson wrote: Everyone knows Null Sec space is way more safer than High Sec space, especially in the heart of Alliance controlled areas. Infrastructure Upgrades are basically an ISK printing press. Alliance Intel channels give advance notice of any enemy ships entering the area. I just can't see how one lone AFK Cloaker can disrupt and shut down activity in an Alliance controlled system, especially a system that's been upgraded. DMC If we compare mission hubs that have the same population as with dek we find dek has several hundred more killed every month. In total nullsec space beats highsec for ships killed by several million. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 24	Posted - 2015.11.26 17:40:43 - [173] - Quote baltec1 wrote: DeMichael Crimson wrote: Everyone knows Null Sec space is way more safer than High Sec space, especially in the heart of Alliance controlled areas. Infrastructure Upgrades are basically an ISK printing press. Alliance Intel channels give advance notice of any enemy ships entering the area. I just can't see how one lone AFK Cloaker can disrupt and shut down activity in an Alliance controlled system, especially a system that's been upgraded. DMC If we compare mission hubs that have the same population as with dek we find dek has several hundred more killed every month. In total nullsec space beats highsec for ships killed by several million. No-one is arguing against that. Is that the major complaint here? That null doesn't have enough agents? Sure that's an easy fix. Or are you still saying the rewards for all pve in hisec is too much? Can't fix that without an awful lot of balance work, but I don't think that is the main issue here. I don't think it matters how lucrative pve in null relative to hi is, as long as there are people in null who just enjoy spoiling other people's playtime. Until you get to the point where null pve is so lucrative that no-one does anything else. At which point you broke eve again. Until you have a solution that isn't just "rebalance pve and make people pvp" I don't think you have much of a point.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13016	Posted - 2015.11.26 18:23:43 - [174] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: I'm going to tell you the same thing I tell anyone that gets less than 100mill running missions: You're doing it wrong. The reply I usually get is that they like doing it that way and that I should bugger off. It's the exact same thing. I can tell you how to do it right but you'll complain it's not fair and you shouldn't have to do X Y and Z. It's the exact same thing. People don't want to have to run burners to make 200mill/h. People don't want to have to deal with LP stores, people want to be able to do it without having to grind standings, people want to be able to do it afk, people want to not have to pay attention, people don't want to lose ships, people don't want to effort, etc, etc, etc. It's a whole bunch of entitlement and that's all I hear coming from you. Are you aware that you didn't address a single thing in the post you quoted? And if you are all using to the fact that you would just tell me to use alt, can you not understand that by doing so, you would be proving the point I and others are making? Why is it so hard for you to admit that we may be right, and that there is a problem with how things work? pride? stubbornness? Whatever the case is, I simply want you to realize that your doing that about a video game. Lastly, explain to me how discussing measureable imbalanced while NOT asking for more isk/wealth for myself (or people like me) is 'entitlement. True entitlement is you making use of a broken system and expecting that to never change,
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13016	Posted - 2015.11.26 18:32:59 - [175] - Quote The Bigpuns wrote: No-one is arguing against that. DeMichael Crimson just did. "Null sec is safer than high sec" is an untruth that people tell themselves to justify their own views to themselves. It's nonsense, space with no magical npc cop response can ever be 'safer' that space where it takes human effort to achieve the same thing. Quote: Is that the major complaint here? That null doesn't have enough agents? Sure that's an easy fix. Sov null has NO agents. Even if you put pirate agents in sov null, that would make another set of problems (sov null would kill the pirate LP stores, negatively affecting both explorers and NPC null mission runners). And people eing able to make 3-400 mil per hour in null sec running sov missions is a whole 'nother set of issues too. This game already has too many rewards. This is why I reject the 'just buff null' idea. I could never be so selfish. Quote: Or are you still saying the rewards for all pve in hisec is too much? Can't speak for baltec, but to me it's not all PVE in high sec. Its the pve in Anize Ornamara's guide, and incursions (no more than 1.5% of players on any given day generating the 3rd largest pile of isk in the game), and FW missions in low sec are a similar problem. The high sec guy puttering around I a raven making maybe 50 mil per hour isn't a problem. We are talking high end PVE here, that's what is unbalanced. Quote: Can't fix that without an awful lot of balance work, but I don't think that is the main issue here. I don't think it matters how lucrative pve in null relative to hi is, as long as there are people in null who just enjoy spoiling other people's playtime. Until you get to the point where null pve is so lucrative that no-one does anything else. At which point you broke eve again. No, null PVE is lucrative enough. In fact, Anoms are what missions should be, unblitzable. For some reason, people are displaying this incredible inability to understand the actual issue being discussed, which ends up with "you just want more isk" or "you just want me to move out of high sec", both of which are severe misunderstandings (if not outright lies). Frankly, it's frustrating that some people can't understand simply typed English on an English speaking forum.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 613	Posted - 2015.11.26 18:59:12 - [176] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: I'm going to tell you the same thing I tell anyone that gets less than 100mill running missions: You're doing it wrong. The reply I usually get is that they like doing it that way and that I should bugger off. It's the exact same thing. I can tell you how to do it right but you'll complain it's not fair and you shouldn't have to do X Y and Z. It's the exact same thing. People don't want to have to run burners to make 200mill/h. People don't want to have to deal with LP stores, people want to be able to do it without having to grind standings, people want to be able to do it afk, people want to not have to pay attention, people don't want to lose ships, people don't want to effort, etc, etc, etc. It's a whole bunch of entitlement and that's all I hear coming from you. Are you aware that you didn't address a single thing in the post you quoted? And if you are all using to the fact that you would just tell me to use alt, can you not understand that by doing so, you would be proving the point I and others are making? Why is it so hard for you to admit that we may be right, and that there is a problem with how things work? pride? stubbornness? Whatever the case is, I simply want you to realize that your doing that about a video game. Lastly, explain to me how discussing measureable imbalanced while NOT asking for more isk/wealth for myself (or people like me) is 'entitlement. True entitlement is you making use of a broken system and expecting that to never change, Everything in here is just personal attacks. It's pretty much over at this point if that's all you and baltec have left when I throw facts and evidence at you. Ah well, I'm always up for discussing PvE mechanics and numbers. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 24	Posted - 2015.11.26 19:00:51 - [177] - Quote Jenn, your last two posts are so full of hypocrisy I can't even bring myself to quote them. How about instead of complaining about one tiny problem (people like Anize being a tiny proportion of pve'ers) you specify problem and solution. "Hisec pve can be lucrative" is too vague. Saying to people "why won't you just see things my way" when you won't do likewise is pointless. Accusing people of not understanding plain typed English in an English speaking forum displays ignorance, prejudice, and a refusal to acknowledge that other people's viewpoint may also have merit. For someone who says that they don't engage with people like us, you do like whining on.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4758	Posted - 2015.11.26 23:33:15 - [178] - Quote Wow, not quite sure how a thread about what you could potentially earn in ISK in high-sec turned into a high-sec vs. low-sec vs. null-sec vs. wormhole income debate... In this (and other) thread(s) I was simply trying to illustrate what was achievable if one put one's mind to it. I don't think high-sec income needs to be nerfed anymore than any other area, simply for the reason that your average player isn't going to run 3 characters (typically 1 or 2 at most). The Blitz-Burner method for Lv4s can certain pay off dividends, but no more so than using the same method in low-sec or null-sec. It's a fairly huge investment at around 5-billion ISK - not to mention the necessary skills. You can apparently make insane ISK in Faction Warfare and we won't even mention farming C5s and C6s or Incursions (everything has an associated risk vs. reward that accompanies it). I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Sobaan Tali Caldari Quick Reaction Force 668	Posted - 2015.11.27 00:21:18 - [179] - Quote I can...which is the sad part. I don't run burners myself, but I do run L4's in high sec, so thanks for the info anyways, Arthur. "Tomahawks?" "----in' A, right?" "Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each." "----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13021	Posted - 2015.11.27 01:40:40 - [180] - Quote The Bigpuns wrote: Jenn, your last two posts are so full of hypocrisy I can't even bring myself to quote them. How about instead of complaining about one tiny problem (people like Anize being a tiny proportion of pve'ers) you specify problem and solution. "Hisec pve can be lucrative" is too vague. Saying to people "why won't you just see things my way" when you won't do likewise is pointless. Accusing people of not understanding plain typed English in an English speaking forum displays ignorance, prejudice, and a refusal to acknowledge that other people's viewpoint may also have merit. Thats just the problem. The 'viewpoint' doesn't have any merit. The problem is how you try to reduce it ("high sec pve can be lucrative"). It's supposed to be lucrative. Lucrative means producing profit, it does not mean "produce so much profit in a game for so very few people that people who would be elsewhere are drawn to it". That's why the argument isnt' the high sec is profitable, it's that high sec is "too profitable, so much so as to be unbalanced". I once explained to a guy at a pve round table event that I wasn't trying to take anyhting out of his wallet, I'm trying to free people like me from high sec. This benefits everyone: people like me get to produce our wealth in space we fought for, and people in high sec get to run incursions they would have otherwise been froze out of because of all the null sec alting. Same goes for closing the blitzing loophole. Sure, closing those loopholes make people like Anize have to grind a bit harder, but it increases the value of the LPs that the "casual mission runner in a raven" has. Who knows, higher buying power for those casuals after these loopholes are closed might mean they stay longer, because they can do more because the Onamara's of EVE arne't depressing the value of their gameplay anymore. Of course, one has to actually care about the experiences of others to want to see a major game play feature (PVE) actually be balanced.

Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13021	Posted - 2015.11.27 01:46:51 - [181] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: The Blitz-Burner method for Lv4s can certain pay off dividends, but no more so than using the same method in low-sec or null-sec. It's a fairly huge investment at around 5-billion ISK - not to mention the necessary skills. This is not true, burner blitzing pays an individual pilot more than being a memebr of all but the most blingy high sec incursion fleets. In other words, it takes being in the old ISN or a "TVP Elite" fleet of 5 bil isk ships to match what a solo burner blitzer can make. That's jsut a high sec to high sec comparision. What's even worse to achieve what SOLO Burner Blitzers in high sec can do (the guide proves it), you need a team and a Class 5 wormhole. That's a pure travesty, and i'd bet it's just one more of the reasons why wormhole space is the least traveled/lived in space (according to CCP at the fanfest before last).
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 616	Posted - 2015.11.27 07:11:31 - [182] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Arthur Aihaken wrote: The Blitz-Burner method for Lv4s can certain pay off dividends, but no more so than using the same method in low-sec or null-sec. It's a fairly huge investment at around 5-billion ISK - not to mention the necessary skills. This is not true, burner blitzing pays an individual pilot more than being a memebr of all but the most blingy high sec incursion fleets. In other words, it takes being in the old ISN or a "TVP Elite" fleet of 5 bil isk ships to match what a solo burner blitzer can make. That's jsut a high sec to high sec comparision. What's even worse to achieve what SOLO Burner Blitzers in high sec can do (the guide proves it), you need a team and a Class 5 wormhole. That's a pure travesty, and i'd bet it's just one more of the reasons why wormhole space is the least traveled/lived in space (according to CCP at the fanfest before last). So now we're blaming things that didn't even exist at the time? Burners only came out after that fanfest if you're talking about 2014, the last one being 2015 and 2014 being before that one. You're not even grasping at straws anymore Jenn, you're blatantly making things up. Not cool. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 616	Posted - 2015.11.27 07:30:42 - [183] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Same goes for closing the blitzing loophole. Sure, closing those loopholes make people like Anize have to grind a bit harder, but it increases the value of the LPs that the "casual mission runner in a raven" has. Who knows, higher buying power for those casuals after these loopholes are closed might mean they stay longer, because they can do more because the Onamara's of EVE arne't depressing the value of their gameplay anymore. Of course, one has to actually care about the experiences of others to want to see a major game play feature (PVE) actually be balanced. Oh hay, the 'think of the children post'. If this was true SOE LP value would be going down but it's not. In fact it's actually been pretty much stable for the last year except for the huge spike when SOE ships released and they had to increase the number of agents. Also, apparently more people are sunning SOE agents than ever before as well. Oh, and since incursion LP can be converted to SOE LP that's a big part of what's keeping SOE LP at it's current level. It's just below 1k per concord LP currently but doesn't require tags like most of the other stores. This is turning out to be a witch hunt pure and simple. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 27	Posted - 2015.11.27 08:21:04 - [184] - Quote So Jenn, is your solution that blitzing should not be possible? Or that burners should not exist, or should take as long as a normal lvl4? Should Anizes methods just not be possible at all, meaning normal hisec missioners can't have a goal of being better at what they do than a normal player? You keep comparing different activities Seriously, until you tell us exactly what change you would like to see... And don't try to tell me you're doing this for other people's benefit. You just want it all your way, and people aren't allowed to play how they want. I am thinking of the children, cos at the moment I'm thinking of you and your grizzling. Edt: like you have been fond of pointing out Jenn, it's a GAME.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 617	Posted - 2015.11.27 09:01:32 - [185] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Arthur Aihaken wrote: The Blitz-Burner method for Lv4s can certain pay off dividends, but no more so than using the same method in low-sec or null-sec. It's a fairly huge investment at around 5-billion ISK - not to mention the necessary skills. This is not true, burner blitzing pays an individual pilot more than being a memebr of all but the most blingy high sec incursion fleets. In other words, it takes being in the old ISN or a "TVP Elite" fleet of 5 bil isk ships to match what a solo burner blitzer can make. That's jsut a high sec to high sec comparision. And Multiboxing null and wormhole content pays an individual player more than anything else in the game. Yes, this does actually sound balanced (no sarcasm) because it's null, it's supposed to be more lucrative for the individual player and encourages people to focus all their characters in null. You still haven't acknowledged the fact that in nullsec you can make far more isk per player than in hi-sec. I don't think I will ever reach 300mill/h in hi-sec doing what I like doing (Fun fact: Burners were already nerfed once btw). A null player can exceed that with 4 subcap characters and then continue going. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13027	Posted - 2015.11.27 09:32:03 - [186] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: Arthur Aihaken wrote: The Blitz-Burner method for Lv4s can certain pay off dividends, but no more so than using the same method in low-sec or null-sec. It's a fairly huge investment at around 5-billion ISK - not to mention the necessary skills. This is not true, burner blitzing pays an individual pilot more than being a memebr of all but the most blingy high sec incursion fleets. In other words, it takes being in the old ISN or a "TVP Elite" fleet of 5 bil isk ships to match what a solo burner blitzer can make. That's jsut a high sec to high sec comparision. What's even worse to achieve what SOLO Burner Blitzers in high sec can do (the guide proves it), you need a team and a Class 5 wormhole. That's a pure travesty, and i'd bet it's just one more of the reasons why wormhole space is the least traveled/lived in space (according to CCP at the fanfest before last). So now we're blaming things that didn't even exist at the time? Burners only came out after that fanfest if you're talking about 2014, the last one being 2015 and 2014 being before that one. You're not even grasping at straws anymore Jenn, you're blatantly making things up. Not cool. Now you're rambling ( a sure sign that you, deep down, understand what I'm saying , and experience pain because of that understanding). I said nothing about burners at fanfest. I wasn't even at that one. You're starting to lose it. Throttle back and think for a bit.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2099	Posted - 2015.11.27 09:34:20 - [187] - Quote watching yall bicker is some of the best forum entertainment I've seen in a while 10/10 all around! I don't even know how to respond to most of this stuff anymore @ChainsawPlankto
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13027	Posted - 2015.11.27 09:41:36 - [188] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: Multiboxing 1, why do you cling to that? Why do you pretend to not understand that we are talking about lone character income potential. And 2, how do you know? You've never done high end anom ratting, only beginner stuff with phoons and myrmydons. (lol myrm). You are wrong by the way. Multiboxing null anomalies does not and physically can not pay as much as multiboxing an incursions toon with This Navy Raven running full clear missions for SOE. Let me say something. I don't like you and you don't like me. But that's no reason for you to stop thinking and learning. So how about this: Why don't we get together and test it? Or, if you follow the EVE way and trust no one and don't care to do that, would you accept screen shots of my wallet and journal entries when I am able to play after this weekend and I fire up my incursion and SOE mission toon again? You say you want proof, I am willing to provide it.
The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 28	Posted - 2015.11.27 09:42:14 - [189] - Quote Chainsaw Plankton wrote: watching yall bicker is some of the best forum entertainment I've seen in a while 10/10 all around! I don't even know how to respond to most of this stuff anymore Probably for the best, there not a lot of understanding going around.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13027	Posted - 2015.11.27 09:43:12 - [190] - Quote Chainsaw Plankton wrote: watching yall bicker is some of the best forum entertainment I've seen in a while 10/10 all around! I don't even know how to respond to most of this stuff anymore If you knew anything damn nub you'd know that this bickering is a 9/10 not a 10/10, because 9/10 escalate more than once like this thread! (didn't want you to feel left out Chainsaw so threw you some shad eot amke you feel welcome])

Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 383	Posted - 2015.11.27 09:51:00 - [191] - Quote Chainsaw Plankton wrote: watching yall bicker is some of the best forum entertainment I've seen in a while 10/10 all around! I don't even know how to respond to most of this stuff anymore me either, they both make good points. i stayed out when i realised it probs only 20 or so dudes actually using these methods. is there any metric for that, of not not alot point to argue either side. I can imagine them both in RL, looking at there moniter & getting slightly mad, maybe hitting keys harder. but yeh very entertaining, on topic. @OP when i do missions i usually salvage the loot, as i dont rly need the isk, i just gather the loot anyway sometimes something useful comes up. its like treasure finding in a way.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13028	Posted - 2015.11.27 09:51:33 - [192] - Quote The Bigpuns wrote: So Jenn, is your solution that blitzing should not be possible? Or that burners should not exist, or should take as long as a normal lvl4? Should Anizes methods just not be possible at all, meaning normal hisec missioners can't have a goal of being better at what they do than a normal player? Not at all. I like that people can engineer new concepts. We're not talking about elmiinationg that, but in many cases they pay too much. It's jsut like the old super tracking 400/mil per hour tracking titans in null sec a few years ago. It was a genious use of them, it just paid to much, doing real damage to the game. Quote: You keep comparing different activities Seriously, until you tell us exactly what change you would like to see... I've done so over and over. A short list is: Lower top potential from burner and al level 4 mission blitzing. Either reduce pays outs or add more risk to high sec incursions Hammer FW missions to the ground (players already gain LP from fw pvp, leave it at that, FW is supposed to be pure pvp not a farming simulator) Leave non-FW low sec, npc null and wormhole space alone, they are fine. For null, eliminate the afk-ability of anoms. Change awards scheme from all isk to half isk, half reedemable tags that drop in npc wrecks and have to be collected (and moved to empire to redeem). Add new items to signature complex/escalation site drop chances. But for Space-Gods sake don't up the isk rewards, too much isk in game to begin with. There, a comprehensive plan for Combat PVE, which it seems none of you seem to care much about while defending a measurably broken status quo. Quote: And don't try to tell me you're doing this for other people's benefit. You just want it all your way, and people aren't allowed to play how they want. If 'play how they want' actually means 'make us of broken rewards mechanics', then you are right. Quote: I am thinking of the children, cos at the moment I'm thinking of you and your grizzling. Edt: like you have been fond of pointing out Jenn, it's a GAME. Which makes the fact that you have the wrong ideas about it more troubling lol.
The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 28	Posted - 2015.11.27 09:53:54 - [193] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: Multiboxing 1, why do you cling to that? Why do you pretend to not understand that we are talking about lone character income potential. And 2, how do you know? You've never done high end anom ratting, only beginner stuff with phoons and myrmydons. (lol myrm). You are wrong by the way. Multiboxing null anomalies does not and physically can not pay as much as multiboxing an incursions toon with This Navy Raven running full clear missions for SOE. Let me say something. I don't like you and you don't like me. But that's no reason for you to stop thinking and learning. So how about this: Why don't we get together and test it? Or, if you follow the EVE way and trust no one and don't care to do that, would you accept screen shots of my wallet and journal entries when I am able to play after this weekend and I fire up my incursion and SOE mission toon again? You say you want proof, I am willing to provide it. I like the way you insist that, deep down, people just agree with you but are being stubborn. Couldn't just be that other people might also be megalomanical egotists trying to impose their thoughts and will over the whole of Eve. Sorry no, that IS just you.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13029	Posted - 2015.11.27 10:01:05 - [194] - Quote The Bigpuns wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: Multiboxing 1, why do you cling to that? Why do you pretend to not understand that we are talking about lone character income potential. And 2, how do you know? You've never done high end anom ratting, only beginner stuff with phoons and myrmydons. (lol myrm). You are wrong by the way. Multiboxing null anomalies does not and physically can not pay as much as multiboxing an incursions toon with This Navy Raven running full clear missions for SOE. Let me say something. I don't like you and you don't like me. But that's no reason for you to stop thinking and learning. So how about this: Why don't we get together and test it? Or, if you follow the EVE way and trust no one and don't care to do that, would you accept screen shots of my wallet and journal entries when I am able to play after this weekend and I fire up my incursion and SOE mission toon again? You say you want proof, I am willing to provide it. I like the way you insist that, deep down, people just agree with you but are being stubborn. Couldn't just be that other people might also be megalomanical egotists trying to impose their thoughts and will over the whole of Eve. Sorry no, that IS just you. I'm not imposing my thoughts on anyone. I'm telling the truth as I see and can measure it. I'm sorry you don't like that, but not everyone does. That's a personal problem for you to solve. If you don't like the way i present it, tough. The invitation extends to you. If you don't believe, I'm willing to show you.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2100	Posted - 2015.11.27 10:02:33 - [195] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: You are wrong by the way. Multiboxing null anomalies does not and physically can not pay as much as multiboxing an incursions toon with This Navy Raven running full clear missions for SOE. I prefer the fof navy raven with rigors/flares missile guidance blehs, and a pithum c-type medium booster. at 100km with an AB speed tank it pretty much doesn't take damage and sometimes you can do a manual 100km burn and save a MJD cool down, or just orbit gate at 20km. In something like "The Score" I usually just burn to the next gate. Haven't tried running it in a while though. Can't make a claim on the isk/hour. although I've done a little bit of barghest testing and it is pretty dank. need to try an fof version sometime. the missile velocity bonus is awesome hit at over 100km before you fire the next volley. If you 1 or 2 volley most frigs it would probably be pretty workable. although with fury cruise I was 2 volleying a MWDing elite frig @ChainsawPlankto
The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 28	Posted - 2015.11.27 10:15:47 - [196] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: The Bigpuns wrote: So Jenn, is your solution that blitzing should not be possible? Or that burners should not exist, or should take as long as a normal lvl4? Should Anizes methods just not be possible at all, meaning normal hisec missioners can't have a goal of being better at what they do than a normal player? Not at all. I like that people can engineer new concepts. We're not talking about elmiinationg that, but in many cases they pay too much. It's jsut like the old super tracking 400/mil per hour tracking titans in null sec a few years ago. It was a genious use of them, it just paid to much, doing real damage to the game. Quote: You keep comparing different activities Seriously, until you tell us exactly what change you would like to see... I've done so over and over. A short list is: Lower top potential from burner and al level 4 mission blitzing. Either reduce pays outs or add more risk to high sec incursions Hammer FW missions to the ground (players already gain LP from fw pvp, leave it at that, FW is supposed to be pure pvp not a farming simulator) Leave non-FW low sec, npc null and wormhole space alone, they are fine. For null, eliminate the afk-ability of anoms. Change awards scheme from all isk to half isk, half reedemable tags that drop in npc wrecks and have to be collected (and moved to empire to redeem). Add new items to signature complex/escalation site drop chances. But for Space-Gods sake don't up the isk rewards, too much isk in game to begin with. There, a comprehensive plan for Combat PVE, which it seems none of you seem to care much about while defending a measurably broken status quo. Quote: And don't try to tell me you're doing this for other people's benefit. You just want it all your way, and people aren't allowed to play how they want. If 'play how they want' actually means 'make us of broken rewards mechanics', then you are right. Quote: I am thinking of the children, cos at the moment I'm thinking of you and your grizzling. Edt: like you have been fond of pointing out Jenn, it's a GAME. Which makes the fact that you have the wrong ideas about it more troubling lol. Great, you've articulated it beautifully, in a way that is clear and concise. I congratulate you on your change of tack. Now to respond in kind: Lowering the top rewards for burners? Fine, agreed. But lowering the blitzing reward? Can only be done if you lower the actual reward for the missions (hurting everyone who runs missions) or remove blitzing as a possibility, leaving full clears as the only solution, which will ruin them for a lot more people than the occasional blitzer. Rebalance incursions risk reward? Again, you'll face a lot more resistance to that than the occasional blitzer. Not saying it's not desirable, but you're on to a loser I'm afraid. Hammer fw? Possibly, as a pvp oriented activity, maybe it shouldn't have rewards, but then it would just be pvp. At least it has focus at the moment. Eliminate afkability of anoms and make them drop the rewards rather than just pay? Couldn't agree more personally. Leave all the stuff YOU want to do alone? Ah, now we're getting somewhere. So what we have, is that the main thing you have been harping on about (Anize and her "exploit") is the main bit where you fall down. Take the rest of it and annoy ccp with it at their events as much as you like, see how far you get. If you don't like their game, play chess, that's quite well balanced after 7000 years of development.
The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 28	Posted - 2015.11.27 10:19:24 - [197] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: The Bigpuns wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: Multiboxing 1, why do you cling to that? Why do you pretend to not understand that we are talking about lone character income potential. And 2, how do you know? You've never done high end anom ratting, only beginner stuff with phoons and myrmydons. (lol myrm). You are wrong by the way. Multiboxing null anomalies does not and physically can not pay as much as multiboxing an incursions toon with This Navy Raven running full clear missions for SOE. Let me say something. I don't like you and you don't like me. But that's no reason for you to stop thinking and learning. So how about this: Why don't we get together and test it? Or, if you follow the EVE way and trust no one and don't care to do that, would you accept screen shots of my wallet and journal entries when I am able to play after this weekend and I fire up my incursion and SOE mission toon again? You say you want proof, I am willing to provide it. I like the way you insist that, deep down, people just agree with you but are being stubborn. Couldn't just be that other people might also be megalomanical egotists trying to impose their thoughts and will over the whole of Eve. Sorry no, that IS just you. I'm not imposing my thoughts on anyone. I'm telling the truth as I see and can measure it. I'm sorry you don't like that, but not everyone does. That's a personal problem for you to solve. If you don't like the way i present it, tough. The invitation extends to you. If you don't believe, I'm willing to show you. There you go again. Someone doesn't agree with you, so they have a personal problem that needs solving. Noticed your hypocrisy yet? As has been repeatedly pointed out to you, the proof is also there for you to look at. Blitzing isn't the problem. Us joining up or sharing screenshots isn't going to solve the problem. Cos the problem only exists in your mind. Now who has the problems that need solving?
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13030	Posted - 2015.11.27 11:04:35 - [198] - Quote The Bigpuns wrote: Leave all the stuff YOU want to do alone? Ah, now we're getting somewhere. Erm, What?
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13030	Posted - 2015.11.27 11:06:50 - [199] - Quote The Bigpuns wrote: There you go again. Someone doesn't agree with you, so they have a personal problem that needs solving. Noticed your hypocrisy yet? As has been repeatedly pointed out to you, the proof is also there for you to look at. Blitzing isn't the problem. Us joining up or sharing screenshots isn't going to solve the problem. Cos the problem only exists in your mind. Now who has the problems that need solving? Still you. You don't want to know the truth , even so far as rejecting a chance to find it. But hey, if pretending your personal issue is actually just something wrong with me, and that makes you feel better, by all means keep doing it. I live to serve.
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 716	Posted - 2015.11.27 13:16:10 - [200] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: The Bigpuns wrote: There you go again. Someone doesn't agree with you, so they have a personal problem that needs solving. Noticed your hypocrisy yet? As has been repeatedly pointed out to you, the proof is also there for you to look at. Blitzing isn't the problem. Us joining up or sharing screenshots isn't going to solve the problem. Cos the problem only exists in your mind. Now who has the problems that need solving? Still you. You don't want to know the truth , even so far as rejecting a chance to find it. But hey, if pretending your personal issue is actually just something wrong with me, and that makes you feel better, by all means keep doing it. I live to serve. Deflection... Everything is personal with you Jenn. Your own psychosis is forced on everyone on these forums because you have a personal crusade against people playing the game in a way that personally bothers you. How about you just ignore the things you don't like, or find a game that better suits your needs. Let the rest of the people play the way they want. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.

The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 28	Posted - 2015.11.27 13:28:26 - [201] - Quote The defence case is closed. Cos the prosecution doesn't have one.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13037	Posted - 2015.11.27 13:32:43 - [202] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: The Bigpuns wrote: There you go again. Someone doesn't agree with you, so they have a personal problem that needs solving. Noticed your hypocrisy yet? As has been repeatedly pointed out to you, the proof is also there for you to look at. Blitzing isn't the problem. Us joining up or sharing screenshots isn't going to solve the problem. Cos the problem only exists in your mind. Now who has the problems that need solving? Still you. You don't want to know the truth , even so far as rejecting a chance to find it. But hey, if pretending your personal issue is actually just something wrong with me, and that makes you feel better, by all means keep doing it. I live to serve. Deflection... Everything is personal with you Jenn. Your own psychosis is forced on everyone on these forums because you have a personal crusade against people playing the game in a way that personally bothers you. How about you just ignore the things you don't like, or find a game that better suits your needs. Let the rest of the people play the way they want. I thought you left. You said you were. Were do you people get "play my way" from "fix this imbalance"? Or do you honeslty think I want everyone to rat angels some days, run incursions other days and dip into a wormhole every now and again? There is little I dislike in the game. What I dislike is intellectual dishonesty and the lengths people seem to want to go to to preserve advantage (even imaginary space ship game advantage). It's not the 1st time I've experienced this here either. When there were High Sec lvl 5s I got into the same arguments. I even linked a post where CCP said they knew it was a bug (naively thinking that this would penetrate with the high sec lvl 5 runners, back then i had not yet learned about the backfire effect). Anytime people have an advantage (or they perceive that the advantage in question helps people the like or hurts people they don't), they get all kinds of irrational in it's defense. I heard it all from "well, that's only one employee saying it's a bug, why don't you get CCP to put out a press statement sying it's a bug" to "it doesn't matter if it's a bug, it's good for the game because it lets players aspire to do big things without having to go through a gate camp!" to "it doesn't matter is they pay out 90k lp per misison, you have to have high standings and only a few people have that". Every slippery, slimey dodge possible. And yep, when CCP got around to fixing the thing they called a bug for 3 years, the high seccers blasted everyone who told CCP the truth, like somehow we were doing it to hurt them personally. BTW it was the same thing, a lot of those HS lvl 5 runners were null sec people, same as with incursions and high end burner blitzing. Say what you want, but these issue exists, and if you condone it you're on the wrong side for the wrong reasons.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 617	Posted - 2015.11.27 13:46:34 - [203] - Quote I'd actually love to see a breakdown of isk generated form anoms/nullsec and isk generated from missions/hisec along with the number of players in both. It's easier to argue the incursion issue because the CCP verified numbers are there for everyone to see and more importantly it's easier to see what can be changed and what shouldn't. I do find it interesting that Jenn keeps mentioning 'this is just a game' but is unable to divorce the game and game mechanics from the people, especially in my case. Tending to focus on my supposed personal and moral issues rather than on looking at each mechanic and talking about them. Maybe because it's easier to break down and damage a person than it is to argue against facts and numbers of a mechanic. It's an interesting contrast. Now I don't have a problem with a specific person or group of people doing things, primarily because I've tried nearly everything in eve. I'd rather look at an activity and see what its current and potential effects are on EvE as a whole. Once you understand the concept of looking at the larger picture and the activity you can get a much clearer view on things and dont get bogged down with individual people. Even better is that you can make much better suggestions regarding solving any issues. I can write a whole wall of text breaking down each activity but it will just be ignored and various personal insults will be all I get in reply so I'll keep it short. Still get insults but less typing. Missions/burners: isk cap per character and isk cap per player is about the same and fixed. Null: isk cap per character is lower than missions/burners and isk cap per player is much, much higher than missions and effectively scalable, maybe around double that of burners? More? Incursions: isk cap per character is kinda variable and slightly higher than null but isk cap per player is potentially very very high. There is however a character cap (1.5%-2% of eve). A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13039	Posted - 2015.11.27 14:01:00 - [204] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: I'd actually love to see a breakdown of isk generated form anoms/nullsec and isk generated from missions/hisec along with the number of players in both. It's easier to argue the incursion issue because the CCP verified numbers are there for everyone to see and more importantly it's easier to see what can be changed and what shouldn't. They already did, a long time ago. about 75% of bounties come from null, because of all the AFKing. which is why AFKing is on my list of things that need to go. AFKing makes null look rich but it just means people are alting it up with ishtars making 60 mil per hour. That's worse for the economy than incursions are. But what you refuse to understand is that the problem with incursions is NOT a macro-economic problem, it's the porblem of the incentives they case for actual at the keyboard high end PVErs. Quote: I do find it interesting that Jenn keeps mentioning 'this is just a game' but is unable to divorce the game and game mechanics from the people, especially in my case. Tending to focus on my supposed personal and moral issues rather than on looking at each mechanic and talking about them. Maybe because it's easier to break down and damage a person than it is to argue against facts and numbers of a mechanic. It's an interesting contrast. Now I don't have a problem with a specific person or group of people doing things, primarily because I've tried nearly everything in eve. I'd rather look at an activity and see what its current and potential effects are on EvE as a whole than insulting people, down to a very personal level as this doesn't solve anything. Once you understand the concept of looking at the larger picture and the activity, rather than persecuting a single group of people you can get a much clearer view on things. Even better is that you can make much better suggestions regarding solving any issues. I can write a whole wall of text breaking down each activity but it will just be ignored and various personal insults will be all I get in reply so I'll keep it short. Still get insults but less typing. If you feel insulted by the truth , Im sorry. But it can't be helped, i call them like they are, and you are in denial. Quote: Missions/burners: isk cap per character and isk cap per player is about the same and fixed. Null: isk cap per character is lower than missions/burners and isk cap per player is much, much higher than missions and effectively scalable, maybe around double that of burners? More? This is the problem. This is why I offer to show you. You don't understand how things work. Null sec pve is not scaleable. Add even one more ship to your anom, and because of how bounties pay out (and the "overkill effect") you end up with less. The game punishes you for using alts. Which is moot. Because WHY do that when you can use one character in the relative safety of high sec and make more than enough isk to do what you need to do while not dealing to the pita that is multiboxing. This is also the draw of incursions. Being in an incursion fleet lets me use one character in high where I'd need 2 in null (and need to be able to defend to, or get both out of danger). You talk of my insulting you, but you keep glossing over the things I tell you (and things that you could prove for yourself if you were interested, things i'm willing to share information with you about). What, exactly do you want me to think then? [/quote] Incursions: isk cap per character is kinda variable and slightly higher than null but isk cap per player is potentially very very high. There is however a character cap (1.5%-2% of eve).[/quote] It is not slightly higher. You can test this yourself as i have. Take a mach and run with an incursion fleet. Take a mach to null (and pve when you are either not in a fleet, or not being chased). The difference between 90 mil (under peak conditions) and 150 mil plus lp (under peak conditions) is not "slightly, it's damn near double. Even comparing incursion to incursion its no good, if you did have the rare null incursion pop up, you arne't goign to take a fleet of 2-5 bil is ships to do them, you take navy vexors and such. Because of the time it takes such ships to compelte the incursion, you have about the same isk in your wallet as if you'd just stayed in high sec.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 617	Posted - 2015.11.27 14:18:52 - [205] - Quote So not only does 75% of bounty income come from null but it's almsot 100% direct to wallet isk with no sink with your solution being 'less afking'. And you want to focus on prosecuting a handfull of hi-sec mission runners that is sinking over half their bounty/reward isk back into the game? Huh. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13042	Posted - 2015.11.27 14:29:06 - [206] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: So not only does 75% of bounty income come from null but it's almsot 100% direct to wallet isk with no sink with your solution being 'less afking'. And you want to focus on prosecuting a handfull of hi-sec mission runners that is sinking over half their bounty/reward isk back into the game? Huh. if you don't understand the terms and situation, where are you arguing with me? No one is trying to persecute anyone. The fact tha tyou are taking it personally probably indicates that you know there is a level of imblance and feel guilty. why can't you get it? there is nothing wrong with what you are doing, its that the thing you are doing exposes an imbalance that negatively affects some aspects of the game And what does sinking have to do with anying. Isk sinks are a macro economic issue, has nothing to do with perosnal incentives. That's what we are talking about here, but you keep trying to drag the subject into something else. And then you have the nerve to get mad when I tell you i think you are being dishonest.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 617	Posted - 2015.11.27 14:50:56 - [207] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: So not only does 75% of bounty income come from null but it's almsot 100% direct to wallet isk with no sink with your solution being 'less afking'. And you want to focus on prosecuting a handfull of hi-sec mission runners that is sinking over half their bounty/reward isk back into the game? Huh. if you don't understand the terms and situation, where are you arguing with me? No one is trying to persecute anyone. The fact tha tyou are taking it personally probably indicates that you know there is a level of imblance and feel guilty. why can't you get it? there is nothing wrong with what you are doing, its that the thing you are doing exposes an imbalance that negatively affects some aspects of the game And what does sinking have to do with anying. Isk sinks are a macro economic issue, has nothing to do with perosnal incentives. That's what we are talking about here, but you keep trying to drag the subject into something else. And then you have the nerve to get mad when I tell you i think you are being dishonest. Exactly, your focus is on the person and not the mechanic and that is why you can't help but drown everyone that disagrees with you in personal insults. I am trying to 'drag' the subject into discussion of the mechanic and out of the witch hunt you're spreading all over the forums but you're resisting because it's easier to break down a person rather than discuss a mechanic. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 617	Posted - 2015.11.27 15:15:13 - [208] - Quote Out of curiosity, what kind of numbers were you able to get to while running burners? A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 28	Posted - 2015.11.27 15:25:11 - [209] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: So not only does 75% of bounty income come from null but it's almsot 100% direct to wallet isk with no sink with your solution being 'less afking'. And you want to focus on prosecuting a handfull of hi-sec mission runners that is sinking over half their bounty/reward isk back into the game? Huh. if you don't understand the terms and situation, where are you arguing with me? No one is trying to persecute anyone. The fact tha tyou are taking it personally probably indicates that you know there is a level of imblance and feel guilty. why can't you get it? there is nothing wrong with what you are doing, its that the thing you are doing exposes an imbalance that negatively affects some aspects of the game And what does sinking have to do with anying. Isk sinks are a macro economic issue, has nothing to do with perosnal incentives. That's what we are talking about here, but you keep trying to drag the subject into something else. And then you have the nerve to get mad when I tell you i think you are being dishonest. Where do you see anyone getting mad? This is once again your own personal delusions of other people. You have no rational comprehension of the argument other people are putting, except to say that we are butthurt cos we really knowing that what you are saying is true, and that we are dishonest cos our viewpoint doesn't coincide with yours. Seriously Jenn, is the irony lost on you? Can you not see where your own arguments work against you? That really is the hypocrisy, and the dishonesty which you attribute to everyone else. It's about time you had a look at yourself, and stop just denying that anyone but you could be right about something. Only the insane believe they are the only sane ones.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13042	Posted - 2015.11.27 15:43:33 - [210] - Quote The Bigpuns wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: So not only does 75% of bounty income come from null but it's almsot 100% direct to wallet isk with no sink with your solution being 'less afking'. And you want to focus on prosecuting a handfull of hi-sec mission runners that is sinking over half their bounty/reward isk back into the game? Huh. if you don't understand the terms and situation, where are you arguing with me? No one is trying to persecute anyone. The fact tha tyou are taking it personally probably indicates that you know there is a level of imblance and feel guilty. why can't you get it? there is nothing wrong with what you are doing, its that the thing you are doing exposes an imbalance that negatively affects some aspects of the game And what does sinking have to do with anying. Isk sinks are a macro economic issue, has nothing to do with perosnal incentives. That's what we are talking about here, but you keep trying to drag the subject into something else. And then you have the nerve to get mad when I tell you i think you are being dishonest. Where do you see anyone getting mad? This is once again your own personal delusions of other people. You have no rational comprehension of the argument other people are putting, except to say that we are butthurt cos we really knowing that what you are saying is true, and that we are dishonest cos our viewpoint doesn't coincide with yours. Seriously Jenn, is the irony lost on you? Can you not see where your own arguments work against you? That really is the hypocrisy, and the dishonesty which you attribute to everyone else. It's about time you had a look at yourself, and stop just denying that anyone but you could be right about something. Only the insane believe they are the only sane ones. \ Not one single thing I've said is a lie. At not time have i tried to deflect from the issue. That was you. And if you think Anize wasn't mad, you can't read. I read the word "insult" a dozen times (none of you have seen me insult anyone, you will know it when it happens...). This isn't about "viewpoints" (I think i found your issue, you have the false and broken sense that all things are equal when they are not), its about right and wrong. About verifiable fact (which I have offered the two of you a chance to observe, Anize says nothing and you declined) vs emotional self interested opinion. If you don't liek what Im saying use the ignore function. I'm going to keep telling the truth about this game that for me and I think others is more a hobby untill the situation is fixed or the servers close, whatever come 1st.

The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 29	Posted - 2015.11.27 15:53:28 - [211] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: The Bigpuns wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: So not only does 75% of bounty income come from null but it's almsot 100% direct to wallet isk with no sink with your solution being 'less afking'. And you want to focus on prosecuting a handfull of hi-sec mission runners that is sinking over half their bounty/reward isk back into the game? Huh. if you don't understand the terms and situation, where are you arguing with me? No one is trying to persecute anyone. The fact tha tyou are taking it personally probably indicates that you know there is a level of imblance and feel guilty. why can't you get it? there is nothing wrong with what you are doing, its that the thing you are doing exposes an imbalance that negatively affects some aspects of the game And what does sinking have to do with anying. Isk sinks are a macro economic issue, has nothing to do with perosnal incentives. That's what we are talking about here, but you keep trying to drag the subject into something else. And then you have the nerve to get mad when I tell you i think you are being dishonest. Where do you see anyone getting mad? This is once again your own personal delusions of other people. You have no rational comprehension of the argument other people are putting, except to say that we are butthurt cos we really knowing that what you are saying is true, and that we are dishonest cos our viewpoint doesn't coincide with yours. Seriously Jenn, is the irony lost on you? Can you not see where your own arguments work against you? That really is the hypocrisy, and the dishonesty which you attribute to everyone else. It's about time you had a look at yourself, and stop just denying that anyone but you could be right about something. Only the insane believe they are the only sane ones. \ Not one single thing I've said is a lie. At not time have i tried to deflect from the issue. That was you. And if you think Anize wasn't mad, you can't read. I read the word "insult" a dozen times (none of you have seen me insult anyone, you will know it when it happens...). This isn't about "viewpoints" (I think i found your issue, you have the false and broken sense that all things are equal when they are not), its about right and wrong. About verifiable fact (which I have offered the two of you a chance to observe, Anize says nothing and you declined) vs emotional self interested opinion. If you don't liek what Im saying use the ignore function. I'm going to keep telling the truth about this game that for me and I think others is more a hobby untill the situation is fixed or the servers close, whatever come 1st. Once again, you appear to be demonstrating an ability to not understand anything else. If you read a couple pages back, you will see that I agree with you that not everything is balanced. And if you think you haven't been insulting in this thread, well, there's frankly a yawning gap in your understanding that this isn't the right forum for. When you demonstrate an ability to understand what anyone else is saying, come back and be welcome. Otherwise, practise what you preach and don't bother with people like us.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 618	Posted - 2015.11.27 16:05:29 - [212] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: Out of curiosity, what kind of numbers were you able to get to while running burners? Going to ignore this as well? A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4759	Posted - 2015.11.27 18:16:51 - [213] - Quote Since when is multi-boxing difficult? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13042	Posted - 2015.11.27 18:42:15 - [214] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Since when is multi-boxing difficult? It's not, who said it was?
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4759	Posted - 2015.11.27 18:46:01 - [215] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: It's not, who said it was? I was sure I saw a comment alluding to how it was more difficult to multi-box than a single character setup, but I find there's not really a huge challenge in running 3 characters vs 1. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13042	Posted - 2015.11.27 18:51:34 - [216] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: Out of curiosity, what kind of numbers were you able to get to while running burners? Going to ignore this as well? I didn't see it. Last time I fired up the alt in Lanngisi and gave it a go (not perfect skills, used meta guns on my vigilant, can't use Vagabond yet, used fleet stabber, Vigilant survived, had to get a neew fleet stabber though) it was over 100 per hour (selling probes to buy orders, so about 15-1600 isk/lp). Not as good as you because im not quite there yet. The 100 per hour with one character that couldn't even use tech 2 blasters or a vagabond still outpaced my perfect skilled, +5 hardwiring, partial mid-grade crystal set Deadspace fit Machariel in isk per hour. Would you like me to try again and provide you screen shots. Would you like for me to PM you the name of my mission alt in lanngisi (again, trust no one but you can atleast see when I undock). Basically, do you want to know the truth? Do you want to understand that for the small group of people who do top end PVE this stuff is a problem that needs fixing. Or do you want to just keep going back and forth on a forum. Your call.
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 719	Posted - 2015.11.27 18:57:01 - [217] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: Out of curiosity, what kind of numbers were you able to get to while running burners? Going to ignore this as well? I didn't see it. Last time I fired up the alt in Lanngisi and gave it a go (not perfect skills, used meta guns on my vigilant, can't use Vagabond yet, used fleet stabber, Vigilant survived, had to get a neew fleet stabber though) it was over 100 per hour (selling probes to buy orders, so about 15-1600 isk/lp). Not as good as you because im not quite there yet. The 100 per hour with one character that couldn't even use tech 2 blasters or a vagabond still outpaced my perfect skilled, +5 hardwiring, partial mid-grade crystal set Deadspace fit Machariel in isk per hour. Would you like me to try again and provide you screen shots. Would you like for me to PM you the name of my mission alt in lanngisi (again, trust no one but you can atleast see when I undock). Basically, do you want to know the truth? Do you want to understand that for the small group of people who do top end PVE this stuff is a problem that needs fixing. Or do you want to just keep going back and forth on a forum. Your call. So you want us to believe it takes you more than 2 hours to run a 10/10? Or that you don't have access to Havens and Sanctums? Seems to me your problem with Eve isn't High-Sec at all, it is the market. You don't like how much value LP has at the moment. Because that is where all the mission income comes from, what other players are willing to pay you for your LP. So you would rather see direct isk injection from CCP survive, but lateral player transactions nerfed? Got it. Edit: On further reflection it appears your problem is indeed with the market. You used to make much more isk per hour when the loot from your sites in null were actually worth something. But since Null has been farmed to hell and back because of how EASY it is, the value of your deadspace mods have dropped. You hate how the LP held up its value while the deadspace gear tanked. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13042	Posted - 2015.11.27 19:00:23 - [218] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: It's not, who said it was? I was sure I saw a comment alluding to how it was more difficult to multi-box than a single character setup, but I find there's not really a huge challenge in running 3 characters vs 1. You misunderstand. it's not that hard to run three. It's HAVING to run three (paying 3 plex or subs per month) to match what people IN SAFER SPACE can do paying one plex/ sub. EVE online has a risk reward scheme that says "the more risk you are willing to take, the more rewards you potentially get". But it doesn't work that way when it takes you more alts (or more friends) to generate the same amount of combat PVE wealth is someone in space with automatic npc police response. When i started playing in 2007 it wasn't like that. I don't want more wealth (in fact, I think it's fine that null sec and WH space make you 'grind' a big to get the good loot, buffing null would be a tragic mistake). and I don't want a roll back (the progress hasn't been all bad), but I do want the game i enjoy as a hobby and it's combat PVE features to work right again, to say "hey, play where you want but there are negative consequences for choosing the automated safety of high sec (or the throwaway ship safety of FW)". CCp has allowed entitlement to grow (as they did with high sec lvl 5s, a situation we helped defeat but not letting CCP forget about how low sec people running for lvl 5 agents that weren't near low sec were getting LP screwed by the high sec bug abusers), and people feel like they deserve unbalanced rewards. I disagree and those of us who believe in balance are going to keep talking about it.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13042	Posted - 2015.11.27 19:04:14 - [219] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: Out of curiosity, what kind of numbers were you able to get to while running burners? Going to ignore this as well? I didn't see it. Last time I fired up the alt in Lanngisi and gave it a go (not perfect skills, used meta guns on my vigilant, can't use Vagabond yet, used fleet stabber, Vigilant survived, had to get a neew fleet stabber though) it was over 100 per hour (selling probes to buy orders, so about 15-1600 isk/lp). Not as good as you because im not quite there yet. The 100 per hour with one character that couldn't even use tech 2 blasters or a vagabond still outpaced my perfect skilled, +5 hardwiring, partial mid-grade crystal set Deadspace fit Machariel in isk per hour. Would you like me to try again and provide you screen shots. Would you like for me to PM you the name of my mission alt in lanngisi (again, trust no one but you can atleast see when I undock). Basically, do you want to know the truth? Do you want to understand that for the small group of people who do top end PVE this stuff is a problem that needs fixing. Or do you want to just keep going back and forth on a forum. Your call. So you want us to believe it takes you more than 2 hours to run a 10/10? Or that you don't have access to Havens and Sanctums? Seems to me your problem with Eve isn't High-Sec at all, it is the market. You don't like how much value LP has at the moment. Because that is where all the mission income comes from, what other players are willing to pay you for your LP. So you would rather see direct isk injection from CCP survive, but lateral player transactions nerfed? Got it. Edit: On further reflection it appears your problem is indeed with the market. You used to make much more isk per hour when the loot from your sites in null were actually worth something. But since Null has been farmed to hell and back because of how EASY it is, the value of your deadspace mods have dropped. You hate how the LP held up its value while the deadspace gear tanked. You're someone who claims to work with numbers for a living. My questio is how can you always get it so wrong? WHO the F said anything about 2 hours to run a 10/10? And why would you think it has anything to do with value. Maybe you weren't around the PVE scene 6 years ago, but we started talkign about these issues 6 years ago. This isn't some new thing with over farming (which only really started to have an affect after CCP upped the escaltion chances for anoms).. Dude, I'm trying to tell you all, this isn't about my wallet. It's about our game,. and our PVE, I know some of you don't give a damn abot that, but i do. I honestly don't understand where the disconnect is, like that 10/10 thing or deadspace loot (wtf does that have to do with this?).
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 719	Posted - 2015.11.27 19:17:35 - [220] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: You're someone who claims to work with numbers for a living. My questio is how can you always get it so wrong? WHO the F said anything about 2 hours to run a 10/10? And why would you think it has anything to do with value. Maybe you weren't around the PVE scene 6 years ago, but we started talkign about these issues 6 years ago. This isn't some new thing with over farming (which only really started to have an affect after CCP upped the escaltion chances for anoms).. Dude, I'm trying to tell you all, this isn't about my wallet. It's about our game,. and our PVE, I know some of you don't give a damn abot that, but i do. I honestly don't understand where the disconnect is, like that 10/10 thing or deadspace loot (wtf does that have to do with this?). Jenn, you know darn well how much completing a 10/10 pays out, from its minimum to a theoretical maximum. And you know darn well that 100mil/hr is far less than you would get with your setup you linked from the other thread (where people are claiming to get between 250 and 1bil per hour of work) You also know that in the last 6 years CCP has enabled the "PRINT ISK" button for null sec. You can upgrade your system, and rarely have to ever change systems or dock for supplies and literally print isk from an unlimited ever streaming set of anoms. You could do this all day every day if you want. Mission runners would kill for that simplicity and ease of isk making. The problem with Null isn't that High-Sec is "better", it is that Politics isn't something everyone wants to play. See the recent surge of low-sec pvp as a clue to why null sucks for players. But none of that matters except for the point that you continue to minimize and lie about how much anoms and ded sites pay out. I don't know why, as everyone knows how much can be made who has done them before. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.

Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13042	Posted - 2015.11.27 19:47:07 - [221] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: You're someone who claims to work with numbers for a living. My questio is how can you always get it so wrong? WHO the F said anything about 2 hours to run a 10/10? And why would you think it has anything to do with value. Maybe you weren't around the PVE scene 6 years ago, but we started talkign about these issues 6 years ago. This isn't some new thing with over farming (which only really started to have an affect after CCP upped the escaltion chances for anoms).. Dude, I'm trying to tell you all, this isn't about my wallet. It's about our game,. and our PVE, I know some of you don't give a damn abot that, but i do. I honestly don't understand where the disconnect is, like that 10/10 thing or deadspace loot (wtf does that have to do with this?). Jenn, you know darn well how much completing a 10/10 pays out, from its minimum to a theoretical maximum. And you know darn well that 100mil/hr is far less than you would get with your setup you linked from the other thread (where people are claiming to get between 250 and 1bil per hour of work) You also know that in the last 6 years CCP has enabled the "PRINT ISK" button for null sec. You can upgrade your system, and rarely have to ever change systems or dock for supplies and literally print isk from an unlimited ever streaming set of anoms. You could do this all day every day if you want. Mission runners would kill for that simplicity and ease of isk making. The problem with Null isn't that High-Sec is "better", it is that Politics isn't something everyone wants to play. See the recent surge of low-sec pvp as a clue to why null sucks for players. But none of that matters except for the point that you continue to minimize and lie about how much anoms and ded sites pay out. I don't know why, as everyone knows how much can be made who has done them before. I am not you. I've stated the problem (inverse incentives). You reject that, that's ok, that doesn't change the fact that it is the issue I'm talking about. It's mroe about time than isk. I like to experiment. Experimenting takes isk. My latest was remote repping navy vexors in null anoms that continue ratting even with neuts in systems. The experiment before that was my remote repping cap stable with MWD one geckoboat Rattlesnake. As is now, when i want experiment funding, I set a goal, i know that goal is x amount of anom grinding. OR i could just log in the high sec alts, grind isk FASTER, and be about my experiments sooner. This is not how it should be, I shouldn't even have that high sec (or FW) option, but i do because since 2009 CCP has stuff too much rewards into the wrong places. With some work CCP can return combat pve to sanity. You lot don't care. But I do.
DeMichael Crimson Republic University Minmatar Republic 52749	Posted - 2015.11.28 04:02:50 - [222] - Quote Unbelievable. If PvE was truly broken, there would be a hell of a lot more than just 2 players complaining about it here on the forums. DMC 'The Plan' \| California Eve Players \| Proposal - The Endless Battle
Morgan Agrivar Happy Endings Massage Parlor 175	Posted - 2015.11.28 08:22:22 - [223] - Quote I am not certain what they are actually arguing about. I run a Mach and get around 30-45m an hour without salvaging. I run missions to relax from a long day at the hospital. Why do people have to min/max so damn much? Enjoy the damn game people! Just something about me...
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 266	Posted - 2015.11.28 09:57:12 - [224] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: Nullies also get the odd deadspace/faction drop when ratting belts and anoms. Of course you can't really factor that into your hourly equation, but it is an additional factor in ratting income. That's true, and you can make a lving in null. The whole point is that the game as it stands creates the backwards incentive to not do that. WHY do that (if isk for other things like PLEX is part of the goal of doign the content) would you do null PVE when you could spend less time achieving the same goal from high sec. That means that people like me (who would prefer to do pve in null) have to make the choice between "do what I like but attain goal slower, or do what I don't like as much but attain goal faster" In my case it's rat in null, or run incursions and make that plex or get that isk for that New Barghest I want to fly quicker. IMO it's nonsense. Not the end of the world, but still nonsense. Again it boils down to your jealously. People do want they like in Eve, if you like ratting in null then stay the hell in null. It shouldn't matter what players are making in hi-sec. This type of jealously is so immature and you really really should get over it. You've been playing Eve for 7 years and you're having trouble making 150 mill an hour in null? I find this very disappointing in you as a player. If you've been playing this long why aren't you doing Cap Escalations in C5 Wormholes making 50-75 bill isk a month? Something like this should be what entices you since you're seeking elite PVE max risk for isk reward gameplay, unless of course you're scared of wormholes. So not only you're a null crybaby but also a coward.
David Therman University of Caille Gallente Federation 103	Posted - 2015.11.28 10:20:40 - [225] - Quote DeMichael Crimson wrote: Unbelievable. If PvE was truly broken, there would be a hell of a lot more than just 2 players complaining about it here on the forums. DMC You haven't seen the incursion thread, have you?
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 266	Posted - 2015.11.28 13:56:37 - [226] - Quote David Therman wrote: DeMichael Crimson wrote: Unbelievable. If PvE was truly broken, there would be a hell of a lot more than just 2 players complaining about it here on the forums. DMC You haven't seen the incursion thread, have you? That's about incursions, this thread is about level 4 missions, big difference. Jenn apparently has a beef with hi-sec income activites in general especially if the activities makes more than he/her makes ratting in null. Unfortunately it hasn't occur to him/her that she just plain sucks at null ratting and should do some other activity to improve isk per hour instead of whimpering about how much more can be made there than she makes in null. But then again some people are just born whiners.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13057	Posted - 2015.11.28 17:07:54 - [227] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: Nullies also get the odd deadspace/faction drop when ratting belts and anoms. Of course you can't really factor that into your hourly equation, but it is an additional factor in ratting income. That's true, and you can make a lving in null. The whole point is that the game as it stands creates the backwards incentive to not do that. WHY do that (if isk for other things like PLEX is part of the goal of doign the content) would you do null PVE when you could spend less time achieving the same goal from high sec. That means that people like me (who would prefer to do pve in null) have to make the choice between "do what I like but attain goal slower, or do what I don't like as much but attain goal faster" In my case it's rat in null, or run incursions and make that plex or get that isk for that New Barghest I want to fly quicker. IMO it's nonsense. Not the end of the world, but still nonsense. Again it boils down to your jealously. People do want they like in Eve, if you like ratting in null then stay the hell in null. It shouldn't matter what players are making in hi-sec. This type of jealously is so immature and you really really should get over it. You've been playing Eve for 7 years and you're having trouble making 150 mill an hour in null? I find this very disappointing in you as a player. If you've been playing this long why aren't you doing Cap Escalations in C5 Wormholes making 50-75 bill isk a month? Something like this should be what entices you since you're seeking elite PVE max risk for isk reward gameplay, unless of course you're scared of wormholes. So not only you're a null crybaby but also a coward. I make plenty. For some reason you people are unwilling to admit glaring problems(well, you did in the GD thread, but the rest aren't). That's fine, you can't expect everyone to care about how PVE players out in a mostly pvp focused game. Sorry, but I do, I play every day and sure it's maybe getting a bit better (the upping of escalation chances was good, drifter incursion have the possibility of fixing the incursion scene, and the removal of off grid boosting means incursion fleets might experience a slight bit more danger), but there's still a lot left to do. I know a lot of you don't like my passion about this. Tough beans. you can keep lying to yourself about 'jealousy' (how does one envy their own wallet I wonder), but you know it's not about that, im building up the ships/skills to truly do Anize's plan, I have a FW and Incursion alt and if you look on zkillboard you will see this character has 2 afk vni deaths (and I despise afk ratting, but whenin Paris...) Adaptation is not the issue either. I've adapted to the realties, even the ones I think need to be hammered into the ground. PVE is the issue. You guys go on not caring, that's your right.
Arthur Aihaken State Protectorate Caldari State 4763	Posted - 2015.11.28 17:48:09 - [228] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: PVE is the issue. You guys go on not caring, that's your right. I guess I don't understand what the issue is then... I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 44	Posted - 2015.11.28 20:42:21 - [229] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: PVE is the issue. You guys go on not caring, that's your right. I guess I don't understand what the issue is then... Most of eve doesn't see the issue. Cos most people can accept reality. I for one think things aren't as balanced as they ideally would be. I see that Jenn has a point about certain things. But she is not putting it forward very well, and the rest is just plain misguided. It's tough to accept things that aren't ideal if you don't understand the reasons behind them. Look at capitalism for example. Looks like an evil thing. But the alternatives don't work. In eve, wealth is created by player activity. Ccp have spent a long time tweaking various aspects, but genuine "balance" is one of those holy grails that not many games actually achieve. I applaud Jenn for having the energy to crusade about these issues, but her manner and blind optimism don't do her any favours. And frankly, I would like to extend you an apology that your thread got hijacked by this nonsense.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2105	Posted - 2015.11.28 22:04:52 - [230] - Quote the issue is when I press f10 and select show pilots in space most of 0.0 space is empty. there is simply very little incentive for anyone to be out there. Sure moon mining is great but as an individual I have almost no access to that, and joining a blob isn't worth it to me. Or maybe access to high end ores yea no thanks. I think that incentives to be in 0.0 for individual pilots would lead to more people in null sec, which could lead to more conflict in nullsec. And then hopefully all that gets even more people interested in null. for example all the nullsec alts that are in high simply because they can make more, or people that like the idea of null but get bored every time they go out there (like me), and then there are the people that will min/max their profit and move to wherever suits that. I think it would be the right move for the game. Yes there are plenty of people that won't leave highsec for pretty much any reason I'm fine with that and think they should still have access to interesting game play. Straight up taking things away just seems like a bad idea, I find it very hard to take the remove lv4s from highsec threads seriously. and yes "balance" is a holy grail that is impossible to hit, but lately it seems ccp hasn't even tried. Mission blitzing in general has been around for a long time now, and incursions too. Although players seemed to have min/maxed the burner thing rather quickly. Compare the time taken when you average 4-5 jumps (most systems) vs 1-2 jumps (lanngisi). Although this is also where it gets hard to add incentives for null. Flooding resources is a no good situation with isk inflation would be a problem, with some other resource you could crash markets. So far in eve it seems that players always end up being better at farming then the devs expected. @ChainsawPlankto

Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4764	Posted - 2015.11.28 22:51:17 - [231] - Quote The Bigpuns wrote: And frankly, I would like to extend you an apology that your thread got hijacked by this nonsense. It's cool. In fairness, it's hard to have any kind of separate PvE/balanced-ISK discussion because anything ISK balance-related things tends to turn into a 'nerf this/that income', it immediately becomes emotionally charged and few (if any) facts are ever presented. From what I've been able to observe and ascertain, if you're setup and well-organized (whatever that may entail) - you can make obscene ISK outside of high-sec. Well in excess of any of the most ultra-realistic ISK/hour numbers any of us have been able to obtain with either the 'several character blitz' or 'Burner/blitz' scenarios. Neither of the these scenarios are without risk, as you are relegated to running rather shiny fits in some instances - which leaves you at the mercy of being ganked (particularly in 0.5 or popular systems).. Running multiple characters is also more involved in terms of micromanagement (not to mention ongoing costs), and you will never achieve the DPS or salvage potential of a single ship. Burners are also fairly unforgiving (especially Team Burners right now), and will become even more so with the pending elimination of off-grid links - and it is quite easy to see your ISK/hour implode with an easy mistake. Can't even comment on Incursions - and not sure I even want to touch that snake with a 50-foot pole... I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4764	Posted - 2015.11.28 23:06:45 - [232] - Quote Short update with some revised fits (for those that like experimenting). Same 0.6 system setup, 'shoot everything' scenario with minimal (implant only) cargo salvage. Anomaly 3/3, Score and Scarlet (didn't get the implant). Ammunition costs were just shy of 400k. GÇó Total ISK/rewards: 79.03 million ISK GÇó Total LP: 19.68m ISK (16,400 LP) GÇó Grand Total: 98.71 / 00:40:00 or 148.07m ISK/hour This was with a trio of Golems, running a passive shield fit with T2 FoF cruise launchers, three precision-scripted MGCs and three BCUs. All V missile skills (Cruise Missile Specialization IV) with Security/Negotiation V on one character and IV on the other two. High-grade Ascendancy implants and +5 Zainou missile implants with an average warp speed of just shy of 5.0 AU/s. With semi-AFK fits I can run this all day without really having to worry about screwing anything up (the biggest detractions are losing volleys and not paying attention to reloads). This can probably be duplicated with Navy Ravens to some extent, although with half the cargo space and twice the ammunition consumption you will literally bleed missiles (there's also the issue of the Golem's tank). I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 268	Posted - 2015.11.29 00:38:34 - [233] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: Nullies also get the odd deadspace/faction drop when ratting belts and anoms. Of course you can't really factor that into your hourly equation, but it is an additional factor in ratting income. That's true, and you can make a lving in null. The whole point is that the game as it stands creates the backwards incentive to not do that. WHY do that (if isk for other things like PLEX is part of the goal of doign the content) would you do null PVE when you could spend less time achieving the same goal from high sec. That means that people like me (who would prefer to do pve in null) have to make the choice between "do what I like but attain goal slower, or do what I don't like as much but attain goal faster" In my case it's rat in null, or run incursions and make that plex or get that isk for that New Barghest I want to fly quicker. IMO it's nonsense. Not the end of the world, but still nonsense. Again it boils down to your jealously. People do want they like in Eve, if you like ratting in null then stay the hell in null. It shouldn't matter what players are making in hi-sec. This type of jealously is so immature and you really really should get over it. You've been playing Eve for 7 years and you're having trouble making 150 mill an hour in null? I find this very disappointing in you as a player. If you've been playing this long why aren't you doing Cap Escalations in C5 Wormholes making 50-75 bill isk a month? Something like this should be what entices you since you're seeking elite PVE max risk for isk reward gameplay, unless of course you're scared of wormholes. So not only you're a null crybaby but also a coward. I make plenty. For some reason you people are unwilling to admit glaring problems(well, you did in the GD thread, but the rest aren't). That's fine, you can't expect everyone to care about how PVE players out in a mostly pvp focused game. Sorry, but I do, I play every day and sure it's maybe getting a bit better (the upping of escalation chances was good, drifter incursion have the possibility of fixing the incursion scene, and the removal of off grid boosting means incursion fleets might experience a slight bit more danger), but there's still a lot left to do. I know a lot of you don't like my passion about this. Tough beans. you can keep lying to yourself about 'jealousy' (how does one envy their own wallet I wonder), but you know it's not about that, im building up the ships/skills to truly do Anize's plan, I have a FW and Incursion alt and if you look on zkillboard you will see this character has 2 afk vni deaths (and I despise afk ratting, but whenin Paris...) Adaptation is not the issue either. I've adapted to the realties, even the ones I think need to be hammered into the ground. PVE is the issue. You guys go on not caring, that's your right. You had a somewhat justifiable argument about how broken Incursions are. After putting myself in your shoes and re reading the posts in that Incursion thread, I was able to see this. But the complaints in this thread you are making are just rants out of sheer jealously. They are completely out of place and uncalled for. I can see if the LP stores in all the empires were as lucrative as SOE and Thurker Tribe but that's totally not the case. SOE and Thurker Tribe are the ONLY Factions you can run for that pays anything decent in hi-sec. The LP store for the other major empires are worthless and are in dire need of a complete rebalance. If the other major empire faction had attractive LP stores with good LP to isk returns then I'd be running Lev 5s in low sec with 2 Rattlesnakes. Maybe in another year or 2, I'll develop your mentality of wanting a more balance PVE environment in Eve but not at this time. Right now I just want to make isk in the most proficient way as possible with my current experience and resources. And for me right now, that is running Lev 4 missions with SOE using 10 mission pulling alts. WIth this setup I make on average 150-200 mill isk an hour (actually maybe up to 250 mill but I don't like to brag). I can only achieve this because I'm using multiple accounts. If I was only using one account then I'd say 50-70 mill isk an hour is what you're looking at running Lev 4 missions for SOE in hi-sec. I do full clear when I run missions and cherry pick the loot/salvage. I've seen whereas if I were to just flat out blitz I could probably make a little more but that gameplay style is too tedious for me. My goal is to do C5 Wormholes multiboxing my 3 Paladins/Vargurs making 400-500 mill isk an hour non-escalated. But to be able to pull that off you need vast amounts of experience in wormholes or you'll die....alot. If I had access to capitals like you and your experience, i'd be raking in stupid isk running cap escalations in those C5s making 1 bill isk an hour. If you're looking for ultimate PVE then that's where your aim should be, not null sec and definitely not hi-sec.
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 734	Posted - 2015.11.29 00:57:46 - [234] - Quote Just FYI I would trade removing lvl 4's and incursions from High-Sec if we got local removed in Null. No Local Null is a wet dream. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4765	Posted - 2015.11.29 01:19:19 - [235] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: I would trade removing lvl 4's and incursions from High-Sec if we got local removed in Null. Include local from low-sec and my interest is perked. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 269	Posted - 2015.11.29 01:55:47 - [236] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Burners are also fairly unforgiving (especially Team Burners right now), and will become even more so with the pending elimination of off-grid links What pending elimination of off grid links?? A link...send me a link of this discussion please.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4767	Posted - 2015.11.29 03:57:11 - [237] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: What pending elimination of off grid links?? A link...send me a link of this discussion please. There was a thread on Reddit, but it's also mentioned here. http://crossingzebras.com/command-destroyers/ I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 270	Posted - 2015.11.29 05:15:53 - [238] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: What pending elimination of off grid links?? A link...send me a link of this discussion please. There was a thread on Reddit, but it's also mentioned here. http://crossingzebras.com/command-destroyers/ Thank you Arthur. Still looking at about 6 months to a year before this kicks in which should be plenty of time to convert my OGB Tengu/Legion alt to be able to fly the Nighthawk/Damnation.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4767	Posted - 2015.11.29 05:42:50 - [239] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: Thank you Arthur. Still looking at about 6 months to a year before this kicks in which should be plenty of time to convert my OGB Tengu/Legion alt to be able to fly the Nighthawk/Damnation. Sorry I couldn't find the original CCP quote (I assume there's some Twitter or Reddit reference somewhere). My guess would be that the successful implementation of Brain-in-a-Box is probably a deciding factor. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2106	Posted - 2015.11.29 09:54:16 - [240] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: I can see if the LP stores in all the empires were as lucrative as SOE and Thurker Tribe but that's totally not the case. SOE and Thurker Tribe are the ONLY Factions you can run for that pays anything decent in hi-sec. The LP store for the other major empires are worthless and are in dire need of a complete rebalance. If the other major empire faction had attractive LP stores with good LP to isk returns then I'd be running Lev 5s in low sec with 2 Rattlesnakes. The empires do have lucrative LP stores, they just don't always have good agents to gain LP with. The major factions typically have 3 different styles of LP stores. there are very often high isk/lp items from one or two of these stores. Then there is the "navy" corp which has a similar LP store to FW. I'll break it down with gallente as I have pretty much no interest in running with them: There are 17 corps with Fed navy webs/tracking comps/sensor boosters BPCs in the LP store. So a good number of items to trade in, although it can require a lot of investment in tags. Not so sure about agents. then there are another 10 corps with the LP store that sells Federation navy mag stab bpcs. tbh I'm not really sure what else is in there, or what that is trading for right now but you could look it up. I would guess it is a decent trade. then there are 5 navy style corps, one of which is the FW store which has a lot of extra goodies and reduced prices on some items. oh and the LP generation method is a bit different so that can as I've said already easily devalue other items. these generally aren't worth running for. I could repeat myself with caldari/amarr/minmatar. and probably add on an analysis of "good" agents (and then "great" agents I can count on one hand) my main complaint is incursion runners can convert concord LP into any empire LP so any time any trades get good they can go fill demand. This ends up being a cap on isk/lp rates and imo the result is a lot of corps just aren't worth running for as they don't have any good agents to gain LP with. If there isn't a good agent LP values should increase to compensate. Making 3k isk/lp but running with a less desirable agent should more or less balance out with running for a good agent and getting more LP but trading at a lower rate. However with CONCORD convertible LP that can't happen. And you end up just being better off running for SoE in lanngisi or apanake instead of most empire corps. And if you want to max out with burners it is lanngisi or bust. I had a nice thing going in a 0.6 system at one point, but it just doesn't seem worth it at this point. The main problems with not running SoE are: 1. how many corps have desirable agents? For standard missions the main aim is for a 0.5 in a constellation without a lowsec, and short warps are preferred. If you start to look at burners it is hard to even think past Lanngisi. Sure they might have a nice looking LP store but running in a 0.7 lowers your LP to the point you would have been better off going to an SoE hub. 2. It can be easy to flood markets with some stores. According to fuzzworks the 5 run Fed navy tracking comps are 1967 isk/lp to BUY orders. but how much could you really cash out on? I'm sure you can maintain the high rate over time but when each one costs ~11k lp it would be very easy to over produce. However that store also has a few other nice looking trades and then fed navy web blueprints so that should provide a lot of volume, but other stores might not be so lucky. Another advantage of SoE, many items and lots of LP sinks so it is hard to overproduce. I found an item with a good rate in another store and just by myself I can nearly meet demand, however a few other people found it, so price competition gets in the way. with SoE stuff I put up an order, walk away and come back to isk in the wallet. Oh yea and I get more LP per mission with SoE. @ChainsawPlankto

Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 276	Posted - 2015.11.29 12:56:23 - [241] - Quote Chainsaw Plankton wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: I can see if the LP stores in all the empires were as lucrative as SOE and Thurker Tribe but that's totally not the case. SOE and Thurker Tribe are the ONLY Factions you can run for that pays anything decent in hi-sec. The LP store for the other major empires are worthless and are in dire need of a complete rebalance. If the other major empire faction had attractive LP stores with good LP to isk returns then I'd be running Lev 5s in low sec with 2 Rattlesnakes. The empires do have lucrative LP stores, they just don't always have good agents to gain LP with. The major factions typically have 3 different styles of LP stores. there are very often high isk/lp items from one or two of these stores. Then there is the "navy" corp which has a similar LP store to FW. I'll break it down with gallente as I have pretty much no interest in running with them: There are 17 corps with Fed navy webs/tracking comps/sensor boosters BPCs in the LP store. So a good number of items to trade in, although it can require a lot of investment in tags. Not so sure about agents. then there are another 10 corps with the LP store that sells Federation navy mag stab bpcs. tbh I'm not really sure what else is in there, or what that is trading for right now but you could look it up. I would guess it is a decent trade. then there are 5 navy style corps, one of which is the FW store which has a lot of extra goodies and reduced prices on some items. oh and the LP generation method is a bit different so that can as I've said already easily devalue other items. these generally aren't worth running for. I could repeat myself with caldari/amarr/minmatar. and probably add on an analysis of "good" agents (and then "great" agents I can count on one hand) my main complaint is incursion runners can convert concord LP into any empire LP so any time any trades get good they can go fill demand. This ends up being a cap on isk/lp rates and imo the result is a lot of corps just aren't worth running for as they don't have any good agents to gain LP with. If there isn't a good agent LP values should increase to compensate. Making 3k isk/lp but running with a less desirable agent should more or less balance out with running for a good agent and getting more LP but trading at a lower rate. However with CONCORD convertible LP that can't happen. And you end up just being better off running for SoE in lanngisi or apanake instead of most empire corps. And if you want to max out with burners it is lanngisi or bust. I had a nice thing going in a 0.6 system at one point, but it just doesn't seem worth it at this point. The main problems with not running SoE are: 1. how many corps have desirable agents? For standard missions the main aim is for a 0.5 in a constellation without a lowsec, and short warps are preferred. If you start to look at burners it is hard to even think past Lanngisi. Sure they might have a nice looking LP store but running in a 0.7 lowers your LP to the point you would have been better off going to an SoE hub. 2. It can be easy to flood markets with some stores. According to fuzzworks the 5 run Fed navy tracking comps are 1967 isk/lp to BUY orders. but how much could you really cash out on? I'm sure you can maintain the high rate over time but when each one costs ~11k lp it would be very easy to over produce. However that store also has a few other nice looking trades and then fed navy web blueprints so that should provide a lot of volume, but other stores might not be so lucky. Another advantage of SoE, many items and lots of LP sinks so it is hard to overproduce. I found an item with a good rate in another store and just by myself I can nearly meet demand, however a few other people found it, so price competition gets in the way. with SoE stuff I put up an order, walk away and come back to isk in the wallet. Oh yea and I get more LP per mission with SoE. Good post Chainsaw, a lot of good info here. I have some questions. From this post are you saying that incursions runners universal LP is the reason the other major empires LP are in such a poor state? You mention BPCs often, how are these converted into isk ? Like do you produce the item the BPC is for or do you just sell the BPC on contract? I found that Apanake missions has the better loot compared to Lanngisi but you referred to Lanngisi as THE place to run burners at, why?
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 736	Posted - 2015.11.29 13:57:14 - [242] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: Chainsaw Plankton wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: I can see if the LP stores in all the empires were as lucrative as SOE and Thurker Tribe but that's totally not the case. SOE and Thurker Tribe are the ONLY Factions you can run for that pays anything decent in hi-sec. The LP store for the other major empires are worthless and are in dire need of a complete rebalance. If the other major empire faction had attractive LP stores with good LP to isk returns then I'd be running Lev 5s in low sec with 2 Rattlesnakes. The empires do have lucrative LP stores, they just don't always have good agents to gain LP with. The major factions typically have 3 different styles of LP stores. there are very often high isk/lp items from one or two of these stores. Then there is the "navy" corp which has a similar LP store to FW. I'll break it down with gallente as I have pretty much no interest in running with them: There are 17 corps with Fed navy webs/tracking comps/sensor boosters BPCs in the LP store. So a good number of items to trade in, although it can require a lot of investment in tags. Not so sure about agents. then there are another 10 corps with the LP store that sells Federation navy mag stab bpcs. tbh I'm not really sure what else is in there, or what that is trading for right now but you could look it up. I would guess it is a decent trade. then there are 5 navy style corps, one of which is the FW store which has a lot of extra goodies and reduced prices on some items. oh and the LP generation method is a bit different so that can as I've said already easily devalue other items. these generally aren't worth running for. I could repeat myself with caldari/amarr/minmatar. and probably add on an analysis of "good" agents (and then "great" agents I can count on one hand) my main complaint is incursion runners can convert concord LP into any empire LP so any time any trades get good they can go fill demand. This ends up being a cap on isk/lp rates and imo the result is a lot of corps just aren't worth running for as they don't have any good agents to gain LP with. If there isn't a good agent LP values should increase to compensate. Making 3k isk/lp but running with a less desirable agent should more or less balance out with running for a good agent and getting more LP but trading at a lower rate. However with CONCORD convertible LP that can't happen. And you end up just being better off running for SoE in lanngisi or apanake instead of most empire corps. And if you want to max out with burners it is lanngisi or bust. I had a nice thing going in a 0.6 system at one point, but it just doesn't seem worth it at this point. The main problems with not running SoE are: 1. how many corps have desirable agents? For standard missions the main aim is for a 0.5 in a constellation without a lowsec, and short warps are preferred. If you start to look at burners it is hard to even think past Lanngisi. Sure they might have a nice looking LP store but running in a 0.7 lowers your LP to the point you would have been better off going to an SoE hub. 2. It can be easy to flood markets with some stores. According to fuzzworks the 5 run Fed navy tracking comps are 1967 isk/lp to BUY orders. but how much could you really cash out on? I'm sure you can maintain the high rate over time but when each one costs ~11k lp it would be very easy to over produce. However that store also has a few other nice looking trades and then fed navy web blueprints so that should provide a lot of volume, but other stores might not be so lucky. Another advantage of SoE, many items and lots of LP sinks so it is hard to overproduce. I found an item with a good rate in another store and just by myself I can nearly meet demand, however a few other people found it, so price competition gets in the way. with SoE stuff I put up an order, walk away and come back to isk in the wallet. Oh yea and I get more LP per mission with SoE. Good post Chainsaw, a lot of good info here. I have some questions. From this post are you saying that incursions runners universal LP is the reason the other major empires LP are in such a poor state? You mention BPCs often, how are these converted into isk ? Like do you produce the item the BPC is for or do you just sell the BPC on contract? I found that Apanake missions has the better loot compared to Lanngisi but you referred to Lanngisi as THE place to run burners at, why? 1) FW is the major reason for most items from the Navies to be worthless, but Concord LP from incursions is really stupid too. 2) You really need to build the items from the BPC to make better isk per LP. Some people prefer to find contracts to sell into or set up their own, but that is time consuming for some items and harder than a market trade. 3) Lann is better than Apanake because of the constellation layout. Burners will be closer, and you will almost never get a low sec. It is the only system for SoE that gives you that really. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4773	Posted - 2015.11.29 14:17:06 - [243] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: FW is the major reason for most items from the Navies to be worthless, but Concord LP from incursions is really stupid too. So... Can we surmise that Faction Warfare and Incursions may need a review with respect to the actual LP loot tables so there are less conflicts with standard missions? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17040	Posted - 2015.11.29 17:14:16 - [244] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: I would trade removing lvl 4's and incursions from High-Sec if we got local removed in Null. Include removing local from low-sec and my interest is perked. Add in highsec and we might have a deal. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17040	Posted - 2015.11.29 17:17:12 - [245] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: FW is the major reason for most items from the Navies to be worthless, but Concord LP from incursions is really stupid too. So... Can we surmise that Faction Warfare and Incursions may need a review with respect to the actual LP loot tables so that there are less conflicts with standard missions and the LP rewards from Empire corporations? (I'm not talking about a nerf, just a rebalance with respect to the LP rewards) Told you the PVE imbalances are complicated Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4773	Posted - 2015.11.29 18:39:54 - [246] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Add in highsec and we might have a deal. What's the benefit in high-sec? baltec1 wrote: Told you the PVE imbalances are complicated So it would seem... Is there an easier fix, like just making certain LP items exclusive to Faction Warfare as opposed to duplicating many in the Navy Factions? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 736	Posted - 2015.11.29 19:41:31 - [247] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Arthur Aihaken wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: I would trade removing lvl 4's and incursions from High-Sec if we got local removed in Null. Include removing local from low-sec and my interest is perked. Add in highsec and we might have a deal. Personally I hate local in all forms, but honesty I think this is just your bias against High-Sec coming out again. Removing local from Null sec makes sense since it is supposed to be no-mans land without any benefits the empires have. Arthur Aihaken wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: FW is the major reason for most items from the Navies to be worthless, but Concord LP from incursions is really stupid too. So... Can we surmise that Faction Warfare and Incursions may need a review with respect to the actual LP loot tables so that there are less conflicts with standard missions and the LP rewards from Empire corporations? (I'm not talking about a nerf, just a rebalance with respect to the LP rewards) LP as a whole needs to be reworked. And there needs to be unique items for corporations to make it worth it to actually run for some of the corporations. Currently there is no benefit to running most of the Caldari corps except for location, spice it up and give invulns to Home Guard and BCS to Navy, other things to Internal Security... etc. FW needs its own separate and unique LP that should be more like Battle Rewards and go towards special items. Incursions shouldn't get LP at all. It is stupid that they pay out LP in the first place. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2107	Posted - 2015.11.29 20:38:35 - [248] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: Good post Chainsaw, a lot of good info here. I have some questions. From this post are you saying that incursions runners universal LP is the reason the other major empires LP are in such a poor state? You mention BPCs often, how are these converted into isk ? Like do you produce the item the BPC is for or do you just sell the BPC on contract? I found that Apanake missions has the better loot compared to Lanngisi but you referred to Lanngisi as THE place to run burners at, why? 1. not specifically, More of the interaction between available agents and LP stores, however incursions certainly limit that. A good LP store doesn't count for much when they only have courier agents available. But compare 14k lp in a 0.5 vs 12k in a 0.6 and the same isk/lp payout, I'm picking the agent in the 0.5 almost every time. 2. typically build the items and sell them on the market. Far easier to update market orders than contracts. Although things like ship BPCs are decent to sell as it is much easier to move a bpc than a ship. Never tried selling module BPCs, but I have seen them on contracts a few times. Years ago BPCs required special skills to make, which was nice as I had a character that could to t2 production so I had most of those skills. now they typically just require basic minerals and no skills. 3. no idea about loot. but I'd guess blood raiders have better salvage than angels. Don't really loot or salvage much myself. 4. constellation layout, and the only neighboring constellation has a trade hub on the exit, so most burner missions are forced inside constellation and that results in a lot of 2 jump burners. In other places with multiple neighboring constellations I usually get ~5 jumps on average. That is a huge travel time difference and a bunch of gate jumps so time spent loading the next system. @ChainsawPlankto
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17040	Posted - 2015.11.29 20:47:50 - [249] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: What's the benefit in high-sec? Easier to hide in a war. Arthur Aihaken wrote: So it would seem... Is there an easier fix, like just making certain LP items exclusive to Faction Warfare as opposed to duplicating many in the Navy Factions? Toning down the amount of LP gained per hour would help, splitting up the rewards is another and dealing with the mountain of concord LP is yet another but there is no one magic bullet. This isn't just a grr nerf highsec, its a need to revamp the lot in all areas in EVE. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4773	Posted - 2015.11.29 22:29:34 - [250] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Easier to hide in a war. You mean as opposed to say, not undocking? Arthur Aihaken wrote: Toning down the amount of LP gained per hour would help, splitting up the rewards is another and dealing with the mountain of concord LP is yet another but there is no one magic bullet. This isn't just a grr nerf highsec, its a need to revamp the lot in all areas in EVE. Are we talking Faction Warfare, Incursions or both? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 276	Posted - 2015.11.30 00:11:23 - [251] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: Chainsaw Plankton wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: I can see if the LP stores in all the empires were as lucrative as SOE and Thurker Tribe but that's totally not the case. SOE and Thurker Tribe are the ONLY Factions you can run for that pays anything decent in hi-sec. The LP store for the other major empires are worthless and are in dire need of a complete rebalance. If the other major empire faction had attractive LP stores with good LP to isk returns then I'd be running Lev 5s in low sec with 2 Rattlesnakes. The empires do have lucrative LP stores, they just don't always have good agents to gain LP with. The major factions typically have 3 different styles of LP stores. there are very often high isk/lp items from one or two of these stores. Then there is the "navy" corp which has a similar LP store to FW. I'll break it down with gallente as I have pretty much no interest in running with them: There are 17 corps with Fed navy webs/tracking comps/sensor boosters BPCs in the LP store. So a good number of items to trade in, although it can require a lot of investment in tags. Not so sure about agents. then there are another 10 corps with the LP store that sells Federation navy mag stab bpcs. tbh I'm not really sure what else is in there, or what that is trading for right now but you could look it up. I would guess it is a decent trade. then there are 5 navy style corps, one of which is the FW store which has a lot of extra goodies and reduced prices on some items. oh and the LP generation method is a bit different so that can as I've said already easily devalue other items. these generally aren't worth running for. I could repeat myself with caldari/amarr/minmatar. and probably add on an analysis of "good" agents (and then "great" agents I can count on one hand) my main complaint is incursion runners can convert concord LP into any empire LP so any time any trades get good they can go fill demand. This ends up being a cap on isk/lp rates and imo the result is a lot of corps just aren't worth running for as they don't have any good agents to gain LP with. If there isn't a good agent LP values should increase to compensate. Making 3k isk/lp but running with a less desirable agent should more or less balance out with running for a good agent and getting more LP but trading at a lower rate. However with CONCORD convertible LP that can't happen. And you end up just being better off running for SoE in lanngisi or apanake instead of most empire corps. And if you want to max out with burners it is lanngisi or bust. I had a nice thing going in a 0.6 system at one point, but it just doesn't seem worth it at this point. The main problems with not running SoE are: 1. how many corps have desirable agents? For standard missions the main aim is for a 0.5 in a constellation without a lowsec, and short warps are preferred. If you start to look at burners it is hard to even think past Lanngisi. Sure they might have a nice looking LP store but running in a 0.7 lowers your LP to the point you would have been better off going to an SoE hub. 2. It can be easy to flood markets with some stores. According to fuzzworks the 5 run Fed navy tracking comps are 1967 isk/lp to BUY orders. but how much could you really cash out on? I'm sure you can maintain the high rate over time but when each one costs ~11k lp it would be very easy to over produce. However that store also has a few other nice looking trades and then fed navy web blueprints so that should provide a lot of volume, but other stores might not be so lucky. Another advantage of SoE, many items and lots of LP sinks so it is hard to overproduce. I found an item with a good rate in another store and just by myself I can nearly meet demand, however a few other people found it, so price competition gets in the way. with SoE stuff I put up an order, walk away and come back to isk in the wallet. Oh yea and I get more LP per mission with SoE. Good post Chainsaw, a lot of good info here. I have some questions. From this post are you saying that incursions runners universal LP is the reason the other major empires LP are in such a poor state? You mention BPCs often, how are these converted into isk ? Like do you produce the item the BPC is for or do you just sell the BPC on contract? I found that Apanake missions has the better loot compared to Lanngisi but you referred to Lanngisi as THE place to run burners at, why? 1) FW is the major reason for most items from the Navies to be worthless, but Concord LP from incursions is really stupid too. 2) You really need to build the items from the BPC to make better isk per LP. Some people prefer to find contracts to sell into or set up their own, but that is time consuming for some items and harder than a market trade. 3) Lann is better than Apanake because of the constellation layout. Burners will be closer, and you will almost never get a low sec. It is the only system for SoE that gives you that really. Hmm, I didn't realize this about Lanngisi. I do all my missions now in Apanake because the blood raiders loot drops meta 4 DCs (8.5 mill isk each) and meta 4 medium/small nuets (5.5-3 mill each). Also because I was flying NMs and later the Paladins. I can fly Vargurs and Machs now so maybe it's time to move back to Lanngisi. The burners here in Apanake are usually 5-8 drops away from mission hub and there is one that's friggin 25 drops away in low sec (I always cancel this one).
The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 47	Posted - 2015.11.30 08:28:46 - [252] - Quote \o/ this has become an actual rational and informed discussion about balancing! Shame it's still off topic, but let's keep it here rather than Arthur's new thread! I don't like the idea of removing local from hisec, it would make it into a less sociable game imo. Let's get rid of all the scams in local instead! That will cause some flames and tears that we can all enjoy!
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17042	Posted - 2015.11.30 11:44:51 - [253] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: baltec1 wrote: Easier to hide in a war. You mean as opposed to say, not undocking? Arthur Aihaken wrote: Toning down the amount of LP gained per hour would help, splitting up the rewards is another and dealing with the mountain of concord LP is yet another but there is no one magic bullet. This isn't just a grr nerf highsec, its a need to revamp the lot in all areas in EVE. Are we talking Faction Warfare, Incursions or both? Both and also missions. It might even be a good idea to remove loot from npc wrecks and put them into the mission LP stores for highsec which would not only greatly expand the selection options for spending LP but also increase the market for T1 mods which would help new industry players. Faction equipment could be something only available in lowsec and dead space/complex mods in new null sov mission agents. Remove mission blitzing and we would have a much better risk/reward situation. Bonus being that null players would have to take gates just like in highsec so the danger is higher than today. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 649	Posted - 2015.11.30 12:31:07 - [254] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Arthur Aihaken wrote: baltec1 wrote: Easier to hide in a war. You mean as opposed to say, not undocking? Arthur Aihaken wrote: Toning down the amount of LP gained per hour would help, splitting up the rewards is another and dealing with the mountain of concord LP is yet another but there is no one magic bullet. This isn't just a grr nerf highsec, its a need to revamp the lot in all areas in EVE. Are we talking Faction Warfare, Incursions or both? Both and also missions. It might even be a good idea to remove loot from npc wrecks and put them into the mission LP stores for highsec which would not only greatly expand the selection options for spending LP but also increase the market for T1 mods which would help new industry players. Faction equipment could be something only available in lowsec and dead space/complex mods in new null sov mission agents. Remove mission blitzing and we would have a much better risk/reward situation. Bonus being that null players would have to take gates just like in highsec so the danger is higher than today. Like I've said previously, I do not like the concord LP situation but since a change is already in the works and is currently being implemented, I purposefully ignore any incursion discussion, either for or against until whatever CCP has planned for it is fully implemented and the effects are observed. This however means that any suggested changes to mission LP payout or ability/speed in getting that LP is also not relevant. Currently any high value low volume LP items (everything that isn't SOE or Navy) is controlled by concord LP/Incursion runners because of the 1 to .8. conversion rate. Ideally this should be controlled by mission runners. Encourage mission runners to move around from corp to corp, system to system, make choices for who you run matter and make the standings system matter (more than it does now) and allow enterprising individuals that go the extra mile to reap extra rewards. Also allow pirates to gank additional targets as a full burner/blitz operation runs into 4 to 6 billion in ships and mods and need to be moved. SOE LP items have steadily been on the rise since the Blood event. Currently there are huge buy orders up for SOE items for over 1900isk/lp. Modules are on the market for close to 3kisk/lp. We should see the Concord LP being cashed out into SOE items soonish as soon as the converted isk/lp surpasses that of implants that incursion runners have access to. However, that does beg the question that I haven't received a good answer to. If SOE item value is on the rise, doesn't that mean demand is outstripping the mission runner's ability to supply SOE items? If so, how does reducing LP income via direct or indirect nerfs make sense? Unless you like 50mill or 100mill faction probe launchers? 500mill Stratioses? Mission running is largely a market controlled income stream so why apply external nerfs to something that's already controlled efficiently by the players? That said, if whatever they do to incursions removes or reduces the 'threat' of concord LP to LP stores consideration will need to be given on weather or not missions will need to be adjusted in accordance with that but we will only know that after incursion changes. People here are fond of bashing CCP for making too many and too big changes too quickly but those same people are prone to falling into that same trap, as demonstrated by the nerf mission crowd. Identify what systems synergies and compete Realize the effect one system will have on another Observe effects of changes to one system has on another Ask, is there (still) a problem THEN discuss a solution to the problem. You guys are skipping a few steps. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17042	Posted - 2015.11.30 12:34:23 - [255] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: baltec1 wrote: Arthur Aihaken wrote: baltec1 wrote: Easier to hide in a war. You mean as opposed to say, not undocking? Arthur Aihaken wrote: Toning down the amount of LP gained per hour would help, splitting up the rewards is another and dealing with the mountain of concord LP is yet another but there is no one magic bullet. This isn't just a grr nerf highsec, its a need to revamp the lot in all areas in EVE. Are we talking Faction Warfare, Incursions or both? Both and also missions. It might even be a good idea to remove loot from npc wrecks and put them into the mission LP stores for highsec which would not only greatly expand the selection options for spending LP but also increase the market for T1 mods which would help new industry players. Faction equipment could be something only available in lowsec and dead space/complex mods in new null sov mission agents. Remove mission blitzing and we would have a much better risk/reward situation. Bonus being that null players would have to take gates just like in highsec so the danger is higher than today. Like I've said previously, I do not like the concord LP situation but since a change is already in the works and is currently being implemented, I purposefully ignore any incursion discussion, either for or against until whatever CCP has planned for it is fully implemented and the effects are observed. This however means that any suggested changes to mission LP payout or ability/speed in getting that LP is also not relevant. Currently any high value low volume LP items (everything that isn't SOE or Navy) is controlled by concord LP/Incursion runners because of the 1 to .8. conversion rate. Ideally this should be controlled by mission runners. Encourage mission runners to move around from corp to corp, system to system, make choices for who you run matter and make the standings system matter (more than it does now) and allow enterprising individuals that go the extra mile to reap extra rewards. Also allow pirates to gank additional targets as a full burner/blitz operation runs into 4 to 6 billion in ships and mods and need to be moved. SOE LP items have steadily been on the rise since the Blood event. Currently there are huge buy orders up for SOE items for over 1900isk/lp. Modules are on the market for close to 3kisk/lp. We should see the Concord LP being cashed out into SOE items soonish as soon as the converted isk/lp surpasses that of implants that incursion runners have access to. However, that does beg the question that I haven't received a good answer to. If SOE item value is on the rise, doesn't that mean demand is outstripping the mission runner's ability to supply SOE items? If so, how does reducing LP income via direct or indirect nerfs make sense? Unless you like 50mill or 100mill faction probe launchers? 500mill Stratioses? Mission running is largely a market controlled income stream so why apply external nerfs to something that's already controlled efficiently by the players? That said, if whatever they do to incursions removes or reduces the 'threat' of concord LP to LP stores consideration will need to be given on weather or not missions will need to be adjusted in accordance with that but we will only know that after incursion changes. People here are fond of bashing CCP for making too many and too big changes too quickly but those same people are prone to falling into that same trap, as demonstrated by the nerf mission crowd. Identify what systems synergies and compete Realize the effect one system will have on another Observe effects of changes to one system has on another Ask, is there (still) a problem THEN discuss a solution to the problem. You guys are skipping a few steps. Fleshed out the idea a bit more, go re-read it. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 649	Posted - 2015.11.30 12:51:34 - [256] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Fleshed out the idea a bit more, go re-read it. Doesn't change anything at all, all my points are still valid and unanswered. You are still skipping steps 1-4 and going straight to step 5. Also doesn't address what is currently happening to SOE LP value and upcoming/planned changes to incursions (Drifters, OGB). The market is apparently showing that mission LP supply can not keep up with SOE item usage demand and you are suggesting we move those items away from the majority of people supplying them further reducing supply? How does that make sense? Quote: Like I've said previously, I do not like the concord LP situation but since a change is already in the works and is currently being implemented, I purposefully ignore any incursion discussion, either for or against until whatever CCP has planned for it is fully implemented and the effects are observed. This however means that any suggested changes to mission LP payout or ability/speed in getting that LP is also not relevant. Currently any high value low volume LP items (everything that isn't SOE or Navy) is controlled by concord LP/Incursion runners because of the 1 to .8. conversion rate. Ideally this should be controlled by mission runners. Encourage mission runners to move around from corp to corp, system to system, make choices for who you run matter and make the standings system matter (more than it does now) and allow enterprising individuals that go the extra mile to reap extra rewards. Also allow pirates to gank additional targets as a full burner/blitz operation runs into 4 to 6 billion in ships and mods and need to be moved. SOE LP items have steadily been on the rise since the Blood event. Currently there are huge buy orders up for SOE items for over 1900isk/lp. Modules are on the market for close to 3kisk/lp. We should see the Concord LP being cashed out into SOE items soonish as soon as the converted isk/lp surpasses that of implants that incursion runners have access to. However, that does beg the question that I haven't received a good answer to. If SOE item value is on the rise, doesn't that mean demand is outstripping the mission runner's ability to supply SOE items? If so, how does reducing LP income via direct or indirect nerfs make sense? Unless you like 50mill or 100mill faction probe launchers? 500mill Stratioses? Mission running is largely a market controlled income stream so why apply external nerfs to something that's already controlled efficiently by the players? That said, if whatever they do to incursions removes or reduces the 'threat' of concord LP to LP stores consideration will need to be given on weather or not missions will need to be adjusted in accordance with that but we will only know that after incursion changes. People here are fond of bashing CCP for making too many and too big changes too quickly but those same people are prone to falling into that same trap, as demonstrated by the nerf mission crowd. Identify what systems synergies and compete Realize the effect one system will have on another Observe effects of changes to one system has on another Ask, is there (still) a problem THEN discuss a solution to the problem. You guys are skipping a few steps. Pirate A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17042	Posted - 2015.11.30 13:09:07 - [257] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: Doesn't change anything at all, all my points are still valid and unanswered. You are still skipping steps 1-4 and going straight to step 5. Also doesn't address what is currently happening to SOE LP value and upcoming/planned changes to incursions (Drifters, OGB). The market is apparently showing that mission LP supply can not keep up with SOE item usage demand and you are suggesting we move those items away from the majority of people supplying them further reducing supply? How does that make sense? Its not being moved away from most players, we all have access to low sec space. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 738	Posted - 2015.11.30 13:10:54 - [258] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: Doesn't change anything at all, all my points are still valid and unanswered. You are still skipping steps 1-4 and going straight to step 5. Also doesn't address what is currently happening to SOE LP value and upcoming/planned changes to incursions (Drifters, OGB). The market is apparently showing that mission LP supply can not keep up with SOE item usage demand and you are suggesting we move those items away from the majority of people supplying them further reducing supply? How does that make sense? Its not being moved away from most players, we all have access to low sec space. I highlighted the part of your post where you lack any understanding of how players in this game work. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17042	Posted - 2015.11.30 13:28:53 - [259] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: I highlighted the part of your post where you lack any understanding of how players in this game work. Hey if you don't want to leave the safety of highsec that's up to you but if you want those better rewards your ganna need to take that risk and put in that extra effort. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 649	Posted - 2015.11.30 13:33:14 - [260] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: I highlighted the part of your post where you lack any understanding of how players in this game work. Hey if you don't want to leave the safety of highsec that's up to you but if you want those better rewards your ganna need to take that risk and put in that extra effort. You know better than anyone that's not how it works, witch means you're close to trolling. Still dodging everything else, not surprised in the least. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03

baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17042	Posted - 2015.11.30 13:37:39 - [261] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: You know better than anyone that's not how it works. That's exactly how it should work. Highsec, lowest reward for the highest safety and least effort put in, lowsec, mid risk and effort for mid reward, nullsec, highest risk and effort for big rewards, WH, high risk and biggest effort for the biggest reward. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13059	Posted - 2015.11.30 13:45:38 - [262] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: You know better than anyone that's not how it works. That's exactly how it should work. Highsec, lowest reward for the highest safety and least effort put in, lowsec, mid risk and effort for mid reward, nullsec, highest risk and effort for big rewards, WH, high risk and biggest effort for the biggest reward. But but, if it made sense like that, how can one have one's cake AND eat it too like you can right now in 'relative safety'? The above question is where every balance discussion ends up eventually...
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 738	Posted - 2015.11.30 13:50:03 - [263] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: You know better than anyone that's not how it works. That's exactly how it should work. Highsec, lowest reward for the highest safety and least effort put in, lowsec, mid risk and effort for mid reward, nullsec, highest risk and effort for big rewards, WH, high risk and biggest effort for the biggest reward. But but, if it made sense like that, how can one have one's cake AND eat it too like you can right now in 'relative safety'? The above question is where every balance discussion ends up eventually... You two are way too intelligent to post crap like this. Both of you know that if you remove Incursions from HS, not many will care. But those that are effected will turn to lvl 4 missions. Remove lvl 4 missions and people will blitz the lvl 3's At some point you need to realize that this entire endeavor is just to make HS so bad, so poor of space that people are willing to get rid of it all together, THAT is your ultimate goal. You guys are just trying to get CCP to soften everyone up to the idea in baby steps. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 649	Posted - 2015.11.30 13:56:02 - [264] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: You know better than anyone that's not how it works. That's exactly how it should work. That sounds surprisingly bitter. I never figured you for an idealist. Look you can beat Hi sec players with a sick as much as you want, ain't going to change a dang thing except kill the game and you know this, everyone knows this. That's all these replies are, beating Hi sec players with a stick. The hate and anger is very real Does anyone know why, if Mission LP is such a huge problem, SOE modules and ships are rising in price? This is exactly the opposite problem we would be seeing if missions was paying out too much. If you reduce the LP or speed LP can be gained, the market will react to reduced supply and you'd end up with the same wealth generated, just more expensive modules and incursion runners making more isk. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13060	Posted - 2015.11.30 14:04:09 - [265] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: You know better than anyone that's not how it works. That's exactly how it should work. Highsec, lowest reward for the highest safety and least effort put in, lowsec, mid risk and effort for mid reward, nullsec, highest risk and effort for big rewards, WH, high risk and biggest effort for the biggest reward. But but, if it made sense like that, how can one have one's cake AND eat it too like you can right now in 'relative safety'? The above question is where every balance discussion ends up eventually... You two are way too intelligent to post crap like this. Both of you know that if you remove Incursions from HS, not many will care. But those that are effected will turn to lvl 4 missions. Remove lvl 4 missions and people will blitz the lvl 3's At some point you need to realize that this entire endeavor is just to make HS so bad, so poor of space that people are willing to get rid of it all together, THAT is your ultimate goal. You guys are just trying to get CCP to soften everyone up to the idea in baby steps. I call the above "defensive prejudice". It's the same idea as "you just want people to play your way" and "you just want me to leave high sec so you can shoot me". All of which are lies. According to Anize most people do missions 'wrong' anyways. Fixing the issues of hyper-blitzing (like fixing incursions) only affects the small number of true min/maxers that exist (many of whom are just null sec alts to begin with lol). In fact, it's my belief that fixing these issues not only would serve to free many of us who belong outside of high sec from a high sec that is too good to ignore, it would also help the majority that are 'doing missions wrong' by returning value to their activities as well. It pleases me to no end to know that (in your short-sightedness) you think you are defending high sec and lowly solo/casuals, when in reality you are actually defending a status quo that benefits null sec and it's already space-rich overlords (where a lot of the min/maxxed wealth ends up).
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 738	Posted - 2015.11.30 14:31:30 - [266] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: You know better than anyone that's not how it works. That's exactly how it should work. Highsec, lowest reward for the highest safety and least effort put in, lowsec, mid risk and effort for mid reward, nullsec, highest risk and effort for big rewards, WH, high risk and biggest effort for the biggest reward. But but, if it made sense like that, how can one have one's cake AND eat it too like you can right now in 'relative safety'? The above question is where every balance discussion ends up eventually... You two are way too intelligent to post crap like this. Both of you know that if you remove Incursions from HS, not many will care. But those that are effected will turn to lvl 4 missions. Remove lvl 4 missions and people will blitz the lvl 3's At some point you need to realize that this entire endeavor is just to make HS so bad, so poor of space that people are willing to get rid of it all together, THAT is your ultimate goal. You guys are just trying to get CCP to soften everyone up to the idea in baby steps. I call the above "defensive prejudice". It's the same idea as "you just want people to play your way" and "you just want me to leave high sec so you can shoot me". All of which are lies. According to Anize most people do missions 'wrong' anyways. Fixing the issues of hyper-blitzing (like fixing incursions) only affects the small number of true min/maxers that exist (many of whom are just null sec alts to begin with lol). In fact, it's my belief that fixing these issues not only would serve to free many of us who belong outside of high sec from a high sec that is too good to ignore, it would also help the majority that are 'doing missions wrong' by returning value to their activities as well. It pleases me to no end to know that (in your short-sightedness) you think you are defending high sec and lowly solo/casuals, when in reality you are actually defending a status quo that benefits null sec and it's already space-rich overlords (where a lot of the min/maxxed wealth ends up). All I can say to this is the level of self-developed delusion about how this game and people works is appalling. Good luck in your crusade, I hope your ideas never see the light of a whiteboard in CCP's offices. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
King Aires Chicks on Speed Mordus Angels 56	Posted - 2015.11.30 14:38:06 - [267] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: It pleases me to no end to know that (in your short-sightedness) you think you are defending high sec and lowly solo/casuals, when in reality you are actually defending a status quo that benefits null sec and it's already space-rich overlords (where a lot of the min/maxxed wealth ends up). I will give you an answer to this with personal experience. You can see what alliance I am in, you can see where we live. Most of us with alts appear to run incursions or missions in high sec, most of us without alts or with specialized alts run Mordus missions for insane LP rewards, far greater than anything you can get in high sec. But I really doubt my overlords are really benefiting from my alts running burner missions for soe and having our alliance live in NPC stations. On a contrasting note, the CFC we are fighting tend to spend massive amounts of time ratting and running sites in their home systems. If their alts are also running missions in empire, so be it. But what I know for a fact is sov alliances tend to use their space. So I guess I have no idea what world you live in, but it must not be the same as mine.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17042	Posted - 2015.11.30 14:42:44 - [268] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: You know better than anyone that's not how it works. That's exactly how it should work. Highsec, lowest reward for the highest safety and least effort put in, lowsec, mid risk and effort for mid reward, nullsec, highest risk and effort for big rewards, WH, high risk and biggest effort for the biggest reward. But but, if it made sense like that, how can one have one's cake AND eat it too like you can right now in 'relative safety'? The above question is where every balance discussion ends up eventually... You two are way too intelligent to post crap like this. Both of you know that if you remove Incursions from HS, not many will care. But those that are effected will turn to lvl 4 missions. Remove lvl 4 missions and people will blitz the lvl 3's At some point you need to realize that this entire endeavor is just to make HS so bad, so poor of space that people are willing to get rid of it all together, THAT is your ultimate goal. You guys are just trying to get CCP to soften everyone up to the idea in baby steps. Point out where I said I want incursions and level 4 missions removed. I'm talking about altering rewards not removing content. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17043	Posted - 2015.11.30 14:49:12 - [269] - Quote King Aires wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: It pleases me to no end to know that (in your short-sightedness) you think you are defending high sec and lowly solo/casuals, when in reality you are actually defending a status quo that benefits null sec and it's already space-rich overlords (where a lot of the min/maxxed wealth ends up). I will give you an answer to this with personal experience. You can see what alliance I am in, you can see where we live. Most of us with alts appear to run incursions or missions in high sec, most of us without alts or with specialized alts run Mordus missions for insane LP rewards, far greater than anything you can get in high sec. But I really doubt my overlords are really benefiting from my alts running burner missions for soe and having our alliance live in NPC stations. On a contrasting note, the CFC we are fighting tend to spend massive amounts of time ratting and running sites in their home systems. If their alts are also running missions in empire, so be it. But what I know for a fact is sov alliances tend to use their space. So I guess I have no idea what world you live in, but it must not be the same as mine. Even with the changes to anoms we don't have enough to go around and the bulk of the people doing anoms are using afk setups so they earn isk while doing something else. Being able to afk anoms is their only selling point. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13060	Posted - 2015.11.30 14:59:24 - [270] - Quote King Aires wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: It pleases me to no end to know that (in your short-sightedness) you think you are defending high sec and lowly solo/casuals, when in reality you are actually defending a status quo that benefits null sec and it's already space-rich overlords (where a lot of the min/maxxed wealth ends up). I will give you an answer to this with personal experience. You can see what alliance I am in, you can see where we live. Most of us with alts appear to run incursions or missions in high sec, most of us without alts or with specialized alts run Mordus missions for insane LP rewards, far greater than anything you can get in high sec. But I really doubt my overlords are really benefiting from my alts running burner missions for soe and having our alliance live in NPC stations. On a contrasting note, the CFC we are fighting tend to spend massive amounts of time ratting and running sites in their home systems. If their alts are also running missions in empire, so be it. But what I know for a fact is sov alliances tend to use their space. So I guess I have no idea what world you live in, but it must not be the same as mine. A few months ago I was running incursions with TVP (The Valhalla Project) when a guy on comms started laughing and posted a killmail of a Sabre in fleet chat. He was a member of Get Off my Lawn (a CfC alliance), he was running 3 afk Ishtars while running incursions, not paying attention to the ishtars at all. Apparently a Sabre had warped in on one of his Ishtars, and the ishtar killed it without him even knowing it. This is why the afk-ability of null anoms needs to die a firey death along with an incursion nerf , they spews isk into the economy for nothing (the mission blitzing loophoels are a seperate but related issue). This is why there needs to be an across the board review of PVE rewards and activities. Of course, the high sec partisans here thinks that needs to happen with an eye towards actually maintaining the imbalances they they benefit from (or that they think they do).

King Aires Chicks on Speed Mordus Angels 56	Posted - 2015.11.30 15:13:41 - [271] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: King Aires wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: It pleases me to no end to know that (in your short-sightedness) you think you are defending high sec and lowly solo/casuals, when in reality you are actually defending a status quo that benefits null sec and it's already space-rich overlords (where a lot of the min/maxxed wealth ends up). I will give you an answer to this with personal experience. You can see what alliance I am in, you can see where we live. Most of us with alts appear to run incursions or missions in high sec, most of us without alts or with specialized alts run Mordus missions for insane LP rewards, far greater than anything you can get in high sec. But I really doubt my overlords are really benefiting from my alts running burner missions for soe and having our alliance live in NPC stations. On a contrasting note, the CFC we are fighting tend to spend massive amounts of time ratting and running sites in their home systems. If their alts are also running missions in empire, so be it. But what I know for a fact is sov alliances tend to use their space. So I guess I have no idea what world you live in, but it must not be the same as mine. A few months ago I was running incursions with TVP (The Valhalla Project) when a guy on comms started laughing and posted a killmail of a Sabre in fleet chat. He was a member of Get Off my Lawn (a CfC alliance), he was running 3 afk Ishtars while running incursions, not paying attention to the ishtars at all. Apparently a Sabre had warped in on one of his Ishtars, and the ishtar killed it without him even knowing it. This is why the afk-ability of null anoms needs to die a firey death along with an incursion nerf , they spews isk into the economy for nothing (the mission blitzing loophoels are a seperate but related issue). This is why there needs to be an across the board review of PVE rewards and activities. Of course, the high sec partisans here thinks that needs to happen with an eye towards actually maintaining the imbalances they they benefit from (or that they think they do). I don't see anyone here advocating for a buff to Incursions, or saying they are perfect. Even McNut there thinks the LP should be removed. Alt-Creep is what you just described though. 3 AFK ishtars was the problem, not the incursion. See that guy had 75-100 Million in isk flowing in from AFK characters, while making 108-150 Million isk from an actively engaged account. And you think the problem with that is the Incursions? I don't like incursions, they feel to "Exclusive" to me with fleets in my TZ being hard to get into at first and completely lacking quality near the end of my night. I would love it if they removed them. However, I still have to laugh hard at the concept that you take more exception to the active account in a fleet of peers making isk than the 3 AFK accounts he couldn't even bother to check if his character was dying or not.
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 894	Posted - 2015.11.30 15:21:42 - [272] - Quote All of this would be moot if PLEX was removed from the game.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13060	Posted - 2015.11.30 15:22:46 - [273] - Quote King Aires wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: King Aires wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: It pleases me to no end to know that (in your short-sightedness) you think you are defending high sec and lowly solo/casuals, when in reality you are actually defending a status quo that benefits null sec and it's already space-rich overlords (where a lot of the min/maxxed wealth ends up). I will give you an answer to this with personal experience. You can see what alliance I am in, you can see where we live. Most of us with alts appear to run incursions or missions in high sec, most of us without alts or with specialized alts run Mordus missions for insane LP rewards, far greater than anything you can get in high sec. But I really doubt my overlords are really benefiting from my alts running burner missions for soe and having our alliance live in NPC stations. On a contrasting note, the CFC we are fighting tend to spend massive amounts of time ratting and running sites in their home systems. If their alts are also running missions in empire, so be it. But what I know for a fact is sov alliances tend to use their space. So I guess I have no idea what world you live in, but it must not be the same as mine. A few months ago I was running incursions with TVP (The Valhalla Project) when a guy on comms started laughing and posted a killmail of a Sabre in fleet chat. He was a member of Get Off my Lawn (a CfC alliance), he was running 3 afk Ishtars while running incursions, not paying attention to the ishtars at all. Apparently a Sabre had warped in on one of his Ishtars, and the ishtar killed it without him even knowing it. This is why the afk-ability of null anoms needs to die a firey death along with an incursion nerf , they spews isk into the economy for nothing (the mission blitzing loophoels are a seperate but related issue). This is why there needs to be an across the board review of PVE rewards and activities. Of course, the high sec partisans here thinks that needs to happen with an eye towards actually maintaining the imbalances they they benefit from (or that they think they do). I don't see anyone here advocating for a buff to Incursions, or saying they are perfect. Even McNut there thinks the LP should be removed. Alt-Creep is what you just described though. 3 AFK ishtars was the problem, not the incursion. See that guy had 75-100 Million in isk flowing in from AFK characters, while making 108-150 Million isk from an actively engaged account. And you think the problem with that is the Incursions? I don't like incursions, they feel to "Exclusive" to me with fleets in my TZ being hard to get into at first and completely lacking quality near the end of my night. I would love it if they removed them. However, I still have to laugh hard at the concept that you take more exception to the active account in a fleet of peers making isk than the 3 AFK accounts he couldn't even bother to check if his character was dying or not. The afk in null problem has nothing to do with the incursion problem or alts. And i don't think incursions need to be removed (i've said less isk OR mroe risk, Drifter incursions and/or other changes might do the trick already though). I don't take exception to an active account making isk. I take exception to ANY activty (incursions, hyper-blitzing burners, FW missions etc) being so good that I and people like me are enticed to do it because that 150 mil an hour activly flying one ship in high sec is way more than we would be making flying one ship actively where we actually live where at least people casn shoot us without NPCs falling out of the sky.. This creates a whole bunch of bad situations in the game beyond the affects of our individual wallets. PVE is supposed to enable interactions and content, not stifle them, but the current PVE meta in EVE does just that. You are conflating issues here.
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 740	Posted - 2015.11.30 15:30:55 - [274] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: King Aires wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: King Aires wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: It pleases me to no end to know that (in your short-sightedness) you think you are defending high sec and lowly solo/casuals, when in reality you are actually defending a status quo that benefits null sec and it's already space-rich overlords (where a lot of the min/maxxed wealth ends up). I will give you an answer to this with personal experience. You can see what alliance I am in, you can see where we live. Most of us with alts appear to run incursions or missions in high sec, most of us without alts or with specialized alts run Mordus missions for insane LP rewards, far greater than anything you can get in high sec. But I really doubt my overlords are really benefiting from my alts running burner missions for soe and having our alliance live in NPC stations. On a contrasting note, the CFC we are fighting tend to spend massive amounts of time ratting and running sites in their home systems. If their alts are also running missions in empire, so be it. But what I know for a fact is sov alliances tend to use their space. So I guess I have no idea what world you live in, but it must not be the same as mine. A few months ago I was running incursions with TVP (The Valhalla Project) when a guy on comms started laughing and posted a killmail of a Sabre in fleet chat. He was a member of Get Off my Lawn (a CfC alliance), he was running 3 afk Ishtars while running incursions, not paying attention to the ishtars at all. Apparently a Sabre had warped in on one of his Ishtars, and the ishtar killed it without him even knowing it. This is why the afk-ability of null anoms needs to die a firey death along with an incursion nerf , they spews isk into the economy for nothing (the mission blitzing loophoels are a seperate but related issue). This is why there needs to be an across the board review of PVE rewards and activities. Of course, the high sec partisans here thinks that needs to happen with an eye towards actually maintaining the imbalances they they benefit from (or that they think they do). I don't see anyone here advocating for a buff to Incursions, or saying they are perfect. Even McNut there thinks the LP should be removed. Alt-Creep is what you just described though. 3 AFK ishtars was the problem, not the incursion. See that guy had 75-100 Million in isk flowing in from AFK characters, while making 108-150 Million isk from an actively engaged account. And you think the problem with that is the Incursions? I don't like incursions, they feel to "Exclusive" to me with fleets in my TZ being hard to get into at first and completely lacking quality near the end of my night. I would love it if they removed them. However, I still have to laugh hard at the concept that you take more exception to the active account in a fleet of peers making isk than the 3 AFK accounts he couldn't even bother to check if his character was dying or not. The afk in null problem has nothing to do with the incursion problem or alts. And i don't think incursions need to be removed (i've said less isk OR mroe risk, Drifter incursions and/or other changes might do the trick already though). I don't take exception to an active account making isk. I take exception to ANY activty (incursions, hyper-blitzing burners, FW missions etc) being so good that I and people like me are enticed to do it because that 150 mil an hour activly flying one ship in high sec is way more than we would be making flying one ship actively where we actually live where at least people casn shoot us without NPCs falling out of the sky.. This creates a whole bunch of bad situations in the game beyond the affects of our individual wallets. PVE is supposed to enable interactions and content, not stifle them, but the current PVE meta in EVE does just that. You are conflating issues here. Funny how you are trying to make yourself look more reasonable now... when all you called for in the last year was to burn high sec to the ground. Also, actively running anoms CAN make more than incursions. and Incursions CAN end up making less than even level 3's. It is all about the variables and situation. One thing is for certain... Anoms, Belt ratting, DED and Missions can all be picked up, solo and at your own discretion with your available game time. Incursions are a group activity that put you at the mercy of others competence and availability in fleet. It is possible if you only have 2 hours a day that you could be waiting 40 minutes for an incursion fleet, thus making less than you could if you just ran Sanctums for 2 hours in null (Especially since you can AFK them in three different characters). You are ignoring a critical piece of the puzzle here Jenn. And you are looking like American Conservatives who pander to the far-right to get their party support and then try and look normal for the election (I only get CNN from Merika') CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13060	Posted - 2015.11.30 15:45:40 - [275] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: Funny how you are trying to make yourself look more reasonable now... when all you called for in the last year was to burn high sec to the ground. You are lying.. Link where I said any such thing. This is the internet, if what you say i said exists, you will be able to find it and post it. Quote: Also, actively running anoms CAN make more than incursions. and Incursions CAN end up making less than even level 3's. It is all about the variables and situation. Can, sure. Do they? 8 trillion isk says no. Quote: One thing is for certain... Anoms, Belt ratting, DED and Missions can all be picked up, solo and at your own discretion with your available game time. Incursions are a group activity that put you at the mercy of others competence and availability in fleet. Which has exactly what to do with anything? All the things you mention can be disrupted without needing an 80 man mom-popping fleet yet you fail to mention that part. Quote: It is possible if you only have 2 hours a day that you could be waiting 40 minutes for an incursion fleet, thus making less than you could if you just ran Sanctums for 2 hours in null (Especially since you can AFK them in three different characters). And what does that have to do with anything? Quote: You are ignoring a critical piece of the puzzle here Jenn. And you are looking like American Conservatives who pander to the far-right to get their party support and then try and look normal for the election (I only get CNN from Merika') There it is, the underlying prejudice that colors your thinking.
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 894	Posted - 2015.11.30 16:10:17 - [276] - Quote baltec1 wrote: King Aires wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: It pleases me to no end to know that (in your short-sightedness) you think you are defending high sec and lowly solo/casuals, when in reality you are actually defending a status quo that benefits null sec and it's already space-rich overlords (where a lot of the min/maxxed wealth ends up). I will give you an answer to this with personal experience. You can see what alliance I am in, you can see where we live. Most of us with alts appear to run incursions or missions in high sec, most of us without alts or with specialized alts run Mordus missions for insane LP rewards, far greater than anything you can get in high sec. But I really doubt my overlords are really benefiting from my alts running burner missions for soe and having our alliance live in NPC stations. On a contrasting note, the CFC we are fighting tend to spend massive amounts of time ratting and running sites in their home systems. If their alts are also running missions in empire, so be it. But what I know for a fact is sov alliances tend to use their space. So I guess I have no idea what world you live in, but it must not be the same as mine. Even with the changes to anoms we don't have enough to go around and the bulk of the people doing anoms are using afk setups so they earn isk while doing something else. Being able to afk anoms is their only selling point. Then un-blue some people.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 654	Posted - 2015.11.30 16:36:20 - [277] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: Does anyone know why, if Mission LP is such a huge problem, SOE modules and ships are rising in price? This is exactly the opposite problem we would be seeing if missions was paying out too much. If you reduce the LP or speed LP can be gained, the market will react to reduced supply and you'd end up with the same wealth generated, just more expensive modules and incursion runners making more isk. Ooh dodged this one for 2 pages now, lets see if we can make a 3rd! A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 894	Posted - 2015.11.30 16:49:45 - [278] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: Does anyone know why, if Mission LP is such a huge problem, SOE modules and ships are rising in price? This is exactly the opposite problem we would be seeing if missions was paying out too much. If you reduce the LP or speed LP can be gained, the market will react to reduced supply and you'd end up with the same wealth generated, just more expensive modules and incursion runners making more isk. Ooh dodged this one for 2 pages now, lets see if we can make a 3rd! Umm, market economy? If people are willing to buy PLEX at 1.2bil, then why not pay more for other items?
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13061	Posted - 2015.11.30 16:50:57 - [279] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: Does anyone know why, if Mission LP is such a huge problem, SOE modules and ships are rising in price? This is exactly the opposite problem we would be seeing if missions was paying out too much. If you reduce the LP or speed LP can be gained, the market will react to reduced supply and you'd end up with the same wealth generated, just more expensive modules and incursion runners making more isk. Ooh dodged this one for 2 pages now, lets see if we can make a 3rd! It's ignored because it's just more of the same: you keep talking about meta-issues that aren't under discussion. You seem to think that the problem is people running SOE missions are making to much wealth. This isn't the case. The problem (in the case of missions) is that because you can blitz them like you do, this creates a 'backwards incentive' for high end pve players to just do that rather than other things that do not have the same "relative safety" (your words). No one is saying any of this (even incursions) is ruining the economy. We're talking about personal incentives but you keep trying to change the subject (which is why, other than this reply explaining the problem for you, no one is replying to what you posted).
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 654	Posted - 2015.11.30 17:18:44 - [280] - Quote 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. Besides of all my null / bitter vet friends I've shown and tried to convince to try out the mission/blitz thing, not a single one of them are doing it. They would rather go into manufacturing, anoms, ratting or heck even mining of all things. You are fabricating a problem that does not exist. Look, if the SOE market is rising AND people are generally getting more LP per time invested, that means less people are running missions. This is the exact opposite of what you're saying. How do you explain less people running missions with a 'backwards incentive' for high end pve players to just run missions? See this is what eve is (in)famous for and what the entire draw is of this game in the first place; the lies, agendas, schemes and meta games of null. You literally can't trust a single word coming from null to be the truth or lies or heck, a little bit of both even. Yes yes, 'null prejudice', etc. get it out of your system. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03

Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 654	Posted - 2015.11.30 17:21:04 - [281] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: Does anyone know why, if Mission LP is such a huge problem, SOE modules and ships are rising in price? This is exactly the opposite problem we would be seeing if missions was paying out too much. If you reduce the LP or speed LP can be gained, the market will react to reduced supply and you'd end up with the same wealth generated, just more expensive modules and incursion runners making more isk. Ooh dodged this one for 2 pages now, lets see if we can make a 3rd! Umm, market economy? If people are willing to buy PLEX at 1.2bil, then why not pay more for other items? The problem is the proposed changes don't actually change anything. MIssion runners keep making the same, incursion runners make a little bit more in fact and nullsec ratting isk is devalued. Good job, you just nerfed null. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13061	Posted - 2015.11.30 17:54:26 - [282] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: 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. Null doesn't suck. In some ways it's too good for making (afk) isk. What it's not good for is isk making for people who make an effort (the difference between my actively piloted mach and an afk ishtars is like 30 mil per hour). What, am I supposed to demand that my "leadership" flip a switch and change the way anomalies work? Even if they could I wouldn't, because 90 mil an hour from anomalies is plenty...until you realize that you could just log in a high sec alt and make the isk you want for whatever your want it for in less time.. That means that 2 extremes of high sec (high level mission blitzing, and incursions) are indeed the 'problem'. Most people in high sec don't do that, so they aren't the problem. You are. And you are defending a status quo you benefit from while saying (without prompting) that most people in high sec don't do what you do. That's why no one is suggesting a nerf of most people in high sec. Only you fat cats who (by exploiting weaknesses in CCPs much neglected pve designs) are doing something you shouldn't be able to do ,pulling down low/null/WH level income from the relative safety (your words) of high sec. It's just high sec lvl 5s all over again. They didn't want to give up their advantages either btw, you will still find some saying 'bring lvl 5s back to high sec'. Quote: Besides of all my null / bitter vet friends I've shown and tried to convince to try out the mission/blitz thing, not a single one of them are doing it. They would rather go into manufacturing, anoms, ratting or heck even mining of all things. You are fabricating a problem that does not exist. So you talked to a few of the thousands of players doing PVE in this game and decided based on that that a problem you could measure for youself (but won't) doesn't exist. Yep, nothing dishonest about that at all. Quote: Look, if the SOE market is rising AND people are generally getting more LP per time invested, that means less people are running missions. This is the exact opposite of what you're saying. How do you explain less people running missions with a 'backwards incentive' for high end pve players to just run missions? It's not the opposite of what I'm saying. That just means more regular mission runners are not runnign missions. Maybe they got tired of blitzers and CONCORD LP slinging Incursions runners devaluing their work... Quote: See this is what eve is (in)famous for and what the entire draw is of this game in the first place; the lies, agendas, schemes and meta games of null. You literally can't trust a single word coming from null to be the truth or lies or heck, a little bit of both even. Yes yes, 'null prejudice', etc. get it out of your system. And there it is again, the prejudice informing the opinion. A question: how would YOU know? You never advanced past the novice stage in null sec (LOL MYRMIDON). Why not gain some experience, then post?
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4775	Posted - 2015.11.30 19:31:30 - [283] - Quote Any chance we can keep the discussion civil here gang? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 47	Posted - 2015.11.30 19:53:48 - [284] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Any chance we can keep the discussion civil here gang? Absolutely not, smelly pants! :) There have been 1 or two reasonable balancing suggestions in this thread (reduce max rewards for burners, change reward style for anoms) but a lot of this bile is just stated without acknowledging the bad impact it would have on the rest of the game (eg. removing blitz as an option). It's probably time this thread got locked. It won't be long till someone mentions the N's or Mr H and we all have to go home.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2112	Posted - 2015.11.30 20:25:52 - [285] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: Does anyone know why, if Mission LP is such a huge problem, SOE modules and ships are rising in price? This is exactly the opposite problem we would be seeing if missions was paying out too much. If you reduce the LP or speed LP can be gained, the market will react to reduced supply and you'd end up with the same wealth generated, just more expensive modules and incursion runners making more isk. Ooh dodged this one for 2 pages now, lets see if we can make a 3rd! if I had to guess I'd say **** tier mission runners who cant afford 1.2bil isk plex got squeezed out so less LP based items are being produced driving up prices. Other more savvy players move in and pick up the slack but at a higher price? Or maybe I'll just blame incursion LP again Changes in volume are hard to eyeball. Pretty easy to see most of the prices bumping up in early October, but on volume I mostly only see a spike on the Stratios. @ChainsawPlankto
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 894	Posted - 2015.11.30 21:21:41 - [286] - Quote Wait, isn't the 90mil isk in nullsec coming directly from the bounties? The isk quoted in this article is bounties + salvage + LP. Are you salvaging your anoms in nullsec?
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4775	Posted - 2015.11.30 22:02:05 - [287] - Quote I have a question. If high-sec income is such an issue, why do so many low-sec and null-sec players run mission alts in high-sec? Is it possible that they in fact depend on high-sec mission income and ganking to some extent to fund their PvP activities? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Hasikan Miallok Republic University Minmatar Republic 1692	Posted - 2015.11.30 22:35:12 - [288] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: I have a question. If high-sec income is such an issue, why do so many low-sec and null-sec players run mission alts in high-sec? Is it possible that they in fact depend on high-sec mission income and ganking to some extent to fund their PvP activities? it's a matter of faith. A bit like being a Apple fan versus a Windows fan or Ford versus Chevy or following a football team. Reason and logic, if relevant at all, is relevant only be coincidence. The handful of people that can blitz incursions at 200 mill an hour, or the slightly larger but still small number that run incursions for similar money, actually need to be actively logged in to make that ISK so their overalll influence on the EVE economy compared to passive/multibox AFK income streams cannot be that significant however it is the principle of the matter - hisec EVE is evil.
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 894	Posted - 2015.11.30 22:37:35 - [289] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: I have a question. If high-sec income is such an issue, why do so many low-sec and null-sec players run mission alts in high-sec? Is it possible that they in fact depend on high-sec mission income and ganking to some extent to fund their PvP activities? Lemme break it down. Nullie logs on, sees baddies in their area, nullie logs off and logs on hisec alt; because, killing baddies is actual work.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4775	Posted - 2015.11.30 23:01:11 - [290] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: Lemme break it down. Nullie logs on, sees baddies in their area, nullie logs off and logs on hisec alt; because, killing baddies is actual work. This was intended as a legitimate question... I'm not sure nerfing high-sec income would force low-sec or null-sec players to focus more on their respective regions, nor do I think simply buffing low-sec or null-sec income would entice players to remain there either. I think the majority of players live in high-sec not because it's necessarily more interesting, but because it's somewhat stable and predictable. While there is an element of risk in being ganked, it's something that can also be mitigated to some extent. If you removed L4 missions from high-sec it's highly unlikely you'd see anyone 'take the plunge' and relocate to low-sec to continue to blitz L4s or Burners (especially with some of the 'shinier' fits required to solo some). It's more likely that you'd see players come up with unique and creative ways to attempt to replace that income with L3s. And from an economics standpoint, there's one thing every proponent of nerfing high-sec continues to overlook - there is simply no need or reason to fit Faction or Deadspace modules for running L3s. And there is a less than zero chance that players will fit these to fly into low-sec to run L4s. Anyone who runs DED sites or farms belts depends on demand from the high-sec market for these modules, so nerfing high-sec will also have the unintended effect of nerfing low-sec and null income. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2112	Posted - 2015.11.30 23:48:16 - [291] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: I have a question. If high-sec income is such an issue, why do so many low-sec and null-sec players run mission alts in high-sec? Is it possible that they in fact depend on high-sec mission income and ganking to some extent to fund their PvP activities? that is the issue. it is better to run a high-sec income alt than try and make income in low/null. According to risk/reward it should be the other way around. In some ways the model works, in day to day individual income it breaks pretty hard. if you ask me if I want to run null anoms or highsec lv4s, I'm picking the lv4s every time. Players that live in null should be able to make isk in null and not feel cheated that highsec can earn more. Also null should make more to incentivize players to move out there. probably should jump on the FW gravy train, get that dank t4 minmatar LP in a stealth bomber. and personally I'm starting to like WH space. however it is designed to be difficult to live in and often you are at the mercy of bob, and god knows how many cloaky t3s @ChainsawPlankto
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4775	Posted - 2015.12.01 00:08:08 - [292] - Quote Chainsaw Plankton wrote: that is the issue. it is better to run a high-sec income alt than try and make income in low/null. According to risk/reward it should be the other way around. In some ways the model works, in day to day individual income it breaks pretty hard. if you ask me if I want to run null anoms or highsec lv4s, I'm picking the lv4s every time. Players that live in null should be able to make isk in null and not feel cheated that highsec can earn more. Also null should make more to incentivize players to move out there. probably should jump on the FW gravy train, get that dank t4 minmatar LP in a stealth bomber. and personally I'm starting to like WH space. however it is designed to be difficult to live in and often you are at the mercy of bob, and god knows how many cloaky t3s And that's a fair point. However... Don't a lot of null-sec players earn ISK through their corporate overlords, ie: ISK distributed from moon mining, space rental, etc. If not directly then indirectly through ship replacement programs and subsidized ships and equipment? DED spawns are so rare as to be almost non-existant in high-sec, and belt ratting does not see any Officer spawns, Faction loot, BPC or implant drops. High-sec anomalies almost never lead to escalations, and even when they do it's almost exclusively low-sec. We're referencing ISK/hour, and it seems more than a little convenient that the very real potential for exotic loot is conveniently overlooked (I'm fairly certain high-sec Burner ISK/hour blitzing does in fact reflect this, as my own non-Burner attempts to include implant drops in the totals). I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13062	Posted - 2015.12.01 00:32:51 - [293] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: Wait, isn't the 90mil isk in nullsec coming directly from the bounties? The isk quoted in this article is bounties + salvage + LP. Are you salvaging your anoms in nullsec? Salvaging lowers income. Like mission runners some do, most don't. 90 mil is excellent isk in null sec... Until you join a high sec incursion fleet or follow the burner guide. A HQ site pays 31.5 mil isk and 7000 LP that (as of right now) sells at 1000 isk lp. So a SLOW incursion fleet that does 3 HQs just earned me 115.5 mil (isk + lp) for following tags and hitting f1, without so much as a backwards glance at local. And following the burner guide and set up properly, you can make more than that AND not need a 40 man fleet (somehow the people screaming at me that "incursions make more because they are group PVE!" don't seem to have an issue with 220 mil per hour blitzing burners.....hmmm double standards). I prefer null pve despite the occasional loss, the lower income potential (except for the lucky DED drop, I did make 890 mil form a Fleet Staging Point 3 last night, 1st time in 2 months making over 200 mil though), and being hunted. Prior to 2009 that preference was rewarded by the highest individual character income potential. Now it's rewarded by that sinking feeling of "that was ok, but I probably I should have just run incursions/missions".
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13062	Posted - 2015.12.01 00:37:54 - [294] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: And that's a fair point. However... Don't a lot of null-sec players earn ISK through their corporate overlords, ie: ISK distributed from moon mining, space rental, etc. If not directly then indirectly through ship replacement programs and subsidized ships and equipment? DED spawns are so rare as to be almost non-existant in high-sec, and belt ratting does not see any Officer spawns, Faction loot, BPC or implant drops. High-sec anomalies almost never lead to escalations, and even when they do it's almost exclusively low-sec. System upgrades and maintenance don't pay for themselves. And SRP is what keeps you being able to defend your ratting space (something people in high sec never have to worry about, no matter how much CODE huffs, they can't "own" high sec). Quote: We're referencing ISK/hour, and it seems more than a little convenient that the very real potential for exotic loot is conveniently overlooked (I'm fairly certain high-sec Burner ISK/hour blitzing does in fact reflect this, as my own non-Burner attempts to include implant drops in the totals). The potential is there, sometimes you hit the lottery. These is not lottery involved with incursions, and the burner blitz guide doesn't rely on random number generator Gods smiling on you. That's why I'm training my alt to better execute the burner guide (instead of training it for a carrier to run low sec lvl 5s like I planned to, why accept risk when you don't have to?).
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4775	Posted - 2015.12.01 00:49:03 - [295] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: The potential is there, sometimes you hit the lottery. These is not lottery involved with incursions, and the burner blitz guide doesn't rely on random number generator Gods smiling on you. That's why I'm training my alt to better execute the burner guide (instead of training it for a carrier to run low sec lvl 5s like I planned to, why accept risk when you don't have to?). But we're not really discussing Incursions - they're kind of a separate item entirely and beyond most high-sec players, are they not? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2112	Posted - 2015.12.01 01:25:58 - [296] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: Arthur Aihaken wrote: I have a question. If high-sec income is such an issue, why do so many low-sec and null-sec players run mission alts in high-sec? Is it possible that they in fact depend on high-sec mission income and ganking to some extent to fund their PvP activities? Lemme break it down. Nullie logs on, sees baddies in their area, nullie logs off and logs on hisec alt; because, killing baddies is actual work. imo that is a whole different problem. Arthur Aihaken wrote: This was intended as a legitimate question... I'm not sure nerfing high-sec income would force low-sec or null-sec players to focus more on their respective regions, nor do I think simply buffing low-sec or null-sec income would entice players to remain there either. I think the majority of players live in high-sec not because it's necessarily more interesting, but because it's somewhat stable and predictable. While there is an element of risk in being ganked, it's something that can also be mitigated to some extent. If you removed L4 missions from high-sec it's highly unlikely you'd see anyone 'take the plunge' and relocate to low-sec to continue to blitz L4s or Burners (especially with some of the 'shinier' fits required to solo some). It's more likely that you'd see players come up with unique and creative ways to attempt to replace that income with L3s. And from an economics standpoint, there's one thing every proponent of nerfing high-sec continues to overlook - there is simply no need or reason to fit Faction or Deadspace modules for running L3s. And there is a less than zero chance that players will fit these to fly into low-sec to run L4s. Anyone who runs DED sites, farms belts or participates in FW depends on demand from the high-sec market for these modules, so nerfing high-sec will also have the unintended effect of nerfing low-sec and null income. there are a lot of people already based in low/null, and pretty good logistical networks to move stuff out there. I think if they made more out there they would spend more time out there. Although then the whole OMG a red/neutral dock up!!! issue pops up. As for the most of the people in highsec, absolutely, they aren't going to leave to run low/null pve. Although I'm pretty sure there is a portion that would, as there are always some people that will follow the isk wherever it goes. as for the markets, that is where things get complicated. I'm sure Highsec pvers pull up prices on a lot of faction/deadspace mods, but pvpers do use a bunch of them. and if they were cheaper perhaps pvpers would start using more of them (or certain ones more often). Also there on caps they make more sense to fit, WH ops, or even low/null isk making boats. Arthur Aihaken wrote: And that's a fair point. However... Don't a lot of null-sec players earn ISK through their corporate overlords, ie: ISK distributed from moon mining, space rental, etc. If not directly then indirectly through ship replacement programs and subsidized ships and equipment? DED spawns are so rare as to be almost non-existant in high-sec, and belt ratting does not see any Officer spawns, Faction loot, BPC or implant drops. High-sec anomalies almost never lead to escalations, and even when they do it's almost exclusively low-sec. We're referencing ISK/hour, and it seems more than a little convenient that the very real potential for exotic loot is conveniently overlooked (I'm fairly certain high-sec Burner ISK/hour blitzing does in fact reflect this, as my own non-Burner attempts to include implant drops in the totals). More complications. I'm not in a null block so I can't speak for specifics, but it seems to me the primary way to get isk back is via SRP, cant say how much of that is for fleet ops only, or any pvp. I don't know that there are any that give their pilots a salary or profit share. I've seen faction loot and pirate implants in highsec belts a few times. As for exploration, it seems too random and low value to really try and run anoms to get escalations, where in null you are running them anyways for income. however there are low end complexes that spawn rather often in high. Personally I don't count my faction loot from burners it is just too random for my sample sizes. Maybe on a month long trial it would work, but I just don't have the energy to do that. @ChainsawPlankto
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 742	Posted - 2015.12.01 03:28:54 - [297] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: Arthur Aihaken wrote: I have a question. If high-sec income is such an issue, why do so many low-sec and null-sec players run mission alts in high-sec? Is it possible that they in fact depend on high-sec mission income and ganking to some extent to fund their PvP activities? Lemme break it down. Nullie logs on, sees baddies in their area, nullie logs off and logs on hisec alt; because, killing baddies is actual work. 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. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 276	Posted - 2015.12.01 03:39:43 - [298] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: I highlighted the part of your post where you lack any understanding of how players in this game work. Hey if you don't want to leave the safety of highsec that's up to you but if you want those better rewards your ganna need to take that risk and put in that extra effort. 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.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 276	Posted - 2015.12.01 03:43:39 - [299] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: You know better than anyone that's not how it works. That's exactly how it should work. Highsec, lowest reward for the highest safety and least effort put in, lowsec, mid risk and effort for mid reward, nullsec, highest risk and effort for big rewards, WH, high risk and biggest effort for the biggest reward. Um I hate to break this to you bittervet, but Low-Sec is more riskier than Null-sec.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 276	Posted - 2015.12.01 04:09:58 - [300] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: King Aires wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: It pleases me to no end to know that (in your short-sightedness) you think you are defending high sec and lowly solo/casuals, when in reality you are actually defending a status quo that benefits null sec and it's already space-rich overlords (where a lot of the min/maxxed wealth ends up). I will give you an answer to this with personal experience. You can see what alliance I am in, you can see where we live. Most of us with alts appear to run incursions or missions in high sec, most of us without alts or with specialized alts run Mordus missions for insane LP rewards, far greater than anything you can get in high sec. But I really doubt my overlords are really benefiting from my alts running burner missions for soe and having our alliance live in NPC stations. On a contrasting note, the CFC we are fighting tend to spend massive amounts of time ratting and running sites in their home systems. If their alts are also running missions in empire, so be it. But what I know for a fact is sov alliances tend to use their space. So I guess I have no idea what world you live in, but it must not be the same as mine. A few months ago I was running incursions with TVP (The Valhalla Project) when a guy on comms started laughing and posted a killmail of a Sabre in fleet chat. He was a member of Get Off my Lawn (a CfC alliance), he was running 3 afk Ishtars while running incursions, not paying attention to the ishtars at all. Apparently a Sabre had warped in on one of his Ishtars, and the ishtar killed it without him even knowing it. This is why the afk-ability of null anoms needs to die a firey death along with an incursion nerf , they spews isk into the economy for nothing (the mission blitzing loophoels are a seperate but related issue). This is why there needs to be an across the board review of PVE rewards and activities. Of course, the high sec partisans here thinks that needs to happen with an eye towards actually maintaining the imbalances they they benefit from (or that they think they do). 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.

Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2112	Posted - 2015.12.01 04:59:10 - [301] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: 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. the whole point is that it's not supposed to be fair. Risk vs Reward is a basic fundamental of Eve design, and that the "unfairness" should put nullsec income as the best income. As long as I've played I've very rarely been enticed to move to 0.0 for the rewards, the biggest reward was ratting up my sec status. Daniela Doran wrote: 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. 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 Daniela Doran wrote: 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. 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. @ChainsawPlankto
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13063	Posted - 2015.12.01 05:24:04 - [302] - Quote Chainsaw Plankton wrote: So all we are really talking about here is nerfing HS just because some people think life should be fair. the whole point is that it's not supposed to be fair. Risk vs Reward is a basic fundamental of Eve design, and that the "unfairness" should put nullsec income as the best income. As long as I've played I've very rarely been enticed to move to 0.0 for the rewards, the biggest reward was ratting up my sec status. [/quote] 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. Quote: 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 There ar eplenty of good players in high sec. The most vocal ones do fit your description though. Do notice how they can't fathom my personal critiques =of null sec, the idea of criticizing something one favors and benefits from (because it's less optimal for the overall game than it could be) is completely foreign to some. Quote: looks like Jenn hit a nerve <- The laughing one, stupid non-gif emoticons. I always do. I believe in radical "screw your panzy little feelings" truth (not just on forums either). NOTHING makes enemies more than observable and verifiable truth. And I mean nothing.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2112	Posted - 2015.12.01 05:34:47 - [303] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: 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. Should have added an "in high/low/null" bit. wasn't really counting WH space. It seems to either fit in very well or completely break risk/reward. I don't have much experience in WH space and can't properly think about it. But over all it seems pretty awesome. I guess my main questions with whs are how often does content respawn, and/or how effective is it to jump into a static and clear that content. and then there is always the day-trip option. But that starts getting off topic. @ChainsawPlankto
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 276	Posted - 2015.12.01 08:46:28 - [304] - Quote Chainsaw Plankton wrote: 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. Maybe the ratting afking Ishtars in null was a bad point to defend. The point I was trying to make was that Jenn seems to lack the ability (or is not even trying) to view from other players perspective. Everyone plays Eve from their own perspective and it differs from one player to another. Before I make any opinion on questionable game design mechanics, I always put my self in the shoes of the people who uses the game mechanics in question. This way I'd have a pretty good affinity with the players who uses the questionable mechanics and will be able to implement an improve feature without losing their interest in the game altogether. Baltec and Jenn (mostly baltec) have made remarks about their improvisions on how to change the PVE landscape that will have the greatest impact on hi-sec players ability to produce isk with total disregard to the players. In their eyes these changes should be made whether they like it or not which I believe would only lead into a decrease in player base. I get extremely irritated when reading their post for this reason because it reveals that deep down, they are either highly conceited, very selfish or severely lacking in foresight. 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. These players would either try low sec, join the blue box gang in null or quit eve altogether. Either way the player base would definitely shrink as hi-sec would become a poor mans land only inhabited by total noobs. Jenn wants to eliminate the ability to blitz missions which I'm in agreement with. Missions weren't intended to be blitzed and I for one wish CCP redesign them so that they are no longer blitzable and only completed by killing all the mission rats or by defeating a powerful rat boss (also would make blitzing guides worthless which would make me very happy) As for burners I don't want their LP payout reduce because they would no longer be worth running. Instead I'd rather CCP buff the stats of the burners themselves so that they'd be no longer possible to solo. They should require at least 2 ships to run them or you get "BURNED",lol.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 660	Posted - 2015.12.01 08:47:28 - [305] - Quote 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? A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17044	Posted - 2015.12.01 16:17:37 - [306] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: 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. Never said that. I said move the faction LP rewards to lowsec with faction ammo and capboosters staying in highsec. I also said CCP should move meta loot drops away from NPC wrecks and into the highsec LP shops. I never said remove the missions themselves. This the problem with you highsec bears, you don't read anything, you just scream we are out to get you and only you. Daniela Doran wrote: 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. We aren't talking about these people we are talking about people like me who know the mechanics inside and out. The average low skilled highsec player wont even see any change. Daniela Doran wrote: 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. That right there is what should be happening. You SHOULD be looking at your income and saying I want what that guy in lowsec or null is earning. This is how you incentivise people to get out there. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17044	Posted - 2015.12.01 16:22:42 - [307] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: Then un-blue some people. Then we have a smaller powerblock with the same lack of anoms. Anoms are very poor at their job because they a finite, they cant adapt to growing populations like missions can. Everyone in null has this problem. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17044	Posted - 2015.12.01 16:26:35 - [308] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: 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. What exactly can they do? Its game mechanics that are the problem here and they have no control over that. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17044	Posted - 2015.12.01 16:31:09 - [309] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: 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? Because you can multibox incursions in highsec and make a staggering sum of isk that dwarfs any other pve activity. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13065	Posted - 2015.12.01 17:10:13 - [310] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: 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? 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: Quote: 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. 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.

Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 660	Posted - 2015.12.01 18:31:36 - [311] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: 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? 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? A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17044	Posted - 2015.12.01 18:41:42 - [312] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: 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? 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. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 660	Posted - 2015.12.01 18:44:01 - [313] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: 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? 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: Quote: 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. 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. Oh Jenn, tsk, tsk, so dishonest. After all that high and mighty preaching to be lying through your teeth like this. First off, it's hard for lv4s to "literally" be Lv5s so that's a straight up lie. Lv5 missions were a bug, as you've said multiple times, while blitzing missions is practically as old as missions themselves. Hardly a bug wouldn't you say? The fact that they're in high sec is also, not a bug. In fact they have been making multiple changes to burners, both in frequency and in how hard each burner is since soon after their release. Currently the dev are very happy with where burners are at, again, exactly the opposite of hisec lv5s. Quote: "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. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.03
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13065	Posted - 2015.12.01 19:10:29 - [314] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: 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. rofl, you just said you guide is a lie. Thanks. Look , I get it, you are uncomfortable with the truths and realities of this discussion. That's fine, you can't expect everyone to understand the situation being talked about (although one would hope that people who choose to reply to a discussion would have some idea of what's going on). I've noticed an ironic situation , the people who reply the most to PVE type issues tend to be the poorest at PVE (this mirrors but pvp discussions and real life btw). My suggestion would be for you to experience more of EVE Online's PVE scene (in other words, why don't you advance past the "lol Myrmidon" stage) so that you can follow what's being talked about better.
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 895	Posted - 2015.12.01 19:52:53 - [315] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: 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? 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.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13065	Posted - 2015.12.01 20:10:54 - [316] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: 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. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1knVqZEH8qFY0eT44nMEFwcKd3t4PbgcZeuv58SVUxsI/pub
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 895	Posted - 2015.12.01 21:03:43 - [317] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: 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. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1knVqZEH8qFY0eT44nMEFwcKd3t4PbgcZeuv58SVUxsI/pub 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.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17044	Posted - 2015.12.01 21:18:01 - [318] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: 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. 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. Daniela Doran wrote: 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. Its players from null based groups that have figured out the vast bulk of the best ways to exploit the mechanics in highsec. Daniela Doran wrote: 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. We have adapted, hence the problems. We have turned highsec into the cashcow that supports our nullsec linemembers. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 895	Posted - 2015.12.01 21:36:28 - [319] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: 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. 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. Daniela Doran wrote: 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. Its players from null based groups that have figured out the vast bulk of the best ways to exploit the mechanics in highsec. Daniela Doran wrote: 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. We have adapted, hence the problems. We have turned highsec into the cashcow that supports our nullsec linemembers. And yet, you continue to whine.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13065	Posted - 2015.12.01 21:46:45 - [320] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: 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. Wait a minute, You Haven't seen me complain about FW missions? That mean you haven't read my posting in this thread. In fact, you can google "jenn aside" and FW missions" lol. And incursions? I'm sorry, but you simply haven't been reading what I wrote in this thread (and you haven't visited General Discussion lately). Also, you can't apply that guy to the majority of null. Want to know why?

Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13065	Posted - 2015.12.01 21:49:24 - [321] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: And yet, you continue to whine. Being honest enough and informed enough to point out things that are problems even when you benefit from them is not whining, it's literally honesty. I ran high sec lvl 5 missions in dual rattlesnakes back in the day, and those of us who told the truth about them (even before CCP admitted that is was a bug) got the same kind of reaction that we are getting in this thread.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4776	Posted - 2015.12.01 22:24:38 - [322] - Quote 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. High-sec DED sites are not an issue because even when they make a rare appearance, they are farmed into oblivion by low and null-sec alts. During the Blood Harvest it was next to impossible to find a spawn, despite the fact that both low and null-sec were literally flooded with sites. I'm sure we'll see a repeat with the upcoming Frost event as well. Which brings us to high-sec PvE. Specifically - L4 missions. Even before Burners there have long been calls to remove these from high-sec, and now it effectively kills two birds with one stone. Never mind the fact that to achieve the level of ISK/hour by blitzing and running Burners requires about a year of solid training, a 5-billion or so investment in ISK and selection of one or two very specific regions. The alternative is several characters, a similar level of training and ISK investment and a higher degree of micromanagement beyond simply pressing 'F1' (something many null-sec players might be unfamiliar with). High-sec players aren't risk-averse - we're bullsht averse. We don't want to be bullied or otherwise indoctrinated into the various alliance marketing and propaganda machines. If you nerf high-sec PvE income anymore than it already has (let's not forget the various loot drop, mineral, reprocessing, etc. nerfs that have taken place over the last year or so), you'll probably find that the vast majority of high-sec EVE players just quit. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.*
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13065	Posted - 2015.12.01 22:45:49 - [323] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: 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. 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. Quote: 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. 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". ]quote] High-sec DED sites are not an issue because even when they make a rare appearance, they are farmed into oblivion by low and null-sec alts. During the Blood Harvest it was next to impossible to find a spawn, despite the fact that both low and null-sec were literally flooded with sites. I'm sure we'll see a repeat with the upcoming Frost event as well. Which brings us to high-sec PvE. Specifically - L4 missions. Even before Burners there have long been calls to remove these from high-sec, and now it effectively kills two birds with one stone. Never mind the fact that to achieve the level of ISK/hour by blitzing and running Burners requires about a year of solid training, a 5-billion or so investment in ISK and selection of one or two very specific regions. The alternative is several characters, a similar level of training and ISK investment and a higher degree of micromanagement beyond simply pressing 'F1' (something many null-sec players might be unfamiliar with). High-sec players aren't risk-averse - we're bullsh*t averse. We don't want to be bullied or otherwise indoctrinated into the various alliance marketing and propaganda machines. If you nerf high-sec PvE income anymore than it already has (let's not forget the various loot drop, mineral, reprocessing, etc. nerfs that have taken place over the last year or so), you'll probably find that the vast majority of high-sec EVE players just quit.[/quote] The rest of this is again dripping with the types of prejudices that are the real enemy of discussion.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17044	Posted - 2015.12.01 23:02:55 - [324] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: And yet, you continue to whine. You keep on using that word yet you don't understand its meaning. Were we whining when we called for tech moons to be nerfed? Or when tracking titans were not only blapping frigates in pvp but also printing so much isk they were driving inflation? Pointing out game imbalances is not whining. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4776	Posted - 2015.12.01 23:04:27 - [325] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: 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. Prejudice aside, how do you account for the fact that the constant calls for high-sec nerfing continue to come almost exclusively from players associated with the major alliances? Quote: 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". Apparently even more elitist than I had imagined... Quote: The rest of this is again dripping with the types of prejudices that are the real enemy of discussion. I've yet to hear a decent proposal for discussion. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2115	Posted - 2015.12.01 23:10:53 - [326] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: 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. @ChainsawPlankto
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4776	Posted - 2015.12.01 23:19:55 - [327] - Quote Chainsaw Plankton wrote: 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. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 395	Posted - 2015.12.01 23:34:48 - [328] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: 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. You can only see so much as an outsider looking in, you should stick to your strengths, pubbie
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 746	Posted - 2015.12.01 23:35:59 - [329] - Quote Chainsaw Plankton wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: 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. 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? CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13065	Posted - 2015.12.01 23:39:21 - [330] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: Chainsaw Plankton wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: 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. 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? Keep telling yourself that, but you know it's dodging the issue. The "you just want me out of high sec" thing relies on the idea that people care about what other people do. I'm sure some do. I don't.

Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 395	Posted - 2015.12.01 23:44:48 - [331] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: 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? If People like you want to stay in the beginner area of the game, doesn't bother me.
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 895	Posted - 2015.12.02 00:17:59 - [332] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: Chainsaw Plankton wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: 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. 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? Keep telling yourself that, but you know it's dodging the issue. The "you just want me out of high sec" thing relies on the idea that people care about what other people do. I'm sure some do. I don't. If that were true, you wouldn't be in this thread arguing about how well some hisec missioners are making isk.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13065	Posted - 2015.12.02 00:22:46 - [333] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: Chainsaw Plankton wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: 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. 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? Keep telling yourself that, but you know it's dodging the issue. The "you just want me out of high sec" thing relies on the idea that people care about what other people do. I'm sure some do. I don't. If that were true, you wouldn't be in this thread arguing about how well some hisec missioners are making isk. It's like some of you like to purposely misunderstand things. When I talk about pve rewards imbalances I'm talking about things that affect me and all of us. The people doing these things aren't breaking any rules, so what they do is none of my business. Overall game mechanics are.
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 746	Posted - 2015.12.02 01:22:21 - [334] - Quote Jerry T Pepridge wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: 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? If People like you want to stay in the beginner area of the game, doesn't bother me. Great... so why post about nothing then? CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 395	Posted - 2015.12.02 01:46:01 - [335] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: Jerry T Pepridge wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: 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? If People like you want to stay in the beginner area of the game, doesn't bother me. Great... so why post about nothing then? This whole thread is nothing. 3 (very clever) guys that figured out how to make bulk isk in hisec VS 1 or 2 nullsec anom farmers, who are slightly butthurt they are capping out at less isk/hour than said hisec people. its one bug nonsensical argument. I wanted to point out that hisec is the beginner area, but a saw a chance to sledge you too, so 2 birds 1 stone etc.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 276	Posted - 2015.12.02 04:10:39 - [336] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: rofl, you just said you guide is a lie. Thanks. Looks like this is what you wanted to know all along. Makes that ego of yours inflate back up again, doesn't it? You spent all this time whining about what can be accomplish in hi-sec based on someone else's testimonies without even verifying whether the facts presented was true or not?? I don't even know what to call people like you, but you're definitely in a class all by yourself (in a unlikable way). You're a very hard person to like Jenn, you know that. I feel so sorry for your corpmates. So now that you've finally come to this conclusion, you can stop whatever training you're currently undergoing in preparation for hi-sec and continue on with your previous training goals in carriers for low-sec level 5 missions. And I say good riddance, I'd hate it to know that there was a whining tattle taler like you hanging around hi-sec looking to spill the beans to CCP if there was anything remotely lucrative going on down here.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2117	Posted - 2015.12.02 04:49:33 - [337] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: 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. e-peen is great and all, but it only lasts for so long. High end minerals and moon goo are nice and all, but how much content do they lead to, and how exciting are they to harvest. IMO: Mining is about on par with a screensaver, and moon mining is worse than watching paint dry on the wall. Also the whole RMT thing has been thrown at various alliances for at least as long as I've been playing (hell probably true in a bunch of cases). and yes at the alliance level there is a lot of isk, but how much goes to supers, srp, sov bills, war chest, ect? What are their SRP terms and will they give me a plex every month? If they want me to be "self sufficient" well then whats the point of joining with them? Sounds like code for buy plex or have a highsec alt. Market McSelling Alt wrote: 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? any source on that? Although on the other hand I wouldn't be surprised if most null pilots that leave drop several highsec alts at the same time. Trading/incursion/mission/production are all pretty well done in highsec. and imo I want players out of high, I don't want to push anyone out, I want them to look out to low/null/whs and say I want to be there and go for it. but as far as I'm concerned there just isn't any incentive to leave. I'm going to make more isk in highsec out of a few specific activities. I'd love to go join a c5-6 wh corp but for the most part I just don't have the time. Daniela Doran wrote: You spent all this time whining about what can be accomplish in hi-sec based on someone else's testimonies without even verifying whether the facts presented was true or not?? I don't even know what to call people like you, but you're definitely in a class all by yourself (in a unlikable way). the guide is true, if not understated. @ChainsawPlankto
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 746	Posted - 2015.12.02 05:23:14 - [338] - Quote Chainsaw Plankton wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: 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? any source on that? CCP Fozzie podcast circa May/June 2015. I am not in the business of looking up the link but his statements about Null/High population are well known. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2117	Posted - 2015.12.02 06:01:26 - [339] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: Chainsaw Plankton wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: 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? any source on that? CCP Fozzie podcast circa May/June 2015. I am not in the business of looking up the link but his statements about Null/High population are well known. found a graph. thanks google http://evenews24.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/demo-players-hisec.jpg a bit old, but I don't think I can see anything that says severe. 75% +/- a few percentage points over the roughly 2 years seems pretty constant. although may/june would be newer than that graph. @ChainsawPlankto
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4779	Posted - 2015.12.02 06:40:57 - [340] - Quote I'm curious how many of the active high-sec players are null-sec alts... I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4779	Posted - 2015.12.02 06:54:38 - [341] - Quote Getting back to the original topic, I made 150-million ISK in just over an hour this evening. I wasn't really pushing it or focusing on micromanagement, so I suspect I could've made another 10-20 millions ISK if I'd concentrated more. If I'm really feeling lazy and unmotivated, I'll average somewhere between 75-90 million ISK/hour. Strangely enough, it's the blitz missions like 'Cargo', 'Duo', 'Recon' and 'Anomaly' that actually drag averages down. To consistently get high numbers you need to capitalize on missions like 'Enemies', 'Damsel', 'Scarlet', 'Beserk', 'Attack Drones' and the 'Extravaganzas' (in addition to the occasional Zor or Storyline implants to boost ISK/hour). No null bears were harmed in the collection of this data... I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 276	Posted - 2015.12.02 08:58:12 - [342] - Quote 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. [/quote] baltec1 wrote: Never said that. I said move the faction LP rewards to lowsec with faction ammo and capboosters staying in highsec. I also said CCP should move meta loot drops away from NPC wrecks and into the highsec LP shops. I never said remove the missions themselves. This the problem with you highsec bears, you don't read anything, you just scream we are out to get you and only you. But this is what you really meant when you said that, isn't? What other reason would you just want the LP Store moved to low-sec when you have to run the missions in hi-sec? Daniela Doran wrote: 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. baltec1 wrote: We aren't talking about these people we are talking about people like me who know the mechanics inside and out. The average low skilled highsec player wont even see any change. Yea you don't miss the opportunity to brag when you can. You've been playing Eve for 10 years compared to me only playing the game 2.5 years so I can't compete with you in regards to Eve experience. But just because you have the experience doesn't mean that players with less experience should just accept your way of viewing how things should be in Eve without even considering their opinions. You alone don't make up the player base. Regardless if you're right or wrong, if the player base doesn't accept your propose way of thinking then it shouldn't be accepted. Daniela Doran wrote: 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. baltec1 wrote: That right there is what should be happening. You SHOULD be looking at your income and saying I want what that guy in lowsec or null is earning. This is how you incentivise people to get out there. Wrong again. You can't forced no one to play in null sec if they don't want to. If the players who prefer to play in hi-sec cannot do what they like to do while making a decent return on their time investment then these players would quit Eve. I personally would probably try low-sec and WH space. If the risk factor vs the reward ends up being not worth it for the time I've invested then that would be it for me. Having a decent income stream in hi-sec at least provides an option. And of course null sec is completely out because of all the boot licking involved which makes it totally suck for certain individual players. Again you display your lack of insight for what draw players to Eve and for them to keep playing it. Making Eve harsher would only lead into a decrease in player base in the long run. Perhaps the time for dividing the servers have come since the disparity between the newer players and the olders players are causing conflict of interest clashes.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17044	Posted - 2015.12.02 10:46:20 - [343] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: But this is what you really meant when you said that, isn't? No, hence why I am not asking for the removal of content from highsec. Daniela Doran wrote: Yea you don't miss the opportunity to brag when you can. You've been playing Eve for 10 years compared to me only playing the game 2.5 years so I can't compete with you in regards to Eve experience. But just because you have the experience doesn't mean that players with less experience should just accept your way of viewing how things should be in Eve without even considering their opinions. You alone don't make up the player base. Regardless if you're right or wrong, if the player base doesn't accept your propose way of thinking then it shouldn't be accepted. 2.5 years is also far from new. And yes, if you don't have the experience you don't exactly have any say in the subject because you don't have the knowledge. Daniela Doran wrote: Wrong again. You can't forced no one to play in null sec if they don't want to. Nobody is forcing anyone to do anything. If you don't want to leave the safety of highsec you don't have to, just don't expect to be earing as much as people who do leave and take on that extra effort and risk. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 276	Posted - 2015.12.02 11:09:14 - [344] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Getting back to the original topic, I made 150-million ISK in just over an hour this evening. I wasn't really pushing it or focusing on micromanagement, so I suspect I could've made another 10-20 million ISK if I'd concentrated more. If I'm really feeling lazy and unmotivated, I'll average somewhere between 75-90 million ISK/hour. Strangely enough, it's the blitz missions like 'Cargo', 'Duo', 'Recon' and 'Anomaly' that actually drag averages down. To consistently get high numbers you need to capitalize on missions like 'Enemies', 'Damsel', 'Scarlet', 'Beserk', 'Attack Drones' and the 'Extravaganzas' (in addition to the occasional Zor or Storyline implants to boost ISK/hour). Three characters seems to be the optimal number to run L4s with. I've tried five but found that my system takes a noticeable performance hit, there are a lot more failed jump gates/commands that need to be repeated and I'm not even coming close to getting a +40% increase in ISK/hour. Part of that is due to these characters being relatively low-skilled, so I'm just not getting a corresponding bump in DPS. Not that it would necessarily make too much of a difference though, as the biggest hurdles I seem to be running into are inherent limits on how much can potentially be shaved from mission transit and spawn times. No null bears were harmed in the collection of this data... Do only the 1st Recon (skip the rest) and skip Cargo, Attack of Drones, Extrava. Worlds Collide.....skip all except the following Assault Pirate Scarlet Blockade Mordus Headhunters Smash the Supplier Worlds Collide (if bonus pays higher than 2 mill) Recon (1st one only) Vengeance (good meta 4 drops if bonus is higher than 2 mill) All Team Burners (except DD & Worm if you don't have a link booster) Optionals are Damsel and Berserk but I usually skip those.
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 747	Posted - 2015.12.02 14:34:43 - [345] - Quote Chainsaw Plankton wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: Chainsaw Plankton wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: 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? any source on that? CCP Fozzie podcast circa May/June 2015. I am not in the business of looking up the link but his statements about Null/High population are well known. found a graph. thanks google http://evenews24.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/demo-players-hisec.jpg a bit old, but I don't think I can see anything that says severe. 75% +/- a few percentage points over the roughly 2 years seems pretty constant. although may/june would be newer than that graph. No that isn't it. It was here http://evenews24.com/2015/07/15/en24-podcast-ccp-fozzie-on-sovereignty-part-i/ However the host of the actual audio is gone now. Try and find an archived recording. July 2015 is a little more recent, but to sum it up he said that the player population that left from from High Sec so don't blame his Sov changes on number drops. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4782	Posted - 2015.12.02 14:48:38 - [346] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: Do only the 1st Recon (skip the rest) and skip Cargo, Attack of Drones, Extrava. Worlds Collide.....skip all except the following Yes, this is the optimized mission list for blitzing. But I'm going for bounties (and not running Burners), so blitzing missions actually bring my per ISK/hour down. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 902	Posted - 2015.12.02 14:56:27 - [347] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: And yet, you continue to whine. You keep on using that word yet you don't understand its meaning. Were we whining when we called for tech moons to be nerfed? Or when tracking titans were not only blapping frigates in pvp but also printing so much isk they were driving inflation? Pointing out game imbalances is not whining. Missed this. I understand it completely. It's not a game mechanic imbalance. It's an imbalance created by the players. Your problem is that you live in a sea of blues in nullsec, and basically suffer from overpopulation. Sure it gives you some security, but it also causes resource competition. Reduce your blues/population and you will have more resources to share with those who remains. Of course, your level of security will go down a bit; but that is the trade off. Now instead of fixing the real problems which were created by your own alliance, you look to either buff your null income or nerf the hisec income so your turf looks better. So yeah, until your alliance gets its house in order, you are basically whining.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4782	Posted - 2015.12.02 15:06:06 - [348] - Quote PLEX prices and changes to multi-boxing are also two factors influencing high-sec numbers. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13067	Posted - 2015.12.02 16:35:22 - [349] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: baltec1 wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: And yet, you continue to whine. You keep on using that word yet you don't understand its meaning. Were we whining when we called for tech moons to be nerfed? Or when tracking titans were not only blapping frigates in pvp but also printing so much isk they were driving inflation? Pointing out game imbalances is not whining. Missed this. I understand it completely. It's not a game mechanic imbalance. It's an imbalance created by the players. Your problem is that you live in a sea of blues in nullsec, and basically suffer from overpopulation. Sure it gives you some security, but it also causes resource competition. Reduce your blues/population and you will have more resources to share with those who remains. Of course, your level of security will go down a bit; but that is the trade off. Now instead of fixing the real problems which were created by your own alliance, you look to either buff your null income or nerf the hisec income so your turf looks better. So yeah, until your alliance gets its house in order, you are basically whining. This is another example of that prejudice I as talking about. It glosses over the actual game mechanics limitations (ie it's no amount of space will make anomalies pay someone as much as that individual character can make doing the PVE activityes being talked about here) while imagining that it's some kind of issue with "blues". It's not. My Alliance doesn't have near as many blues as Imperium does, we physically control a portion of one null sec region and are constantly at war with out neighbors. A trip to zkill to look at my killboard will should you those local wars. And yet the problems Baltec outlines (while being a member of a huge bloc) affects me the exact same way, because while null sec pve is more than adequate. ot's foolish to do too much of it because of all the interuptions from none blues coming in trying to kill us as well as the actual mechanical limitations of the content. In other words, it is not physically possible to use one character in one sub-capital ship to make the kinds of wealth that one can do as (in ascending order) a member of a high sec incursion fleet, a high sec burner mission blitzer or FW mission runner in a Caracal, Drake or Stealth Bomber. Those are the main things that are broken here, despite all the dodging done by people in this thread. That's why I have an FW alt and an incursion alt, and why I'm taking the character that I was training to carrier blitz lvl 5 missions in low sec (btw that character also has nice Blood Raider and Guristas Standings, I've used it to run missions in Delve and Venal) and training it for burner blitzing. The imbalances are so strong that they lure folks like me away from more dangerous endeavors and into the easy isk making. The is exactly backwards of what the game should be doing. While the game should not force people to do things they do not want (like, for instance, leaving high sec), it also shouldn't be putting the brakes on those of us who would do these things on their own if only they were (relatively) more worth it. Last Week I took this thing into a c3 wormhole (using my incursion running alt): [Dominix, C3 Solo] Domination Large Armor Repairer Domination Large Armor Repairer Domination Large Armor Repairer Drone Damage Amplifier II Drone Damage Amplifier II Imperial Navy Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane Imperial Navy Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane Cap Recharger II Cap Recharger II Cap Recharger II Cap Recharger II Cap Recharger II Large Remote Hull Repairer II Heavy Diminishing Power System Drain I Heavy Diminishing Power System Drain I Heavy Unstable Power Fluctuator I Drone Link Augmentor II Large Remote Armor Repairer II Large Auxiliary Nano Pump II Large Capacitor Control Circuit I Large Capacitor Control Circuit II Hornet EC-300 x10 Salvage Drone I x5 Hobgoblin II x10 Garde II x5 Curator II x5 It was fun. I had a buddy in the same fit (we didn't even have to remote rep each other once or give cap, btw the fit we used had cap teransfer, hull repairer was in cargo. It was fun, and we did get jumped by a small gang of 3 tech 3 destroyers and chased them off. Each of us risked half a bill isk worth of ship on our little day trip. When we went back to normal space and cashed out after 3 hours we had a nice little chunk of change... ...Less change than we would have gotten being in an incursion fleet, spamming fw missions or SOLO blitzing lvl 4 missions together (without doing any burner style missions) in good old Lanngisi. How does it make sense that we went into the most dangerous space EVE Online has and PVE'd successfully and ended up with less wealth than had we just stayed in the safest part of EVE Online (or just went into low sec with cheap as hell bombers and did FW missions and made way more)? If you can explain to me how that makes any damn sense, I'll swear i'll drop it. Good luck on that though lol.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2120	Posted - 2015.12.02 18:35:21 - [350] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: Yea you don't miss the opportunity to brag when you can. You've been playing Eve for 10 years compared to me only playing the game 2.5 years so I can't compete with you in regards to Eve experience. But just because you have the experience doesn't mean that players with less experience should just accept your way of viewing how things should be in Eve without even considering their opinions. You alone don't make up the player base. Regardless if you're right or wrong, if the player base doesn't accept your propose way of thinking then it shouldn't be accepted. if eve were balanced like that then we would never need the phrase "adapt or die" Thank bob eve isn't balanced like that. @ChainsawPlankto

Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4783	Posted - 2015.12.02 18:37:21 - [351] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: How does it make sense that we went into the most dangerous space EVE Online has and PVE'd successfully and ended up with less wealth than had we just stayed in the safest part of EVE Online (or just went into low sec with cheap as hell bombers and did FW missions and made way more)? If you can explain to me how that makes any damn sense, I'll swear i'll drop it. Good luck on that though lol. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't C3s on the 'lighter' side of wormhole income? They're kind of the equivalent wormhole equivalent of high-sec L3 missions, are they not? I have a limited amount of game time in wormholes (mostly C4s), so I can't really comment beyond that I know you can make obscene ISK in wormhole space - but it takes a lot logistically, and it's not without risk. I will concede the point on high-sec Incursions because I really don't know very much about them other than they seem to be an ISK faucet for predominantly null-sec players (not necessarily exclusively, but a sizeable segment). I'm not entirely convinced that restricting Incursions to low-sec would warrant continued player investment in terms of risk vs. reward. The high-sec community as a whole has never really viewed Incursions as anything more than an 'elite' or exclusive activity, anyway. I think everyone agrees Faction Warfare is broken to some extent. I made 250k LP in just under an hour using nothing more than a cheap T2 fit stealth bomber (and this was only at Caldari T2). If it wasn't so incredibly boring optimizing the 80 or so odd jumps required to string a half dozen missions together I'd probably find it more interesting (or if my Faction was at level T4 or T5). From everything everyone is saying it really sounds like null-sec just, well... sucks. Everyone's trying to kill you all of the time, it's obscenely expensive to live there and a person can't really eek out anydecent kind of living. Or it's the complete opposite and it's boring as hell and there's just not a lot to do. The only thing I'm certain of is that I don't have a very favorable opinion of null-sec, and nothing in this discussion has really given me pause to think otherwise. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13069	Posted - 2015.12.02 19:04:02 - [352] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Please correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't C3s on the 'lighter' side of wormhole income? They're kind of the equivalent wormhole equivalent of high-sec L3 missions, are they not? I have a limited amount of game time in wormholes (mostly C4s), so I can't really comment beyond that I know you can make obscene ISK in wormhole space - but it takes a lot logistically, and it's not without risk. One can make a good solid 60-80 mil an hour in a c3. This is about right for the amount of threat the NPCs can provide. and it's dangerous space, someone could log in there in a recon and you'd not know it till they were on you. Or you put alts on the exits and listen for people coming in, but that takes alts. Or you could just do this in high sec with a ship that cost about as much, with next to zero risk and much less effort (no scanning down sigs, bookmarking entrances and exist etc) while making the same isk. 500 mil Domi in WH space solo or a 600 mil mach in high sec solo. Which one makes more financial sense? The answer is ALWAYS high sec. That's the problem (in this case it's yet again the problem of blitzing). The fix is to either eliminate blitzing OR make more stuff (like WH anomalies) some how 'bltizable' so that people who put in more effort/creativity can wring more wealth out of dangerous space like they can in safer space. Quote: From everything everyone is saying it really sounds like null-sec just, well... sucks. Everyone's trying to kill you all of the time, it's obscenely expensive to live there and a person can't really eek out any decent kind of living. Or it's the complete opposite and it's boring as hell and there's just not a lot to do. The only thing I'm certain of is that I don't have a very favorable opinion of null-sec, and nothing in this discussion has really given me pause to think otherwise. Null sec, like WH space, is imo mostly fine. The income is good enough, the PVE is no less interesting than any other, there are chances for epic drops, and having to fight to maintain the abilty to PVE makes the PVE more worthwhile. What's broken is some aspects of PVE in safer space that ends up devaluing the efforts of people who don't mind playing in more dangerous space. While all PVE should be worthwhile, in a game that says "more danger equals higher potential rewards", you shouldn't have to choose between "less isk and ok rewards but also more fun vs better isk and more safety". Of course, as it's been suggested in this thread, people in dangerous space could "just use more alts" to counter these inherent balance deficiencies, and then pretend like having to use more alts in dangerous space to equal what can be done with ONE CHARACTER in SAFE SPACE is totally the way it should work
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17044	Posted - 2015.12.02 19:28:28 - [353] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: Missed this. I understand it completely. It's not a game mechanic imbalance. It's an imbalance created by the players. Your problem is that you live in a sea of blues in nullsec, and basically suffer from overpopulation. Sure it gives you some security, but it also causes resource competition. Reduce your blues/population and you will have more resources to share with those who remains. Of course, your level of security will go down a bit; but that is the trade off. Now instead of fixing the real problems which were created by your own alliance, you look to either buff your null income or nerf the hisec income so your turf looks better. So yeah, until your alliance gets its house in order, you are basically whining. So your answer to fixing the hardcap on how many people can PVE in null is to depopulate null... Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
FarosWarrior De Muuzevangers 3	Posted - 2015.12.02 20:27:40 - [354] - Quote The point that a lot of people here are making concerning null-sec vs high-sec income is the following: High-sec: 1 PLAYER (not char) can take on infite amounts of missions in the same system. 100 players can take the same number of infinite (see what I did there?) missions, run them all and complete them in the SAME system on the SAME day. 1000 players can do the same etc. etc. 1 PLAYER with 2-3 alts doesn't make 2-3 times as much isk, more like 80-90% more per char because you have to switch to shoot/move/not die. Null-sec (anomalies!) 1 player in 1 system can run all the sites he wants all day long. Depending on the system you can have several hubs, havens or sanctums at once, and you can cycle between them. Add a player to that system, and if your system isn't true 0.0 you will already start to have fights over the best anomalies. Add even more players ( like a dozen) and a lot of people will start fighting over which site belongs to them. Null-sec anomaly income doesn't scale so well with more people in system. Blitzing high-sec missions always yields more isk/hour than nullsec anomalies (annotation needed), and it scales incredibly well. You can have 1 player making 150m/hour, and if you add 100 more, those 100 players can all make 150m an hour. In null-sec, 1 player can make 60-80m an hour in an afktar. Add 100 players and about 95 of those will be twiddling thumbs in station doing nothing at all. The point is not only that high-sec income is higher than nullsec income, the point is that high-sec income is infinite, and null-sec isn't. I have run anoms in nullsec and am running missions in high-sec, I know the struggle and the ease of both.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4784	Posted - 2015.12.02 20:43:45 - [355] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Or you could just do this in high sec with a ship that cost about as much, with next to zero risk and much less effort (no scanning down sigs, bookmarking entrances and exist etc) while making the same isk. 500 mil Domi in WH space solo or a 600 mil mach in high sec solo. Which one makes more financial sense? The answer is ALWAYS high sec. That's the problem (in this case it's yet again the problem of blitzing). The fix is to either eliminate blitzing OR make more stuff (like WH anomalies) some how 'bltizable' so that people who put in more effort/creativity can wring more wealth out of dangerous space like they can in safer space. You're citing an outdated and extreme example of L3 blitzing. 2000 ISK/LP is probably unrealistic to use on a consistent basis, and I think the reality is more in the 1400-1600 ISK/LP range. If memory serves, there was also some recent discussion on how the 80m ISK ceiling was (for whatever reasons) no longer achievable and that 40-50m ISK/hour was a more accurate L3 blitz number. Running standard L4s (shooting and looting) in 0.5-0.6 systems with typical (non-SoE) Empire agents will yield anywhere from 30-40m ISK/hour on average (-¦ skills and the specific Faction). This can be greatly enhanced by accepting missions that damage opposing Faction standings. The odd lucky implant drop or storyline mission will further augment this. I've been able to hit over 200m ISK/hour running three characters, but this was influenced heavily by favorable mission draws. I have consistently broken the 100m ISK/hour mark blitzing L4s/Burners solo with standard Empire agents, although this required a fairly substantial initial investment (one I'm still paying off). I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 904	Posted - 2015.12.02 21:55:41 - [356] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: Missed this. I understand it completely. It's not a game mechanic imbalance. It's an imbalance created by the players. Your problem is that you live in a sea of blues in nullsec, and basically suffer from overpopulation. Sure it gives you some security, but it also causes resource competition. Reduce your blues/population and you will have more resources to share with those who remains. Of course, your level of security will go down a bit; but that is the trade off. Now instead of fixing the real problems which were created by your own alliance, you look to either buff your null income or nerf the hisec income so your turf looks better. So yeah, until your alliance gets its house in order, you are basically whining. So your answer to fixing the hardcap on how many people can PVE in null is to depopulate null... Or maybe you spread out some. After all, ya'll pretty much focused in one area of nullsec. Vast swaths are pretty much barren, and I know it's mostly because they are so damn far out there. Players want to stay within jump distance so they can get their goods from/to hisec, and that is also a problem; but more of logistics and bad structure design by CCP. A somewhat good suggestion I heard in another thread, merge all the missions. Have mission agents give out security, distribution, and mining missions. No specialized agents for mining missions, no specialized agents for distribution mission, etc. Put all the missions in the same pool. This could possibly kill blitzing as you will prolly have a lot more missions to decline to stick to the good ones. The real problems with mission running is that they are predictable; and since they are, can easily be farmed by blitzing. Payouts/rewards are fine. Just need to switch up the missions and make them unpredictable and different. I'm not saying completely new mission, but maybe jazz up the ones we have. Change triggers, add more neut and webbing towers, add more scrams, add a little more dps. Now, someone answer me why there are not any L5 mission agents in NPC null, and why can't there be some way to install mission agents in SOV null?
FarosWarrior De Muuzevangers 3	Posted - 2015.12.02 22:06:14 - [357] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: baltec1 wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: Missed this. I understand it completely. It's not a game mechanic imbalance. It's an imbalance created by the players. Your problem is that you live in a sea of blues in nullsec, and basically suffer from overpopulation. Sure it gives you some security, but it also causes resource competition. Reduce your blues/population and you will have more resources to share with those who remains. Of course, your level of security will go down a bit; but that is the trade off. Now instead of fixing the real problems which were created by your own alliance, you look to either buff your null income or nerf the hisec income so your turf looks better. So yeah, until your alliance gets its house in order, you are basically whining. So your answer to fixing the hardcap on how many people can PVE in null is to depopulate null... Or maybe you spread out some. After all, ya'll pretty much focused in one area of nullsec. Vast swaths are pretty much barren, and I know it's mostly because they are so damn far out there. Players want to stay within jump distance so they can get their goods from/to hisec, and that is also a problem; but more of logistics and bad structure design by CCP. A somewhat good suggestion I heard in another thread, merge all the missions. Have mission agents give out security, distribution, and mining missions. No specialized agents for mining missions, no specialized agents for distribution mission, etc. Put all the missions in the same pool. This could possibly kill blitzing as you will prolly have a lot more missions to decline to stick to the good ones. The real problems with mission running is that they are predictable; and since they are, can easily be farmed by blitzing. Payouts/rewards are fine. Just need to switch up the missions and make them unpredictable and different. I'm not saying completely new mission, but maybe jazz up the ones we have. Change triggers, add more neut and webbing towers, add more scrams, add a little more dps. Now, someone answer me why there are not any L5 mission agents in NPC null, and why can't there be some way to install mission agents in SOV null? Or: make it so that blitzing is completely impossible...
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 904	Posted - 2015.12.02 22:17:38 - [358] - Quote FarosWarrior wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: baltec1 wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: Missed this. I understand it completely. It's not a game mechanic imbalance. It's an imbalance created by the players. Your problem is that you live in a sea of blues in nullsec, and basically suffer from overpopulation. Sure it gives you some security, but it also causes resource competition. Reduce your blues/population and you will have more resources to share with those who remains. Of course, your level of security will go down a bit; but that is the trade off. Now instead of fixing the real problems which were created by your own alliance, you look to either buff your null income or nerf the hisec income so your turf looks better. So yeah, until your alliance gets its house in order, you are basically whining. So your answer to fixing the hardcap on how many people can PVE in null is to depopulate null... Or maybe you spread out some. After all, ya'll pretty much focused in one area of nullsec. Vast swaths are pretty much barren, and I know it's mostly because they are so damn far out there. Players want to stay within jump distance so they can get their goods from/to hisec, and that is also a problem; but more of logistics and bad structure design by CCP. A somewhat good suggestion I heard in another thread, merge all the missions. Have mission agents give out security, distribution, and mining missions. No specialized agents for mining missions, no specialized agents for distribution mission, etc. Put all the missions in the same pool. This could possibly kill blitzing as you will prolly have a lot more missions to decline to stick to the good ones. The real problems with mission running is that they are predictable; and since they are, can easily be farmed by blitzing. Payouts/rewards are fine. Just need to switch up the missions and make them unpredictable and different. I'm not saying completely new mission, but maybe jazz up the ones we have. Change triggers, add more neut and webbing towers, add more scrams, add a little more dps. Now, someone answer me why there are not any L5 mission agents in NPC null, and why can't there be some way to install mission agents in SOV null? Or: make it so that blitzing is completely impossible... Who asked you?
FarosWarrior De Muuzevangers 3	Posted - 2015.12.02 22:45:27 - [359] - Quote Nobody asked me anything, but since it is a public forum I have all the right to respond... And if the problem is blitzing = more isk that healthy then you simply remove the blitzing part. Make it so that certain missions which are currently easy to blitz and that make a lot of isk/lp aren't blitzable anymore. If you remove mission types and make 1 big mission pool you will probably cause more annoyance if anything. Problem solved. Null-seccers are happy that highsec doesn't make ungodly amounts of isk anymore, and the carebears can do what they like which is solo lvl4's.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 276	Posted - 2015.12.02 22:49:10 - [360] - Quote FarosWarrior wrote: The point that a lot of people here are making concerning null-sec vs high-sec income is the following: High-sec: 1 PLAYER (not char) can take on infite amounts of missions in the same system. 100 players can take the same number of infinite (see what I did there?) missions, run them all and complete them in the SAME system on the SAME day. 1000 players can do the same etc. etc. 1 PLAYER with 2-3 alts doesn't make 2-3 times as much isk, more like 80-90% more per char because you have to switch to shoot/move/not die. Null-sec (anomalies!) 1 player in 1 system can run all the sites he wants all day long. Depending on the system you can have several hubs, havens or sanctums at once, and you can cycle between them. Add a player to that system, and if your system isn't true 0.0 you will already start to have fights over the best anomalies. Add even more players ( like a dozen) and a lot of people will start fighting over which site belongs to them. Null-sec anomaly income doesn't scale so well with more people in system. Blitzing high-sec missions always yields more isk/hour than nullsec anomalies (annotation needed), and it scales incredibly well. You can have 1 player making 150m/hour, and if you add 100 more, those 100 players can all make 150m an hour. In null-sec, 1 player can make 60-80m an hour in an afktar. Add 100 players and about 95 of those will be twiddling thumbs in station doing nothing at all. The point is not only that high-sec income is higher than nullsec income, the point is that high-sec income is infinite, and null-sec isn't. I have run anoms in nullsec and am running missions in high-sec, I know the struggle and the ease of both. Then this is a problem in null sec and should be looked at. Perhaps by buffing and adding lots more missions that are available there. As for anoms, I hear that there is a lot of empty space in null so the players just need to spread themselves out a bit more. By all means this does not warrant a nerf to hi-sec income. The income in hi-sec is infinite but very limited in quality. The only way for a normal missions runner to make above 80 mill an hour in hi-sec is to have multiple accounts and the missions that pay anything decent are only SOE & Thurker Tribe.

FarosWarrior De Muuzevangers 3	Posted - 2015.12.02 23:03:54 - [361] - Quote Quote: Then this is a problem in null sec and should be looked at. Perhaps by buffing and adding lots more missions that are available there. As for anoms, I hear that there is a lot of empty space in null so the players just need to spread themselves out a bit more. While it is very much true that part of the problem is also in nullsec because many of the systems are unused, we would also need a significant buff to nullsec PvE mechanics. I ran anomalies in Providence (yeah I know, not the best blablabla), but as soon as you have 5-6 people in system that are running said anoms, the system is getting full and overtaxed. What I'm meaning is that highsec doesn't have such a limit. As it is now a system can more comfortably support a whole army of miners than a hand full of anomaly runners. Quote: By all means this does not warrant a nerf to hi-sec income. The income in hi-sec is infinite but very limited in quality. The only way for a normal missions runner to make above 80 mill an hour in hi-sec is to have multiple accounts and the missions that pay anything decent are only SOE & Thurker Tribe. I wasn't suggesting a nerf to high-sec income, perhaps only to the ability to blitz many of them. And SoE/Thukker aren't the only corps 'worth' running for, for others you just have to be a bit more creative.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2121	Posted - 2015.12.02 23:20:05 - [362] - Quote get rid of blitzing and I just go to afk mjd fof barghests (maybe golems, the MJD cd reduction is pretty awesome), and run a few at the same time. At least with blitzing I have to be at the keyboard and pay attention. Agents used to give out missions at random. The distribution was based on what division the agent worked for. And no one liked it then, I doubt anyone would want that system coming back, or worse, every mission being completely random. as far as "randomized missions" who cares if it is predictable or not if it is still easy. And if it is too hard, that is almost equally as uninteresting. Look at drifters, they are kinda easy to kill, except for the 700k damage doomsday. The switch from too easy to too hard swaps way too fast. although now it looks like people have learned to sig tank them and imo that pushes it into uninteresting territory. Obfuscating the triggers a bit already happens, In many missions the spawns are typically slightly random. however it is still pretty easy to tell, that could get a little more random. lv5 null agents would probably give out so much lp they are imbalanced, or drop normal mission runner's lp value (or both). although would probably be content worth fighting over. Standard agents, sounds like it was hinted at with citadels. My main concern is how much farming would occur. I can only imagine an LP value curbstomp. Maybe that would be a good thing overall? Or perhaps it would draw enough player hunters that it never happens? At the same time I can hear groans of "I did enough missions in high, I want something different in null" Personally I'd rather see something more group oriented, and potentially contestable, and certainly yoinkable. @ChainsawPlankto
Hasikan Miallok Republic University Minmatar Republic 1700	Posted - 2015.12.02 23:34:15 - [363] - Quote It would be interesting to know exactly how many people actually blitz missions for 100 mill per hour plus. It seems to me the bulk of mission runners get nothing like that and many newer players spend over an hour on one level 4 mission that may return 20 mill ISK if they are lucky. It is highly unlikely that the handful of people making 100 mill plus per hour as an ACTIVE activity are online enough to be having that much effect on the EVE economy. Nerfing mission running on the basis that some minuscule percentage of older high SPcharacters can make good ISK in level 4 missions (rather than running 5s in a Carrier in losec or whatever ) is likely to seriously effect newer players and probably be detrimental overall.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2121	Posted - 2015.12.02 23:39:57 - [364] - Quote FarosWarrior wrote: Nobody asked me anything, but since it is a public forum I have all the right to respond... And if the problem is blitzing = more isk that healthy then you simply remove the blitzing part. Make it so that certain missions which are currently easy to blitz and that make a lot of isk/lp aren't blitzable anymore. If you remove mission types and make 1 big mission pool you will probably cause more annoyance if anything. Problem solved. Null-seccers are happy that highsec doesn't make ungodly amounts of isk anymore, and the carebears can do what they like which is solo lvl4's. I think it is worth noting the primary reward from blitzing is LP, and LP is an isk sink. personally I'd rather have more isk sinks than we do now (how many more is a good question that I have no idea how to even start to answer). Although the 700b XL citadel bpos should be interesting in that regard. @ChainsawPlankto
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4785	Posted - 2015.12.02 23:56:58 - [365] - Quote Hasikan Miallok wrote: It would be interesting to know exactly how many people actually blitz missions for 100 mill per hour plus. It seems to me the bulk of mission runners get nothing like that and many newer players spend over an hour on one level 4 mission that may return 20 mill ISK if they are lucky. It is highly unlikely that the handful of people making 100 mill plus per hour as an ACTIVE activity are online enough to be having that much effect on the EVE economy. That was kind of my point as well. I could be blitzing L4 SoE missions and Burners, but I'm not. It's just not my thing, but more power to anyone who wants to invest the time and ISK to pull it off. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2122	Posted - 2015.12.03 00:23:16 - [366] - Quote Hasikan Miallok wrote: It would be interesting to know exactly how many people actually blitz missions for 100 mill per hour plus. It seems to me the bulk of mission runners get nothing like that and many newer players spend over an hour on one level 4 mission that may return 20 mill ISK if they are lucky. It is highly unlikely that the handful of people making 100 mill plus per hour as an ACTIVE activity are online enough to be having that much effect on the EVE economy. Nerfing mission running on the basis that some minuscule percentage of older high SPcharacters can make good ISK in level 4 missions (rather than running 5s in a Carrier in losec or whatever ) is likely to seriously effect newer players and probably be detrimental overall. to have CCP's data, now wouldn't that be something. I would love to have the answers to that one. @ChainsawPlankto
Hasikan Miallok Republic University Minmatar Republic 1702	Posted - 2015.12.03 01:24:49 - [367] - Quote Chainsaw Plankton wrote: I think it is worth noting the primary reward from blitzing is LP, and LP is an isk sink. personally I'd rather have more isk sinks than we do now (how many more is a good question that I have no idea how to even start to answer). Although the 700b XL citadel bpos should be interesting in that regard. LP is an ISK sink. However SOE level IVs are more or less ISK neutral. You pretty much invest all the LP plus any ISK from reward/bounty to get assets, generally some SOE Probe Launchers or a Stratios. Selling those assets later to another player in return for ISK does not inject any ISK into the game .
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4785	Posted - 2015.12.03 01:32:30 - [368] - Quote Hasikan Miallok wrote: However SOE level IVs are more or less ISK neutral. You pretty much invest all the LP plus any ISK from reward/bounty to get assets, generally some SOE Probe Launchers or a Stratios. Selling those assets later to another player in return for ISK does not inject any ISK into the game. I'd love to see the price of Faction modules reduced by half or even three quarters. Then players might actually start utilizing them more than they do. It's ridiculous that a Faction BCU or gun costs 50x more than a comparable T2 version. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Hasikan Miallok Republic University Minmatar Republic 1702	Posted - 2015.12.03 01:36:20 - [369] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Hasikan Miallok wrote: However SOE level IVs are more or less ISK neutral. You pretty much invest all the LP plus any ISK from reward/bounty to get assets, generally some SOE Probe Launchers or a Stratios. Selling those assets later to another player in return for ISK does not inject any ISK into the game. I'd love to see the price of Faction modules reduced by half or even three quarters. Then players might actually start utilizing them more than they do. It's ridiculous that a Faction BCU or gun costs 50x more than a comparable T2 version. True, you tend to think twice when just one module costs more than the hull you are fitting it to :D
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2124	Posted - 2015.12.03 02:02:01 - [370] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Hasikan Miallok wrote: However SOE level IVs are more or less ISK neutral. You pretty much invest all the LP plus any ISK from reward/bounty to get assets, generally some SOE Probe Launchers or a Stratios. Selling those assets later to another player in return for ISK does not inject any ISK into the game. I'd love to see the price of Faction modules reduced by half or even three quarters. Then players might actually start utilizing them more than they do. It's ridiculous that a Faction BCU or gun costs 50x more than a comparable T2 version. most of that cost is the tag cost. most people are afraid to "mess up" their standings or whatever excuse. also with more people running SoE missions less are running the faction kill missions for the tags for bcus. @ChainsawPlankto

Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4785	Posted - 2015.12.03 03:16:45 - [371] - Quote Chainsaw Plankton wrote: most of that cost is the tag cost. most people are afraid to "mess up" their standings or whatever excuse. also with more people running SoE missions less are running the faction kill missions for the tags for bcus. I haven't really seen tag prices increase though - have they? If you loot FW missions (not sure how many do) you can scoop a lot of tags there as well. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.03 05:35:39 - [372] - Quote Hasikan Miallok wrote: It would be interesting to know exactly how many people actually blitz missions for 100 mill per hour plus. It seems to me the bulk of mission runners get nothing like that and many newer players spend over an hour on one level 4 mission that may return 20 mill ISK if they are lucky. It is highly unlikely that the handful of people making 100 mill plus per hour as an ACTIVE activity are online enough to be having that much effect on the EVE economy. Nerfing mission running on the basis that some minuscule percentage of older high SPcharacters can make good ISK in level 4 missions (rather than running 5s in a Carrier in losec or whatever ) is likely to seriously effect newer players and probably be detrimental overall. The nerfs being talked about would only impact the people who blitz missions. The people who dont blitz would see no change. Its also worth pointing out the average pilot running anoms in null also isnt maxing out the system. The afktar will net around 45 mil/hr in perfect circumstances and it will die in the not too distant future. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.03 05:41:35 - [373] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: Or maybe you spread out some. After all, ya'll pretty much focused in one area of nullsec. Vast swaths are pretty much barren, and I know it's mostly because they are so damn far out there. Players want to stay within jump distance so they can get their goods from/to hisec, and that is also a problem; but more of logistics and bad structure design by CCP. Logistics isnt the reason large parts of null are empty. They are empty because the systems are terrible in quality to the point where it is simply not worth investing in. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 747	Posted - 2015.12.03 06:15:17 - [374] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Hasikan Miallok wrote: It would be interesting to know exactly how many people actually blitz missions for 100 mill per hour plus. It seems to me the bulk of mission runners get nothing like that and many newer players spend over an hour on one level 4 mission that may return 20 mill ISK if they are lucky. It is highly unlikely that the handful of people making 100 mill plus per hour as an ACTIVE activity are online enough to be having that much effect on the EVE economy. Nerfing mission running on the basis that some minuscule percentage of older high SPcharacters can make good ISK in level 4 missions (rather than running 5s in a Carrier in losec or whatever ) is likely to seriously effect newer players and probably be detrimental overall. The nerfs being talked about would only impact the people who blitz missions. The people who dont blitz would see no change. Its also worth pointing out the average pilot running anoms in null also isnt maxing out the system. The afktar will net around 45 mil/hr in perfect circumstances and it will die in the not too distant future. What?! 45mil an hour if you were skilled like a noob maybe. You literally just told us three pages ago that an ishtar made as much as the 90mil an hour blitz level 3 guys... we literally can pull your own words to prove you are lying. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 276	Posted - 2015.12.03 06:16:56 - [375] - Quote Actually I wouldn't have a problem if they reduce LP payout from missions if they add more difficult mission rats plus increase the bounties in them. Would also eliminate the blitzing abuse.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4785	Posted - 2015.12.03 06:55:03 - [376] - Quote I like shooting rats. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.03 11:09:47 - [377] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: What?! 45mil an hour if you were skilled like a noob maybe. You literally just told us three pages ago that an ishtar made as much as the 90mil an hour blitz level 3 guys... we literally can pull your own words to prove you are lying. No I did not and have never said an afk ishtar will make 90 mil/hr. Please stop telling blatant lies. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 747	Posted - 2015.12.03 14:43:11 - [378] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: What?! 45mil an hour if you were skilled like a noob maybe. You literally just told us three pages ago that an ishtar made as much as the 90mil an hour blitz level 3 guys... we literally can pull your own words to prove you are lying. No I did not and have never said an afk ishtar will make 90 mil/hr. Please stop telling blatant lies. You very incorrectly said that running the best setup in anoms would net you the same as a lvl3 blitzer in High Sec, which you incorrectly pegged at 100mil an hour. Then you went on to say that you were in a RHML Raven in HS making 84mil blitzing lvl 3's which would have put you ahead of Stoic's optimal Rail Tengu/Mach numbers. Then you went on to say you were talking about Vindicators... So basically, you Fudded your way through several posts, none of which are true and none of which have real numbers. AFK Ishtar is EASILY 75mil to 85mil per hour in pure bounty plus the odd boost from loot fairy. And because a fully upgraded system now has a minimum of 5 high end anoms, you can run a few in each system you have access to. I love your attempts to be sly, you just keep lying about everything though. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13070	Posted - 2015.12.03 14:43:17 - [379] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: What?! 45mil an hour if you were skilled like a noob maybe. You literally just told us three pages ago that an ishtar made as much as the 90mil an hour blitz level 3 guys... we literally can pull your own words to prove you are lying. No I did not and have never said an afk ishtar will make 90 mil/hr. Please stop telling blatant lies. I was the one who mentioned 90 mil an hour, with a deadspace fit Mach (which costs about 8 times as much as an afktar). somehow he can't tell you from me. See, it's that prejudice way of thinking I mentioned before rearing it's head again (people with prejudices see only some form of collective group instead of the individuals who make up that group). In this case, it's a matter of 'all you null seccers look alike'... despite the fact that we are in Alliances that are diametrically opposed to each other and don't even agree on several aspects of pve.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13070	Posted - 2015.12.03 14:56:53 - [380] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: baltec1 wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: What?! 45mil an hour if you were skilled like a noob maybe. You literally just told us three pages ago that an ishtar made as much as the 90mil an hour blitz level 3 guys... we literally can pull your own words to prove you are lying. No I did not and have never said an afk ishtar will make 90 mil/hr. Please stop telling blatant lies. You very incorrectly said that running the best setup in anoms would net you the same as a lvl3 blitzer in High Sec, which you incorrectly pegged at 100mil an hour. Then you went on to say that you were in a RHML Raven in HS making 84mil blitzing lvl 3's which would have put you ahead of Stoic's optimal Rail Tengu/Mach numbers. Then you went on to say you were talking about Vindicators... So basically, you Fudded your way through several posts, none of which are true and none of which have real numbers. AFK Ishtar is EASILY 75mil to 85mil per hour in pure bounty plus the odd boost from loot fairy. And because a fully upgraded system now has a minimum of 5 high end anoms, you can run a few in each system you have access to. I love your attempts to be sly, you just keep lying about everything though. Another aspect of prejudice is over-estimating what someone else has while simultaneously under-estimating one's own privilege. "High Sec Privilege" needs to be checked. The heart of that privilege is not being able to understand that the practical safety offers by CONCORD is supremely valuable even if it can be overcome in certain ways. It's not unlike real life where people benefiting from affluence don't understand the advantages they have (and thus consider less advantaged people 'lazy' for not doing better...). 75 mil per hour from null anomalies is 25 mil ticks. That's not even physically or mathematically possible from a ship that does dps in the 600 (specific damage type drones) to 700 (Geckos + lighter drones) range. To cross the 20 mil tick barrer with a single ship you need at least 950 dps , the 25 mil barrier is Carrier/marauder/pirate battleship territory and you simply cannot be afk lest your want to make less isk and/or die. Meanwhile, in "high security space"...

Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4786	Posted - 2015.12.03 16:42:55 - [381] - Quote Can we revisit this 90m ISK/hour estimate blitzing L3s? I seriously doubt this is obtainable, and rather than quoting threads I'd like to see some of those championing L3 blitzing post their fits and actual numbers achieved. This includes a breakdown of mission rewards, NPC bounties, salvage where applicable and ISK/LP conversion - in addition to which Empire Faction and system type. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13071	Posted - 2015.12.03 17:04:26 - [382] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Can we revisit this 90m ISK/hour estimate blitzing L3s? I seriously doubt this is obtainable, and rather than quoting threads I'd like to see some of those championing L3 blitzing post their fits and actual numbers achieved. This includes a breakdown of mission rewards, NPC bounties, salvage where applicable and ISK/LP conversion - in addition to which Empire Faction and system type. Sure, go ahead. But understand this, if it were 70 mil, it would still represent an unbalanced situation, because safety (in the form of responding npc police) has a value. That's what gets lost in talking rewards with people (particularly those who don't recognize their high sec privilages). In the GD discussion about incursions someone mentioned that you can make more from null incursions. In all, a null incursion HQ site pays like 13.5 mil isk more than a high sec one. Which is why High Sec incursions get farmed by professional communities that formed and null incursions go largely undone. It's why the 10% more LP you get from low sec missions means jack squat also. Because CCP doesn't really understand the value of safety, they don't knwo how to properly scale rewards to be meaningful. 70 mil an hour in high sec blitzing lvl 3s never losing a ship is preferable to 90 mil an hour in null dodging nullified interceptors and hot dropping stealth bombers in null (or 80 mil an hour doing C3s in a wormhole). But buffing null past that 90 mil per hour (in liquid isk) would also be a big mistake as would upping the amount of wealth you can wring from a wormyhole, so the obvious best balance approach is to look at the things that are actually problems (blitzing, high sec incursions, FW missions, the afk-ability of null anoms etc) and cutting some of that down.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4787	Posted - 2015.12.03 17:10:19 - [383] - Quote Yes, if it were 70m ISK/hour - but I don't even think this is achievable. I think the real number is under 50m ISK/hour, which makes any comparison to null-sec income somewhat moot (no one is going to blitz L3s for 35-40m when they can easily earn more than that in null). As I said, let's run the numbers and find out what the realistic achievable rate is (and using a realistic ISK/LP conversion of around 1200 ISK/LP). I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.03 18:06:04 - [384] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: baltec1 wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: What?! 45mil an hour if you were skilled like a noob maybe. You literally just told us three pages ago that an ishtar made as much as the 90mil an hour blitz level 3 guys... we literally can pull your own words to prove you are lying. No I did not and have never said an afk ishtar will make 90 mil/hr. Please stop telling blatant lies. You very incorrectly said that running the best setup in anoms would net you the same as a lvl3 blitzer in High Sec, which you incorrectly pegged at 100mil an hour. Then you went on to say that you were in a RHML Raven in HS making 84mil blitzing lvl 3's which would have put you ahead of Stoic's optimal Rail Tengu/Mach numbers. Then you went on to say you were talking about Vindicators... So basically, you Fudded your way through several posts, none of which are true and none of which have real numbers. AFK Ishtar is EASILY 75mil to 85mil per hour in pure bounty plus the odd boost from loot fairy. And because a fully upgraded system now has a minimum of 5 high end anoms, you can run a few in each system you have access to. I love your attempts to be sly, you just keep lying about everything though. Quote that passage of text, you will find that you are talking bullshit. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.03 18:26:22 - [385] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Can we revisit this 90m ISK/hour estimate blitzing L3s? I seriously doubt this is obtainable, and rather than quoting threads I'd like to see some of those championing L3 blitzing post their fits and actual numbers achieved. This includes a breakdown of mission rewards, NPC bounties, salvage where applicable and ISK/LP conversion - in addition to which Empire Faction and system type. Otherwise we can add this claim to cold fusion and crop circles. Looking back you were there at ground zero when this was discovered. But here we are anyway. This was done With the following. [Machariel, Level - 3] Gyrostabilizer II Republic Fleet Gyrostabilizer Republic Fleet Gyrostabilizer Republic Fleet Gyrostabilizer Signal Amplifier II Signal Amplifier II Medium Armor Repairer II Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range Script Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range Script Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range Script Sensor Booster II, Scan Resolution Script 100MN Microwarpdrive II 800mm Repeating Cannon II, Phased Plasma L 800mm Repeating Cannon II, Phased Plasma L 800mm Repeating Cannon II, Phased Plasma L 800mm Repeating Cannon II, Phased Plasma L 800mm Repeating Cannon II, Phased Plasma L 800mm Repeating Cannon II, Phased Plasma L 800mm Repeating Cannon II, Phased Plasma L Drone Link Augmentor II Large Hyperspatial Velocity Optimizer I Large Hyperspatial Velocity Optimizer I Large Hyperspatial Velocity Optimizer I Warden II x4 Hobgoblin II x5 Implants: 5% dmg: ss-905 5% dmg: LP1005 10% warp speed: ws-610 Warp speed: 5.18 AU/s Guns: 1005 DPS Range: 4.8km+69km I would like to point out that improvements have been made on the above fit which has given it even faster warp speeds. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4788	Posted - 2015.12.03 20:29:01 - [386] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Looking back you were there at ground zero when this was discovered. Probably, but I've lost track of many of these threads. Thanks for posting the spreadsheet analysis. It looks like if we use an ISK/LP conversion ratio of 2000 (which seems a tad on the high side), 80m ISK/hour is achievable. On the low side, 55m ISK/hour. So a happy medium is probably somewhere in the middle around 67.5m ISK/hour. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4790	Posted - 2015.12.03 21:08:24 - [387] - Quote Just to do a quick comparison, I ran Gone Beserk with a non-SoE 0.5 agent. The mission rewards were 143500 (12%) lower. It took me 00:05:48 start to finish, which was shooting everything. I had a faster mission warp speed but arguably my drone, gunnery and other applicable skills are not 100% (mostly IV with some V). I earned 1689 LP which is 143 (8%) less. I will be lucky to get a 1000 ISK/LP conversion with a non-SoE agent. I didn't blitz it - but this will yield higher bounties. No salvage. Mission rewards: 1.08m ISK LP rewards: 1.69m ISK (1000 ISK/LP) Bounties: 1.68m ISK Grand total: 4.45m ISK / 00:05:48, or 44.5m ISK/hour if I continue at this rate. A few observations. First, unless you use a SoE agent in the perfect system, you're never going to break 50m ISK/hour blitzing or even just running L3s with the Machariel fit. Second, you cannot keep up a blitz pace indefinitely. At some point you're going to start burning out, making mistakes (or reading forums) which will impact your ISK/hour. There is a lot more micromanagement involved in blitzing or running missions as opposed to shooting battleship spawns in anomalies. Third, the ISK/LP conversion is the real wild card here. The 80m ISK/hour threshold should be considered an upper limit under ideal conditions with perfect skills and favorable mission conditions. You start with 80m ISK/hour potential and go down from there. How fast depends on you. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 904	Posted - 2015.12.03 22:31:45 - [388] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Arthur Aihaken wrote: Can we revisit this 90m ISK/hour estimate blitzing L3s? I seriously doubt this is obtainable, and rather than quoting threads I'd like to see some of those championing L3 blitzing post their fits and actual numbers achieved. This includes a breakdown of mission rewards, NPC bounties, salvage where applicable and ISK/LP conversion - in addition to which Empire Faction and system type. Sure, go ahead. But understand this, if it were 70 mil, it would still represent an unbalanced situation, because safety (in the form of responding npc police) has a value. That's what gets lost in talking rewards with people (particularly those who don't recognize their high sec privilages). In the GD discussion about incursions someone mentioned that you can make more from null incursions. In all, a null incursion HQ site pays like 13.5 mil isk more than a high sec one. Which is why High Sec incursions get farmed by professional communities that formed and null incursions go largely undone. It's why the 10% more LP you get from low sec missions means jack squat also. Because CCP doesn't really understand the value of safety, they don't knwo how to properly scale rewards to be meaningful. 70 mil an hour in high sec blitzing lvl 3s never losing a ship is preferable to 90 mil an hour in null dodging nullified interceptors and hot dropping stealth bombers in null (or 80 mil an hour doing C3s in a wormhole). But buffing null past that 90 mil per hour (in liquid isk) would also be a big mistake as would upping the amount of wealth you can wring from a wormyhole, so the obvious best balance approach is to look at the things that are actually problems (blitzing, high sec incursions, FW missions, the afk-ability of null anoms etc) and cutting some of that down. An incursion fleet is basically a pvp fleet minus the tackle, which you really don't need because the rats will tackle people for you. Incursion systems have system-wide cyno jammer going so you don't have to worry about people hot-dropping you. Caps can't take the gates. Since an incursion fleet is already maxed for dps and remote reps, if someone were to come into your site in low or null, you will most likely be on equal footing or in an even better position than the attacker. Seriously, I don't understand why people are so scared of running incursions in low or null. The hardest part is prolly getting people out there to run them.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2134	Posted - 2015.12.03 23:20:20 - [389] - Quote I think the two main problems with null incursions are that they spawn randomly so it is hard to maintain interest in them. If you always know you are going to have one you can have a standing fleet for them, if you get one every other month how do you maintain interest? I think your points about combat make it pretty decent for the people running the incursions. however my second problem is that it is very easy to see someone running a null incursion on the map and it becomes easy for attackers to form up around that. Disruptions can be a big drain, although a fight on that scale seems like it would be worth it just for lulz. Although it looks like you can throw roughly 60 people into a null HQ before you lose rewards. Every time I look at the incursion report the lowsec version seems to have some progress. I'm guessing that the increased rewards and chances for the reverent bpc or shadow bpcs are decent enough someone has started running them. re lv3s I hit something like 50m/hour just accepting them all and relying on overwhelming dps to go fast. I Think AE was a significant drag, probably should have taken better notes. A few fit optimizations and better knowledge of the missions would have helped a bunch, and of course a larger sample size. I generally believe numbers between 50-80m or so. @ChainsawPlankto
Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 407	Posted - 2015.12.03 23:34:17 - [390] - Quote Another day another page of PVE sperg

Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4791	Posted - 2015.12.04 00:02:24 - [391] - Quote Chainsaw Plankton wrote: I think the two main problems with null incursions are that they spawn randomly so it is hard to maintain interest in them. I think it's hard to interest players in null-sec just to show up. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.04 01:15:14 - [392] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: baltec1 wrote: Looking back you were there at ground zero when this was discovered. Probably, but I've lost track of many of these threads. Thanks for posting the spreadsheet analysis. It looks like if we use an ISK/LP conversion ratio of 2000 (which seems a tad on the high side), 80m ISK/hour is achievable. On the low side, 55m ISK/hour. So a happy medium is probably somewhere in the middle around 67.5m ISK/hour. 80 mil/hr isn't too hard to get with the newer mach fits as they get 8 au warp speeds, longer falloff and faster locking times than the original. Your looking at 90 mil/hr maxed out and it's no harder than piloting a hyperion or vindi in anoms. SOE probes are also selling at very good rates at the moment. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4791	Posted - 2015.12.04 01:26:49 - [393] - Quote baltec1 wrote: SOE probes are also selling at very good rates at the moment. 2000 ISK/IP good? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.04 01:37:09 - [394] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: baltec1 wrote: SOE probes are also selling at very good rates at the moment. 2000 ISK/IP good? 2400 as of now. Even some of the faction ammo is knocking on for 2000 and good many in demand implants are well over 3000. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4795	Posted - 2015.12.04 01:45:38 - [395] - Quote How exactly is ISK/LP being calculated here? I assume any Faction store ISK cost is deducted from the selling price before calculating ISK/LP?a I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2136	Posted - 2015.12.04 01:46:11 - [396] - Quote combat probes were selling for over a million yesterday, although they look to be back at normal prices today :p heck right now they are selling for 2443.3694444444 isk/lp according to fuzzworks @ChainsawPlankto
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 276	Posted - 2015.12.04 04:19:38 - [397] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Just to do a quick comparison, I ran Gone Beserk with a non-SoE 0.5 agent. The mission rewards were 143500 (12%) lower. It took me 00:05:48 start to finish, which was shooting everything. I had a faster mission warp speed but arguably my drone, gunnery and other applicable skills are not 100% (mostly IV with some V). I earned 1689 LP which is 143 (8%) less. I will be lucky to get a 1000 ISK/LP conversion with a non-SoE agent. I didn't blitz it - but this will yield higher bounties. No salvage. Mission rewards: 1.08m ISK LP rewards: 1.69m ISK (1000 ISK/LP) Bounties: 1.68m ISK Grand total: 4.45m ISK / 00:05:48, or 44.5m ISK/hour if I continue at this rate. A few observations. First, unless you use a SoE agent in the perfect system, you're never going to break 50m ISK/hour blitzing or even just running L3s with the Machariel fit. Second, you cannot keep up a blitz pace indefinitely. At some point you're going to start burning out, making mistakes (or reading forums) which will impact your ISK/hour. There is a lot more micromanagement involved in blitzing or running missions as opposed to shooting battleship spawns in anomalies. Third, the ISK/LP conversion is the real wild card here. The 80m ISK/hour threshold should be considered an upper limit under ideal conditions with perfect skills and favorable mission conditions. You start with 80m ISK/hour potential and go down from there. How fast depends on you. Thanks Arthur for taking the time to gather REALISTIC isk per hour figures on mission blitzing. What the high inflated numbers don't explain is that those figures are only achievable under optimal conditions and with only running with SOE. Also not mentioned is that mission blitzing is very tedious and hard work. Not everyone is gonna have the temperament to maintain a steady mistake free blitz run over a long indefinite period of time. I tried to blitz missions just to see the isk per hour comparison and was totally exhausted within 2-3 hours, it's just not as sustainable as regular mission running. So the high inflated isk per hour mission blitzing is mostly only achievable in bursts, not continuously non-stop all day long.
Hasikan Miallok Republic University Minmatar Republic 1705	Posted - 2015.12.04 04:39:26 - [398] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: Arthur Aihaken wrote: Just to do a quick comparison, I ran Gone Beserk with a non-SoE 0.5 agent. The mission rewards were 143500 (12%) lower. It took me 00:05:48 start to finish, which was shooting everything. I had a faster mission warp speed but arguably my drone, gunnery and other applicable skills are not 100% (mostly IV with some V). I earned 1689 LP which is 143 (8%) less. I will be lucky to get a 1000 ISK/LP conversion with a non-SoE agent. I didn't blitz it - but this will yield higher bounties. No salvage. Mission rewards: 1.08m ISK LP rewards: 1.69m ISK (1000 ISK/LP) Bounties: 1.68m ISK Grand total: 4.45m ISK / 00:05:48, or 44.5m ISK/hour if I continue at this rate. A few observations. First, unless you use a SoE agent in the perfect system, you're never going to break 50m ISK/hour blitzing or even just running L3s with the Machariel fit. Second, you cannot keep up a blitz pace indefinitely. At some point you're going to start burning out, making mistakes (or reading forums) which will impact your ISK/hour. There is a lot more micromanagement involved in blitzing or running missions as opposed to shooting battleship spawns in anomalies. Third, the ISK/LP conversion is the real wild card here. The 80m ISK/hour threshold should be considered an upper limit under ideal conditions with perfect skills and favorable mission conditions. You start with 80m ISK/hour potential and go down from there. How fast depends on you. Thanks Arthur for taking the time to gather REALISTIC isk per hour figures on mission blitzing. What the high inflated numbers don't explain is that those figures are only achievable under optimal conditions and with only running with SOE. Also not mentioned is that mission blitzing is very tedious and hard work. Not everyone is gonna have the temperament to maintain a steady mistake free blitz run over a long indefinite period of time. I tried to blitz missions just to see the isk per hour comparison and was totally exhausted within 2-3 hours, it's just not as sustainable as regular mission running. So the high inflated isk per hour mission blitzing is mostly only achievable in bursts, not continuously non-stop all day long. I would have thought it was pretty obvious that high ISK blitz figures are only achieved running for high ISK/LP corps and are an active hands on activity that probably best suits players that are on for short periods and want to maximise their income for the limited time they are online. Some one doing semi afk missioning all day long, day in day out, for a convenient corp in a safe higher security system whilst watching a movie in another screen or whatever is not going to increase income that much by suddenly starting blitzing.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.04 06:06:43 - [399] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: Thanks Arthur for taking the time to gather REALISTIC isk per hour figures on mission blitzing. What the high inflated numbers don't explain is that those figures are only achievable under optimal conditions and with only running with SOE. Not only are they realistic but right now they are based upon 2000isk/lp, the current going price of combat probes is 2400 so you can be earning more that 90mil/hr doing level 3 missions. 2000 isk/lp can also be found in a surprisingly large number of factions too. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2137	Posted - 2015.12.04 06:31:45 - [400] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: Thanks Arthur for taking the time to gather REALISTIC isk per hour figures on mission blitzing. What the high inflated numbers don't explain is that those figures are only achievable under optimal conditions and with only running with SOE. Not only are they realistic but right now they are based upon 2000isk/lp, the current going price of combat probes is 2400 so you can be earning more that 90mil/hr doing level 3 missions. 2000 isk/lp can also be found in a surprisingly large number of factions too. 1. for lv 3s the numbers are valid for corps other than SoE. many other corps have stores with similar or higher isk/lp rates. For burners I'm not sure you can match it. For conventional lv4s you can probably match or beat elsewhere, although there may be some limits there. 2. you will only get 2400 isk/lp out of combat probes if you are in jita updating the order frequently. Competition is pretty strong on those. And I doubt that rate will last more than a few days. Heck I'm surprised it has lasted as long as it has. half tempted to go throw a billion isk worth of probes at 1900 or so. heh now I'm tempted to go crash a specific market see what prices I can set. Arthur Aihaken wrote: How exactly is ISK/LP being calculated here? I assume any Faction store ISK cost is deducted from the selling price before calculating ISK/LP?a fuzzworks uses buy prices for required items/tags and subtracts that out of the selling price along with isk requirement and then divides by LP to get isk/lp. Every time I compare fuzzwork numbers to in game numbers they seem to match up very well. I'm not sure what the delay is, but there is always the risk you will get slightly old info, or someone else will act on it sooner than you can. Overall it looks pretty rock solid to me. I use buy orders for all my tags, but still use the fuzzworks numbers because that would represent the opportunity cost of selling the tags. I used to use previous days median price in my own spreadsheet, but I'm lazy and fuzzworks does such a nice job. @ChainsawPlankto

Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4798	Posted - 2015.12.04 07:45:50 - [401] - Quote Let's use Sisters Combat Scanner Probes then. GÇó Cost of 10 Combat Scanner Probe Is (Jita) ... 10x 12,894 = 128,940 ISK GÇó 10x Sisters Combat Scanner Probe (SoE store) ... 1,200,000 ISK GÇó 10x Sisters Combat Scanner Probe (SoE store) ... 1800 LP In November the average selling price ranged from a low of around 450,000 ISK to a high of around 475,000 ISK, so we'll split the difference and go with 462,500 ISK as a realistic price to fetch (market conditions will vary). GÇó 4.625m ISK - 1.329m ISK = 3.296m ISK GÇó 3.296m ISK / 1800 LP = 1831 ISK/LP As previously indicated (as as the numbers demonstrate), 2000 ISK/LP is unrealistic and 2400 ISK/LP is grossly exaggerated. Can you obtain more than 1800 ISK/LP? Sure, probably on occasion - and provided you're willing to watch the market like a hawk for 0.01 underbidders. This also won't be instantaneous ISK, and you could well be sitting on your items for days or longer. Maybe you can get 2400 ISK/LP on certain items, but since no one's delving into specifics ("2000 isk/lp can also be found in a surprisingly large number of factions too") I'm going to treat some of these higher conversions with a degree of skepticism. And yes, depending on the system you mission, where you buy your probes and where you sell them will all influence these numbers. I'm using Jita, but this is by no means the best (or worst) market. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4798	Posted - 2015.12.04 07:48:21 - [402] - Quote Somewhat off-topic (but still related), when you run in a SoE system your likelihood of being ganked just increased 10-fold (if not more). And it doesn't matter if you're running a cheap T2 fit, when you're flying around in a billion ISK Marauder and run into one of the roving Catalyst or Tornado gank gangs simply looking to pad their killboard - all bets are off (just ask some of the former Golem owners who lost both ship and pod last night). I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.04 11:05:04 - [403] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Somewhat off-topic (but still related), when you run in a SoE system your likelihood of being ganked just increased 10-fold (if not more). Chances of a t2 fitted battleship getting ganked are as close to nil as you can get. Arthur Aihaken wrote: As previously indicated (as as the numbers demonstrate), 2000 ISK/LP is unrealistic and 2400 ISK/LP is grossly exaggerated. Your numbers are wrong, the tools we are using are indeed accurate hence why they get used. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 277	Posted - 2015.12.04 11:55:56 - [404] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Arthur Aihaken wrote: Somewhat off-topic (but still related), when you run in a SoE system your likelihood of being ganked just increased 10-fold (if not more). Chances of a t2 fitted battleship getting ganked are as close to nil as you can get. Arthur Aihaken wrote: As previously indicated (as as the numbers demonstrate), 2000 ISK/LP is unrealistic and 2400 ISK/LP is grossly exaggerated. Your numbers are wrong, the tools we are using are indeed accurate hence why they get used. You don't need to use tools. I have station trading alts in Amarr, Dodixie, Ren and Jita and I can tell you that his numbers aren't that far off.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.04 12:05:17 - [405] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: You don't need to use tools. I have station trading alts in Amarr, Dodixie, Ren and Jita and I can tell you that his numbers aren't that far off. He is 110,000 isk per unit off. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 277	Posted - 2015.12.04 15:08:14 - [406] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: You don't need to use tools. I have station trading alts in Amarr, Dodixie, Ren and Jita and I can tell you that his numbers aren't that far off. He is 110,000 isk per unit off. No you can't go by what they are selling because it can take you days to sell them with competing tediously with the other sellers. The buy order is what you go by for instant LP to isk conversion. And that is 480k isk per probe atm.
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 905	Posted - 2015.12.04 15:22:50 - [407] - Quote LP rates change based on player demand. Market economy and all that. What might be high one week, can be low the next. For all we know someone could have been saving up for months to buy up all the probes and launchers, and the resell them at a higher price. So stop niggling on a wildcard in the equation. The only thing in PVE that stays constant is the bounty.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.04 16:53:38 - [408] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: No you can't go by what they are selling for because it shows I am wrong in a way I cannot argue against. Fixed that for you. Now that we have shown you the facts we can move this topic back to the pressing need of reform of this game imbalance. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.04 16:54:48 - [409] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: LP rates change based on player demand. Market economy and all that. What might be high one week, can be low the next. For all we know someone could have been saving up for months to buy up all the probes and launchers, and the resell them at a higher price. So stop niggling on a wildcard in the equation. The only thing in PVE that stays constant is the bounty. SOE prices have been steady for years. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 906	Posted - 2015.12.04 17:41:44 - [410] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: LP rates change based on player demand. Market economy and all that. What might be high one week, can be low the next. For all we know someone could have been saving up for months to buy up all the probes and launchers, and the resell them at a higher price. So stop niggling on a wildcard in the equation. The only thing in PVE that stays constant is the bounty. SOE prices have been steady for years. Oh? Show proof.

baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.04 17:52:05 - [411] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: baltec1 wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: LP rates change based on player demand. Market economy and all that. What might be high one week, can be low the next. For all we know someone could have been saving up for months to buy up all the probes and launchers, and the resell them at a higher price. So stop niggling on a wildcard in the equation. The only thing in PVE that stays constant is the bounty. SOE prices have been steady for years. Oh? Show proof. I think it is about time for you so show some proof. I have posted guides, fits, graphs and endless statistics, now its your turn. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4803	Posted - 2015.12.04 21:20:10 - [412] - Quote One thing I hadn't considered is that if you manufacture your own probes you can bring the cost down substantially - especially if you mine your own minerals or have access to a cheap source. There's the cost of acquiring and researching a set of original blueprints, but that's really only a one-time hit unless you switch items. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 907	Posted - 2015.12.04 22:51:51 - [413] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: baltec1 wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: LP rates change based on player demand. Market economy and all that. What might be high one week, can be low the next. For all we know someone could have been saving up for months to buy up all the probes and launchers, and the resell them at a higher price. So stop niggling on a wildcard in the equation. The only thing in PVE that stays constant is the bounty. SOE prices have been steady for years. Oh? Show proof. I think it is about time for you so show some proof. I have posted guides, fits, graphs and endless statistics, now its your turn. I don't have to. Everyone knows prices fluctuate in a market economy. EVE is no different. You stated that the price has been steady for years. You are the one stating something as fact. Not I. Burden of proof is on you.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.04 23:17:41 - [414] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: I don't have to. Everyone knows prices fluctuate in a market economy. EVE is no different. You stated that the price has been steady for years. You are the one stating something as fact. Not I. Burden of proof is on you. No dice, prove what you are saying for once. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 750	Posted - 2015.12.05 03:14:20 - [415] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: I don't have to. Everyone knows prices fluctuate in a market economy. EVE is no different. You stated that the price has been steady for years. You are the one stating something as fact. Not I. Burden of proof is on you. No dice, prove what you are saying for once. You are the dishonest one here claiming things that are easily verified as false. Markets move up and down and the numbers you claim are so far off base we can safely discard them. In before Jenn appears to your aid with a: "This is your made up pretend amateur psychoanalysis condition showing" post. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2141	Posted - 2015.12.05 04:53:23 - [416] - Quote yes of course prices change, but y'all know SoE stuff has been pretty damn constant. @ChainsawPlankto
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4804	Posted - 2015.12.05 05:46:36 - [417] - Quote So as with L4 mission blitzing/Burners, to approach these numbers for blitzing L3s you need: GÇó SoE agents in Lanngisi (the closest SoE hub is only 0.7, and Lanngisi is preferable over Apanake; minimal jumps and distances) GÇó Both Security V and Negotiation V (at least Security V, as LP return is key) GÇó Researched BPCs, skills and minerals to manufacture any items required in LP redemption GÇó Timing sell orders with peak market demand to ensure the highest rate of return (requires market monitoring) I don't think you necessarily need a Machariel, though. A HML Tengu with FoF missiles would probably suffice (warp speed with a Gravitational Capacitor will be comparable), and you can run a passive fit for the most part. 600 applied DPS with implants, no micromanagement and a fast align time would seem to meet the requirements (you're not going to be getting 1000+ DPS with a Machariel at maximum range anyway). Personally, I wouldn't rank blitzing L3 SoE missions as a high-point in my PvE activities. I much prefer shooting (and occasionally looting) L4s with 3 characters. It's quite easy to sustain 125-150m+ ISK/hour (and occasionally break 200m+ ISK/hour) which is double what you can get blitzing SoE L3s and almost on par with blitzing SoE L4s/Burners. And my numbers are typically at Security/Negotiation IV in standard 0.6 Faction systems, and the majority of the ISK comes from bounties, mission rewards and occasional salvage (if I get more than 1000 ISK/LP I'm ecstatic). You don't need a 5-billion ISK investment (you can ramp-up with additional characters), perfect skills and you can opt for a system closer to your favorite market hub. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.05 09:10:15 - [418] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: I don't think you necessarily need a Machariel, though. A HML Tengu with FoF missiles would probably suffice (warp speed with a Gravitational Capacitor will be comparable), and you can run a passive fit for the most part. 600 applied DPS with implants, no micromanagement and a fast align time would seem to meet the requirements (you're not going to be getting 1000+ DPS with a Machariel at maximum range anyway). . FoF tengu wont get close to a mach. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.05 09:15:35 - [419] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: You are the dishonest one here claiming things that are easily verified as false. I'm the only one here who has back up what they have said with spreadsheets, data, fits and guides. Your side so far has absolutely noting to back up what you say. As usual. Market McSelling Alt wrote: Markets move up and down and the numbers you claim are so far off base we can safely discard them. Prove what you are saying. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4804	Posted - 2015.12.05 09:55:49 - [420] - Quote baltec1 wrote: FoF tengu wont get close to a mach. I think you underestimate, but I'll run a few L3s and report the completion time for comparison. With respect to "sides", I've tried to relay my own observations in an unbiased manner (granted, it's not as technical or comprehensive as the spreadsheet you've linked). I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 52	Posted - 2015.12.05 09:57:43 - [421] - Quote Ok, this is getting out of hand. Hopefully we can agree that a massive rebalance of hisec pve would take an awful lot of balancing and is not likely to happen anytime soon. I do agree that some aspects of it could easily and desirably be toned down. Such as: 1. Reduce max lp return on burners 2. Link the lp return of a mission to level of completion (ie you blitz it only killing a quarter of the baddies, you only get a quarter of the lp's, maybe add a bit if you killed a boss rat) 3. Incursion and fw could do with some sort of work. Maybe not reducing max rewards, but make the rewards require more effort to cash in? Hope we can get to a civilised discussion again, even if there is no hope of these changes actually happening!
Yadaryon Vondawn Alius Itineris Virtus 76	Posted - 2015.12.05 11:14:07 - [422] - Quote I think that regardless of the precise numbers blitzing can be very profitable. I also think however that there are less than 50 ~ players in the entirety of New Eden that run these extreme numbers. For all this stuff to work (talking about L4 blitzing now, 200M+~) you need be running for SoE in a 0.5 system and being on the ball continously. The average mission runner does not do this, can not do this and probably never will. I think this is a case of a few people who have dedicated themselves (commendable!) to optimize this. That should not warrant a nerf but a nod of appreciation in my opinion. Having scrolled through the blitz guides I have adapted some strategies if I am mission running myself but even tho I know going full blitz is more profitable, I most likely never will do it that way. It seems to me a bit the same like those high end wormhole folks that clear sites in seconds by bombrunning or smartbombing groups of sleepers. Yes is it insanely profitable but hard to setup and not that many people do it. My point being: A very small portion of the mission running folks have optimized their strategum, good for them and nice of them to share these methods. This should however not mean that just because <1% run high ISK/hour the entirety should be nerfed. In fact CCP has already announced that they will implement the tribute system which will give additional rewards. @The Bigpuns 1: Tho I agree that the LP turnout on burners is substantial higher (50%~ of a Blockade say) the dangers involved are equally higher. Running the Blockade takes no effort whatsoever while running burners is a much more dangerous venture involving semi-costly ships (depends on the player ofc), more skill intensive characters and overloading. I think CCP is fairly happy by the ratio risk/LP turnout on this one and so am I personally. 2: I can very much see why you make this point. I also know very few mission runner folks in my social circle that do not (partially) blitz missions. Lowering the income on blitzers would (I think) have a negative impact on mission runner participation in general. 3: Incursions are a funny thing for highsec PVE. Despite people claiming that the cost of entry is high, in practice that is not so much the case. Any group I ever ran incursions with accepted T2 fit BS/Logi. Also the ISK turnover of the average incursion group is a bit lower than normally is advertised I think. When people say that they make 140M~/hour with incursions they are (in my experience) running with a solid, knowledgable group with very optimized fits and strong control. Most groups I ran with averaged at 60-70M~/hour normally. Again I think CCP is quite happy with the fleet learning incursions provide. Missions > Incursions > PVP is somewhat common. Making entry harder for newbros might not be something they want to do. Just my two cents.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 278	Posted - 2015.12.05 13:06:41 - [423] - Quote The Bigpuns wrote: Ok, this is getting out of hand. Hopefully we can agree that a massive rebalance of hisec pve would take an awful lot of balancing and is not likely to happen anytime soon. I do agree that some aspects of it could easily and desirably be toned down. Such as: 1. Reduce max lp return on burners 2. Link the lp return of a mission to level of completion (ie you blitz it only killing a quarter of the baddies, you only get a quarter of the lp's, maybe add a bit if you killed a boss rat) 3. Incursion and fw could do with some sort of work. Maybe not reducing max rewards, but make the rewards require more effort to cash in? Hope we can get to a civilised discussion again, even if there is no hope of these changes actually happening! Good because I'm content with the way things are now. There have already been tons of PVE content that has gotten nerfed or axed before I've had a chance to cash in. Baltec and that Jenn have already cashed in their cow and now it's others turn. And no to your #1 because if you lower the LP on burners then they'll no longer be worth running.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 278	Posted - 2015.12.05 13:15:46 - [424] - Quote Yadaryon Vondawn wrote: I think that regardless of the precise numbers blitzing can be very profitable. I also think however that there are less than 50 ~ players in the entirety of New Eden that run these extreme numbers. For all this stuff to work (talking about L4 blitzing now, 200M+~) you need be running for SoE in a 0.5 system and being on the ball continously. The average mission runner does not do this, can not do this and probably never will. I think this is a case of a few people who have dedicated themselves (commendable!) to optimize this. That should not warrant a nerf but a nod of appreciation in my opinion. Having scrolled through the blitz guides I have adapted some strategies if I am mission running myself but even tho I know going full blitz is more profitable, I most likely never will do it that way. It seems to me a bit the same like those high end wormhole folks that clear sites in seconds by bombrunning or smartbombing groups of sleepers. Yes is it insanely profitable but hard to setup and not that many people do it. My point being: A very small portion of the mission running folks have optimized their strategum, good for them and nice of them to share these methods. This should however not mean that just because <1% run high ISK/hour the entirety should be nerfed. In fact CCP has already announced that they will implement the tribute system which will give additional rewards. @The Bigpuns 1: Tho I agree that the LP turnout on burners is substantial higher (50%~ of a Blockade say) the dangers involved are equally higher. Running the Blockade takes no effort whatsoever while running burners is a much more dangerous venture involving semi-costly ships (depends on the player ofc), more skill intensive characters and overloading. I think CCP is fairly happy by the ratio risk/LP turnout on this one and so am I personally. 2: I can very much see why you make this point. I also know very few mission runner folks in my social circle that do not (partially) blitz missions. Lowering the income on blitzers would (I think) have a negative impact on mission runner participation in general. 3: Incursions are a funny thing for highsec PVE. Despite people claiming that the cost of entry is high, in practice that is not so much the case. Any group I ever ran incursions with accepted T2 fit BS/Logi. Also the ISK turnover of the average incursion group is a bit lower than normally is advertised I think. When people say that they make 140M~/hour with incursions they are (in my experience) running with a solid, knowledgable group with very optimized fits and strong control. Most groups I ran with averaged at 60-70M~/hour normally. Again I think CCP is quite happy with the fleet learning incursions provide. Missions > Incursions > PVP is somewhat common. Making entry harder for newbros might not be something they want to do. Just my two cents. The word newbro is completely lost on baltec and the like. People like him thinks everyone who plays Eve is a 10 year bittervet like him.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4804	Posted - 2015.12.05 15:11:38 - [425] - Quote The Bigpuns wrote: Ok, this is getting out of hand. So it would seem... I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 751	Posted - 2015.12.05 16:55:31 - [426] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: The Bigpuns wrote: Ok, this is getting out of hand. Hopefully we can agree that a massive rebalance of hisec pve would take an awful lot of balancing and is not likely to happen anytime soon. I do agree that some aspects of it could easily and desirably be toned down. Such as: 1. Reduce max lp return on burners 2. Link the lp return of a mission to level of completion (ie you blitz it only killing a quarter of the baddies, you only get a quarter of the lp's, maybe add a bit if you killed a boss rat) 3. Incursion and fw could do with some sort of work. Maybe not reducing max rewards, but make the rewards require more effort to cash in? Hope we can get to a civilised discussion again, even if there is no hope of these changes actually happening! Good because I'm content with the way things are now. There have already been tons of PVE content that has gotten nerfed or axed before I've had a chance to cash in. Baltec and that Jenn have already cashed in their cows and now want to eliminate any opportunity for anyone else to do the same. And no to your #1 because if you lower the LP on burners then they'll no longer be worth running. It is the same reason why rich bankers don't want the governments running deficits and giving out zero interest loans. Inflation or perceived inflation hurt the value of the amassed wealth one has accumulated. People like Jenn and Baltec have used the buffs to anoms and the "trimming fat off the top" of null sec to stuff their wallets over the years. Now they need the value of isk to be stable so they don't need to work hard to keep their wallets valuable. They also despise any thought of the game ending or changing because they have worked very hard for digital pixel goods. It is why in every single topic about anything having to do with isk or income, they start crying about inflation (which hasn't existed in this game in years). They are deep down inside just some old rich misers who want to count their wealth and keep it out of the hands of others. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 53	Posted - 2015.12.05 18:18:20 - [427] - Quote I'm not quite sure it's that simple. Granted, I also don't believe their argument that they are just doing it for other people's benefit (won't someone think of the children). There should be incentive for people to go to nullsec. Activities there's should pay more than equivalent activities in high. And they do. The problem is, people are incentivised to go to null not for pve activities, but to pvp. This makes it so there is zero reason for people to move to null if they don't want to pvp for whatever reason, cos as soon as they move and try to do their desired activity in low or null, some douche blows them up. This is where the idea of rebalancing high and null pve falls down. The reason for the imbalance is the players who prevent the activities taking place in 'their' space. You want to make money with pve? Accept the fact that null is not the right place for that, unless you are part of an alliance that can effectively lock down a massive swathe of space, at which point we basically have another highsec area. Maybe at that point we could also move mission agents to these null areas. Completely homogenise Eve.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4805	Posted - 2015.12.06 00:00:47 - [428] - Quote Overall, I think high-sec PvE income is fine. Where all the disparity occurs is in a single SoE hub. There might be a few other Factions where you can get a high ISK/LP conversion, but these are the exception rather than the rule. This hub is well off the beaten path, and a good distance to major trade hubs (so you need to ferry everything you need in and transport all your spoils of war out). There's also the requisite standings requirement (not a hurdle, but still something that needs to occur) in addition to perfect Social skills (Secutity/Negotiation V). There are also more kill/gank squads in addition to players who love nothing more than scanning down MTUs (not that you'll necessarily salvage, but if you do...). Faction Warfare and Incursions are a bag of snakes, and null-sec is just a gong show. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2144	Posted - 2015.12.06 01:17:01 - [429] - Quote The Bigpuns wrote: I'm not quite sure it's that simple. Granted, I also don't believe their argument that they are just doing it for other people's benefit (won't someone think of the children). There should be incentive for people to go to nullsec. Activities there's should pay more than equivalent activities in high. And they do. The problem is, people are incentivised to go to null not for pve activities, but to pvp. This makes it so there is zero reason for people to move to null if they don't want to pvp for whatever reason, cos as soon as they move and try to do their desired activity in low or null, some douche blows them up. This is where the idea of rebalancing high and null pve falls down. The reason for the imbalance is the players who prevent the activities taking place in 'their' space. You want to make money with pve? Accept the fact that null is not the right place for that, unless you are part of an alliance that can effectively lock down a massive swathe of space, at which point we basically have another highsec area. Maybe at that point we could also move mission agents to these null areas. Completely homogenise Eve. locking down space requires putting ship in space, which is content (you know, for those "douches" that like blowing people up)! and imo right now there are very few reasons to do that at all. There is also the issue of local chat where it is very easy to see neutrals/reds coming so you can safe up typically before they even have a chance to get to you. The closest I ever came to getting caught I was in a long warp when a neutral jumped in and we landed in the same spot, I magically warped out because the pos bookmark was aligned with my warp path. I was in a dominix and they were in a ceptor so there is a chance I could have killed them and gotten out before their friends showed up, but I'll never know. Had a laugh with the guy in local as what happened was so improbable. also a lot of players do pve in null. the pirate and police ships destroyed in the last 24 hours lights up null very well. many systems are in the 1,000s. some of the busiest are in the 10,000s. Inaya looks to be the busiest highsec at 22,000+ which is quite a bit higher, but as it is a mission system it can support many more players than any null system could hope to. I don't know that adding agents to most parts of null is the right move, but it would be something that could improve player density. Imo that is something null has lacked. @ChainsawPlankto
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2144	Posted - 2015.12.06 01:26:04 - [430] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Overall, I think high-sec PvE income is fine. Where all the disparity occurs is in a single SoE hub. There might be a few other Factions where you can get a high ISK/LP conversion, but these are the exception rather than the rule. This hub is well off the beaten path, and a good distance to major trade hubs (so you need to ferry everything you need in and transport all your spoils of war out). There's also the requisite standings requirement (not a hurdle, but still something that needs to occur) in addition to perfect Social skills (Secutity/Negotiation V). There are also more kill/gank squads in addition to players who love nothing more than scanning down MTUs (not that you'll necessarily salvage, but if you do...). Faction Warfare and Incursions are a bag of snakes, and null-sec is just a gong show. The disparity isn't all because of one SoE system. although that one system is a great example of everything going right. Very hard to blame it all on SoE when right next door in Nakugard there is a Krusual Tribe agent with a decent number of good trades. also imo standard mission blitzing is viable with a very large number of agents, and that is still preferable to most null activities. I kinda miss flying marauders. The main qualities are a 0.5 system in a constellation with no lowsec, and a decent bpc or two in the LP store. and a while ago I triggered all the spawns in a blockade and left an MTU, I even manually flew around so the scram frigs would be ontop of the MTU. Sadly no one seems to have died from the trap. Although does a suspect wreck get pulled in/looted by an mtu? I know criminal ones do. @ChainsawPlankto

baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.06 04:14:33 - [431] - Quote The Bigpuns wrote: I'm not quite sure it's that simple. Granted, I also don't believe their argument that they are just doing it for other people's benefit (won't someone think of the children). Tech moon nerf, tracking titan nerf, anom nerf, FW nerf (the one where we could make 1 trillion in a weekend) are a few examples of things I have supported in the past. All of them directly hurt my income, my corps income and my alliances income. I call out game imbalances for what they are even if it negatively impacts me. The Bigpuns wrote: There should be incentive for people to go to nullsec. Activities there's should pay more than equivalent activities in high. And they do. I have shown countless times now that they do not. Anoms, the primary activity and income source in null pay at best around the same as highsec level 3 missions. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 756	Posted - 2015.12.06 12:51:36 - [432] - Quote baltec1 wrote: The Bigpuns wrote: I'm not quite sure it's that simple. Granted, I also don't believe their argument that they are just doing it for other people's benefit (won't someone think of the children). Tech moon nerf, tracking titan nerf, anom nerf, FW nerf (the one where we could make 1 trillion in a weekend) are a few examples of things I have supported in the past. All of them directly hurt my income, my corps income and my alliances income. I call out game imbalances for what they are even if it negatively impacts me. The Bigpuns wrote: There should be incentive for people to go to nullsec. Activities there's should pay more than equivalent activities in high. And they do. I have shown countless times now that they do not. Anoms, the primary activity and income source in null pay at best around the same as highsec level 3 missions. Again, even if the 70-90mil per hour for blitzing lvl 3s was "easy" you can still run three accounts "easier" doing anoms. So actually per person behind a keyboard you have the potential to make more than incursions, lvl 4 or lvl 3 missions with relatively lighter workload. Also, you guys should be happy now. Incursions just got a huge nerf due to the changes in Logi. RIP Shield Vindi fleets (32km optimal shield logi lulz) CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.06 13:47:44 - [433] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: Again, even if the 70-90mil per hour for blitzing lvl 3s was "easy" you can still run three accounts "easier" doing anoms. It is infact just as easy to run 3 accounts in level 4 missions as it is running them in anoms. Market McSelling Alt wrote: So actually per person behind a keyboard you have the potential to make more than incursions, lvl 4 or lvl 3 missions with relatively lighter workload. Per person its 90 mil at the very most you will get from anoms, this is on par with level 3 missions per person. Market McSelling Alt wrote: Also, you guys should be happy now. Incursions just got a huge nerf due to the changes in Logi. RIP Shield Vindi fleets (32km optimal shield logi lulz) Logi sit on top on the fleet, no change for them at all. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 756	Posted - 2015.12.06 13:52:41 - [434] - Quote baltec1 wrote: It is infact just as easy to run 3 accounts in level 4 missions as it is running them in anoms. Per person its 90 mil at the very most you will get from anoms, this is on par with level 3 missions per person. Logi sit on top on the fleet, no change for them at all. Point 1) You are full of crap. You cannot multi-box mission blitz characters, not even close. You are blatantly lying. Point 2) Per character it is 25mil ticks AFK... or 75mil per character. This scales with the number of systems and the upgrades available. Running 3 accounts at 25mil ticks is almost as easy as running 1 at 30mil ticks. Again, you are blatantly lying. Point 3) You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, even so with the fitting changes and the Scimi losing 50 CPU, you will never fit an Incursion Scimi the same again. Going to chalk this one up to ignorance. Stop lying Baltec, you are just fudding your way through this horribly. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 54	Posted - 2015.12.06 17:55:31 - [435] - Quote Chainsaw Plankton wrote: The Bigpuns wrote: I'm not quite sure it's that simple. Granted, I also don't believe their argument that they are just doing it for other people's benefit (won't someone think of the children). There should be incentive for people to go to nullsec. Activities there's should pay more than equivalent activities in high. And they do. The problem is, people are incentivised to go to null not for pve activities, but to pvp. This makes it so there is zero reason for people to move to null if they don't want to pvp for whatever reason, cos as soon as they move and try to do their desired activity in low or null, some douche blows them up. This is where the idea of rebalancing high and null pve falls down. The reason for the imbalance is the players who prevent the activities taking place in 'their' space. You want to make money with pve? Accept the fact that null is not the right place for that, unless you are part of an alliance that can effectively lock down a massive swathe of space, at which point we basically have another highsec area. Maybe at that point we could also move mission agents to these null areas. Completely homogenise Eve. locking down space requires putting ship in space, which is content (you know, for those "douches" that like blowing people up)! and imo right now there are very few reasons to do that at all. There is also the issue of local chat where it is very easy to see neutrals/reds coming so you can safe up typically before they even have a chance to get to you. The closest I ever came to getting caught I was in a long warp when a neutral jumped in and we landed in the same spot, I magically warped out because the pos bookmark was aligned with my warp path. I was in a dominix and they were in a ceptor so there is a chance I could have killed them and gotten out before their friends showed up, but I'll never know. Had a laugh with the guy in local as what happened was so improbable. also a lot of players do pve in null. the pirate and police ships destroyed in the last 24 hours lights up null very well. many systems are in the 1,000s. some of the busiest are in the 10,000s. Inaya looks to be the busiest highsec at 22,000+ which is quite a bit higher, but as it is a mission system it can support many more players than any null system could hope to. I don't know that adding agents to most parts of null is the right move, but it would be something that could improve player density. Imo that is something null has lacked. Sorry, the sarcasm failed to come across in my wall of plain text there, I don't actually want to homogenise Eve. Personally, and I know that Jenn and Baltec have said they don't want this, I do think nullsec income could do with a polish. The reason is that nerfing the hisec mission runners will be painful to balance, incursions and fw need a different type of balancing, and there isn't enough pull to null. But on the flipside, that null income also needs to be more difficult to access (anoms and whatnot should not be afk activities to be farmed). Higher income for the risk is reasonable, but not to the detriment of all the people in high who don't blitz.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2144	Posted - 2015.12.06 18:40:53 - [436] - Quote and McAlt is blatantly twisting words 1. he said run, and never mentioned blitzing. I could maybe blitz (so without burners) 2 characters at the same time, I used to dual box 2 chars in 2 missions. Maybe I could even do 2 chars in burners, there are a lot of moments were all you are doing is waiting 20-30s to cap boost, and a lot of time where all you are doing is traveling. Although running multiple chars in lv4s is a bit tedious, all the gate jumps and agent dialogs that you don't have to do running null anoms. 2. using multiple characters requires paying more or buying more plex. I don't think it is necessarily fair to compare the two. 1 account at 90m/hour vs 3 accounts at 75m/hour (225 total). The break even for 3 accounts is at 16 hours, although it pulls ahead of the single account at 18 hours. The 3 accounts seem a lot stronger than I would have thought. but still. that is about on par with burner blitzing. That doesn't change that with anoms or level 3s you make about the same income with one account. and also ignores that players could semi-afk multibox level 4s and probably match. Also ignores things like if each person was running 3 accounts in 3 anoms 0.0 would run out of space very quickly. 3. no idea haven't looked at the logi rebalance carefully, and don't know incursion tactics. That said shield logi get A LOT of falloff so they should be pretty effective at a decent range. the cycle time increase is also something of interest. Although I'd guess most people would just start staggering reps so I can't say how effective that will be over all. @ChainsawPlankto
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13096	Posted - 2015.12.06 18:56:32 - [437] - Quote The Bigpuns wrote: Sorry, the sarcasm failed to come across in my wall of plain text there, I don't actually want to homogenise Eve. Personally, and I know that Jenn and Baltec have said they don't want this, I do think nullsec income could do with a polish. The reason is that nerfing the hisec mission runners will be painful to balance, incursions and fw need a different type of balancing, and there isn't enough pull to null. But on the flipside, that null income also needs to be more difficult to access (anoms and whatnot should not be afk activities to be farmed). Higher income for the risk is reasonable, but not to the detriment of all the people in high who don't blitz. Closing the blitzing loophole sonly affect the few that do know how to blitz. The "just buff null" thing is bad for 2 obvious reasons: #1. It 'fixes' something that does not need fixing (60 to 90 mil isk per hour with bonuses from escalations and such depending on how you rat is fine). #2. It ends up with the exact same result. If you buff null, people in high sec end up with lower "purchasing power" after people in null sec learn how to squeeze the most out of the buffs (like people with scimitars and titan did after CCPs 1st "EHP/Hour" anom buff that made forsaken hubs into frigless monsters spewing 4-500 mil isk per hour). It's like with everything else, if something is a problem, you fix that problem. Ishtars were a problem, CCP could have just given every single other ship in the game the same drone bonuses and drone bandwidth sufficient to launch 5 sentry drones (I would have loved a 5 sentry drone riftert lol). OR they could not be stupid and just nerf the Ishtar that was just too damn good. Same here. You can buff the rest of PVE to be as unbalanced as high sec incursions, FW missions and now Burner mission blitzing (meaning that folks like Baltec, me and the rest of null sec that right now already produces 20 trillion isk per month in raw wealth will have a way to spew EVEN MORE STUFF into the game)., OR CCP could just fix the 3 things that are actually unbalanced (along with ending the afk ability of null sec anoms and the nature of 'money moons') but that benefit a very few people and everything is fine and better for everyone (including me). Some of us simply do not believe in breaking the game (or maintaining unbalanced status quos) for our own benefit. Others, well, this thread shows what others think.
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 764	Posted - 2015.12.06 18:57:53 - [438] - Quote Chainsaw Plankton wrote: and McAlt is blatantly twisting words 1. he said run, and never mentioned blitzing. I could maybe blitz (so without burners) 2 characters at the same time, I used to dual box 2 chars in 2 missions. Maybe I could even do 2 chars in burners, there are a lot of moments were all you are doing is waiting 20-30s to cap boost, and a lot of time where all you are doing is traveling. Although running multiple chars in lv4s is a bit tedious, all the gate jumps and agent dialogs that you don't have to do running null anoms. 2. using multiple characters requires paying more or buying more plex. I don't think it is necessarily fair to compare the two. 1 account at 90m/hour vs 3 accounts at 75m/hour (225 total). The break even for 3 accounts is at 16 hours, although it pulls ahead of the single account at 18 hours. The 3 accounts seem a lot stronger than I would have thought. but still. that is about on par with burner blitzing. That doesn't change that with anoms or level 3s you make about the same income with one account. and also ignores that players could semi-afk multibox level 4s and probably match. Also ignores things like if each person was running 3 accounts in 3 anoms 0.0 would run out of space very quickly. 3. no idea haven't looked at the logi rebalance carefully, and don't know incursion tactics. That said shield logi get A LOT of falloff so they should be pretty effective at a decent range. the cycle time increase is also something of interest. Although I'd guess most people would just start staggering reps so I can't say how effective that will be over all. 1) I am twisting nothing. He has been talking about blitzing and he specifically said blitzing. Missions themselves even when not blitzed don't scale well to multi-boxing anyways, Blitzing on multiple accounts is near impossible. 2) I am aware that plex costs have to be a factor in this, that is in itself another discussion. I am also aware that on its face pound for pound as they say Anoms and Lvl 3 blitzing is very similar. The effort involved with blitzing is far greater than that of efficient Anom running. Blitz income is almost 2 to 1 in favor of LP, which has a value only of that which the players dictate. Anoms direct isk bounty injection is preferable and considerably less effort. 3) Only time will tell how fleets like TVP and W2Me will respond to the changes, probably drop a Vindi for an additional Scimi, who knows. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13096	Posted - 2015.12.06 19:04:18 - [439] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: The Bigpuns wrote: Ok, this is getting out of hand. Hopefully we can agree that a massive rebalance of hisec pve would take an awful lot of balancing and is not likely to happen anytime soon. I do agree that some aspects of it could easily and desirably be toned down. Such as: 1. Reduce max lp return on burners 2. Link the lp return of a mission to level of completion (ie you blitz it only killing a quarter of the baddies, you only get a quarter of the lp's, maybe add a bit if you killed a boss rat) 3. Incursion and fw could do with some sort of work. Maybe not reducing max rewards, but make the rewards require more effort to cash in? Hope we can get to a civilised discussion again, even if there is no hope of these changes actually happening! Good because I'm content with the way things are now. There have already been tons of PVE content that has gotten nerfed or axed before I've had a chance to cash in. Baltec and that Jenn have already cashed in their cows and now want to eliminate any opportunity for anyone else to do the same. And no to your #1 because if you lower the LP on burners then they'll no longer be worth running. It is the same reason why rich bankers don't want the governments running deficits and giving out zero interest loans. Inflation or perceived inflation hurt the value of the amassed wealth one has accumulated. People like Jenn and Baltec have used the buffs to anoms and the "trimming fat off the top" of null sec to stuff their wallets over the years. Now they need the value of isk to be stable so they don't need to work hard to keep their wallets valuable. They also despise any thought of the game ending or changing because they have worked very hard for digital pixel goods. It is why in every single topic about anything having to do with isk or income, they start crying about inflation (which hasn't existed in this game in years). They are deep down inside just some old rich misers who want to count their wealth and keep it out of the hands of others. This guy thinks everyone values pixels like he does. The ironic thing is he's projecting, he's probably way richer than I am (Jeve assets says across 4 accounts I'm worth 14 billion isk lol, which is nothing). He's literally defending a status quo to does benefit people like me and screws the kinds of people he likes (like people in high sec). EVERY TIME I cash in some CONCORD LP (buying bpcs for someone in the LP selling channels I frequent) it basically depresses the value of LP sitting in high sec casual or new player wallets. I should even want to be in high sec on the alt that does incursions. But because of the imbalances, I am there at least part of my play time per month. It would actually be funnier if it wasn't sad, because the way the Alt is lead by his prejudice into basically supporting the people he thinks he's opposing (people like the Alt are actually very good for my imaginary wallet), he's mirroring what happens in actual real life. It's really too bad we can't talk politics here lol.
Tom Bradys RightThumb Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 0	Posted - 2015.12.06 19:42:19 - [440] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: The Bigpuns wrote: Ok, this is getting out of hand. Hopefully we can agree that a massive rebalance of hisec pve would take an awful lot of balancing and is not likely to happen anytime soon. I do agree that some aspects of it could easily and desirably be toned down. Such as: 1. Reduce max lp return on burners 2. Link the lp return of a mission to level of completion (ie you blitz it only killing a quarter of the baddies, you only get a quarter of the lp's, maybe add a bit if you killed a boss rat) 3. Incursion and fw could do with some sort of work. Maybe not reducing max rewards, but make the rewards require more effort to cash in? Hope we can get to a civilised discussion again, even if there is no hope of these changes actually happening! Good because I'm content with the way things are now. There have already been tons of PVE content that has gotten nerfed or axed before I've had a chance to cash in. Baltec and that Jenn have already cashed in their cows and now want to eliminate any opportunity for anyone else to do the same. And no to your #1 because if you lower the LP on burners then they'll no longer be worth running. It is the same reason why rich bankers don't want the governments running deficits and giving out zero interest loans. Inflation or perceived inflation hurt the value of the amassed wealth one has accumulated. People like Jenn and Baltec have used the buffs to anoms and the "trimming fat off the top" of null sec to stuff their wallets over the years. Now they need the value of isk to be stable so they don't need to work hard to keep their wallets valuable. They also despise any thought of the game ending or changing because they have worked very hard for digital pixel goods. It is why in every single topic about anything having to do with isk or income, they start crying about inflation (which hasn't existed in this game in years). They are deep down inside just some old rich misers who want to count their wealth and keep it out of the hands of others. This guy thinks everyone values pixels like he does. The ironic thing is he's projecting, he's probably way richer than I am (Jeve assets says across 4 accounts I'm worth 14 billion isk lol, which is nothing). He's literally defending a status quo to does benefit people like me and screws the kinds of people he likes (like people in high sec). EVERY TIME I cash in some CONCORD LP (buying bpcs for someone in the LP selling channels I frequent) it basically depresses the value of LP sitting in high sec casual or new player wallets. I should even want to be in high sec on the alt that does incursions. But because of the imbalances, I am there at least part of my play time per month. It would actually be funnier if it wasn't sad, because the way the Alt is lead by his prejudice into basically supporting the people he thinks he's opposing (people like the Alt are actually very good for my imaginary wallet), he's mirroring what happens in actual real life. It's really too bad we can't talk politics here lol. You never really ever argue a true point do you? You just play games with words and drift the discussion off into some black hole of eye-bleed. Basically I have come to the conclusion you are 100% full of hot air, 100% of the time. Now, I have to finish watching Seattle cream the Viks.

Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13096	Posted - 2015.12.06 22:44:53 - [441] - Quote Tom Bradys RightThumb wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: The Bigpuns wrote: Ok, this is getting out of hand. Hopefully we can agree that a massive rebalance of hisec pve would take an awful lot of balancing and is not likely to happen anytime soon. I do agree that some aspects of it could easily and desirably be toned down. Such as: 1. Reduce max lp return on burners 2. Link the lp return of a mission to level of completion (ie you blitz it only killing a quarter of the baddies, you only get a quarter of the lp's, maybe add a bit if you killed a boss rat) 3. Incursion and fw could do with some sort of work. Maybe not reducing max rewards, but make the rewards require more effort to cash in? Hope we can get to a civilised discussion again, even if there is no hope of these changes actually happening! Good because I'm content with the way things are now. There have already been tons of PVE content that has gotten nerfed or axed before I've had a chance to cash in. Baltec and that Jenn have already cashed in their cows and now want to eliminate any opportunity for anyone else to do the same. And no to your #1 because if you lower the LP on burners then they'll no longer be worth running. It is the same reason why rich bankers don't want the governments running deficits and giving out zero interest loans. Inflation or perceived inflation hurt the value of the amassed wealth one has accumulated. People like Jenn and Baltec have used the buffs to anoms and the "trimming fat off the top" of null sec to stuff their wallets over the years. Now they need the value of isk to be stable so they don't need to work hard to keep their wallets valuable. They also despise any thought of the game ending or changing because they have worked very hard for digital pixel goods. It is why in every single topic about anything having to do with isk or income, they start crying about inflation (which hasn't existed in this game in years). They are deep down inside just some old rich misers who want to count their wealth and keep it out of the hands of others. This guy thinks everyone values pixels like he does. The ironic thing is he's projecting, he's probably way richer than I am (Jeve assets says across 4 accounts I'm worth 14 billion isk lol, which is nothing). He's literally defending a status quo to does benefit people like me and screws the kinds of people he likes (like people in high sec). EVERY TIME I cash in some CONCORD LP (buying bpcs for someone in the LP selling channels I frequent) it basically depresses the value of LP sitting in high sec casual or new player wallets. I should even want to be in high sec on the alt that does incursions. But because of the imbalances, I am there at least part of my play time per month. It would actually be funnier if it wasn't sad, because the way the Alt is lead by his prejudice into basically supporting the people he thinks he's opposing (people like the Alt are actually very good for my imaginary wallet), he's mirroring what happens in actual real life. It's really too bad we can't talk politics here lol. You never really ever argue a true point do you? You just play games with words and drift the discussion off into some black hole of eye-bleed. Basically I have come to the conclusion you are 100% full of hot air, 100% of the time. Now, I have to finish watching Seattle cream the Viks. This is actually the kind of response you get when you tell the actual truth, probably from an alt of someone already in the conversation.
Hasikan Miallok Republic University Minmatar Republic 1708	Posted - 2015.12.06 23:29:25 - [442] - Quote This thread has got TL&DR . However my superficial impression is the argument seems to be "because maybe 50 or 100 mission runners (out of 300,000 subscriptions) at Lanngisi blitz missions and deliberately trash their agent standings to just above -2.0 please nerf all highsec ISK making activity :D It's just politics the overall motive is to reduce highsec income for all mission runners and the blitzers are just good propoganda.
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 765	Posted - 2015.12.06 23:38:52 - [443] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: This is actually the kind of response you get when you tell the actual truth, probably from an alt of someone already in the conversation. I am pretty sure you just proved his point with more of that trademark "Attack the messenger" bit you do. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 428	Posted - 2015.12.06 23:41:43 - [444] - Quote Hasikan Miallok wrote: This thread has got TL&DR . However my superficial impression is the argument seems to be "because maybe 50 or 100 mission runners (out of 300,000 subscriptions) at Lanngisi blitz missions and deliberately trash their agent standings to just above -2.0 please nerf all highsec ISK making activity :D It's just politics the overall motive is to reduce highsec income for all mission runners and the blitzers are just good propoganda. This a handful of scrubs shoould't decide the outcome for all.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 278	Posted - 2015.12.06 23:51:36 - [445] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: baltec1 wrote: It is infact just as easy to run 3 accounts in level 4 missions as it is running them in anoms. Per person its 90 mil at the very most you will get from anoms, this is on par with level 3 missions per person. Logi sit on top on the fleet, no change for them at all. Point 1) You are full of crap. You cannot multi-box mission blitz characters, not even close. You are blatantly lying. Point 2) Per character it is 25mil ticks AFK... or 75mil per character. This scales with the number of systems and the upgrades available. Running 3 accounts at 25mil ticks is almost as easy as running 1 at 30mil ticks. Again, you are blatantly lying. Point 3) You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, even so with the fitting changes and the Scimi losing 50 CPU, you will never fit an Incursion Scimi the same again. Going to chalk this one up to ignorance. Stop lying Baltec, you are just fudding your way through this horribly. I agree. You are soo full of it baltec. baltec1 wrote: Per person its 90 mil at the very most you will get from anoms, this is on par with level 3 missions per person. This post from you is your most ridiculously dumbfounded post thus far in this thread.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.06 23:55:40 - [446] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: Point 1) You are full of crap. You cannot multi-box mission blitz characters, not even close. You are blatantly lying. People run FC fleets while running probing alts at the same time, running multiple blitz alts is easier than that. Market McSelling Alt wrote: Point 2) Per character it is 25mil ticks AFK... or 75mil per character. This scales with the number of systems and the upgrades available. Running 3 accounts at 25mil ticks is almost as easy as running 1 at 30mil ticks. Again, you are blatantly lying. You can also run them AFK in missions for a similar amount. Market McSelling Alt wrote: Point 3) You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, even so with the fitting changes and the Scimi losing 50 CPU, you will never fit an Incursion Scimi the same again. Going to chalk this one up to ignorance. Stop lying Baltec, you are just fudding your way through this horribly. Why would your logi move more than 35 km away from the DPS in an incursion fleet in the first place? There is no reason at all for the logi to be any more than 5km away from the fleet. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.07 00:02:45 - [447] - Quote Jerry T Pepridge wrote: Hasikan Miallok wrote: This thread has got TL&DR . However my superficial impression is the argument seems to be "because maybe 50 or 100 mission runners (out of 300,000 subscriptions) at Lanngisi blitz missions and deliberately trash their agent standings to just above -2.0 please nerf all highsec ISK making activity :D It's just politics the overall motive is to reduce highsec income for all mission runners and the blitzers are just good propoganda. This a handful of scrubs shoould't decide the outcome for all. So would you like to reverse the tech moon nerf? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.07 00:18:39 - [448] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: baltec1 wrote: It is infact just as easy to run 3 accounts in level 4 missions as it is running them in anoms. Per person its 90 mil at the very most you will get from anoms, this is on par with level 3 missions per person. Logi sit on top on the fleet, no change for them at all. Point 1) You are full of crap. You cannot multi-box mission blitz characters, not even close. You are blatantly lying. Point 2) Per character it is 25mil ticks AFK... or 75mil per character. This scales with the number of systems and the upgrades available. Running 3 accounts at 25mil ticks is almost as easy as running 1 at 30mil ticks. Again, you are blatantly lying. Point 3) You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, even so with the fitting changes and the Scimi losing 50 CPU, you will never fit an Incursion Scimi the same again. Going to chalk this one up to ignorance. Stop lying Baltec, you are just fudding your way through this horribly. I agree. You are soo full of it baltec. baltec1 wrote: Per person its 90 mil at the very most you will get from anoms, this is on par with level 3 missions per person. This post from you is your most ridiculously dumbfounded post thus far in this thread. So far I have backed up everything I have said with data, charts, guides, fits, spreadsheets and even videos. To date you have provided nothing to back up your argument other than insults and lies. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 430	Posted - 2015.12.07 00:22:15 - [449] - Quote baltec1 wrote: So would you like to reverse the tech moon nerf? Implying you directly received any of it anyway, , its personal income argument here not alliance wide. Im well aware of the struggles for nullsec PVE, toiled with it b4 i became rich enough to not worry about fun/hour. If you want to take action, tank the SOE prices, rather than cry about it tbh, else HTFU.
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 768	Posted - 2015.12.07 00:36:16 - [450] - Quote Jerry T Pepridge wrote: baltec1 wrote: So would you like to reverse the tech moon nerf? Implying you directly received any of it anyway, , its personal income argument here not alliance wide. Im well aware of the struggles for nullsec PVE, toiled with it b4 i became rich enough to not worry about fun/hour. If you want to take action, tank the SOE prices, rather than cry about it tbh, else HTFU. That is the problem with Baltec and Jenn. Their issue with income in High Sec is with Incursions (which 1.5% run) and lvl 4's (Which are LP value dependent). Incursions just got a nerf in the form of Logi fitting, module fitting, cycle times, range. Incursions had a nerf before that in drone assist limits. Incursions are about to be nerfed harder by OGB changes. Is it enough for them? Nope, they minimalize it. Null sec got Anoms boosted this summer, are they happy? Nope And their lvl 4 arguments revolve around a broken LP market for 3 total agents in High Sec, only two that are particularly useful. So really they have an issue with the market value of LP, while ignoring the fact they could make 2x as much running the same missions in Null. And LOL@ "FC's probe on alt accounts while running a fleet so missions are easy to multibox" Where you flying? MoA?! CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.

Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 433	Posted - 2015.12.07 00:51:11 - [451] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: And their lvl 4 arguments revolve around a broken LP market for 3 total agents in High Sec, only two that are particularly useful. So really they have an issue with the market value of LP, while ignoring the fact they could make 2x as much running the same missions in Null. If you mean u can run SOE missions in nullsec the same way as highsec, your kidding yourself matey. http://evemaps.dotlan.net/map/Outer_Ring/IZ-AOB#kills24 (Npc kils 24hours) http://evemaps.dotlan.net/map/Outer_Ring/IZ-AOB#jumps24 (jumps 24 hours) Assume each jump is an interuption/ make you warp to safe. You can run those missions sure, at a much higher risk, interupted alot & only really available to those on that side of the map. for the 40-50 or so blitzing those missions, they have 5b+ in ships perfectly optimazed for it, you want to fly those to NPC null?
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.07 00:59:35 - [452] - Quote Jerry T Pepridge wrote: baltec1 wrote: So would you like to reverse the tech moon nerf? Implying you directly received any of it anyway, , its personal income argument here not alliance wide. . Argument here is game balance, tech is just one example of poor balance that benefited a handful of people. OK how about the FW nerf that stopped us from earning 1 trillion in a single weekend? Its only a handful of people after all. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 768	Posted - 2015.12.07 01:06:44 - [453] - Quote Jerry T Pepridge wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: And their lvl 4 arguments revolve around a broken LP market for 3 total agents in High Sec, only two that are particularly useful. So really they have an issue with the market value of LP, while ignoring the fact they could make 2x as much running the same missions in Null. If you mean u can run SOE missions in nullsec the same way as highsec, your kidding yourself matey. http://evemaps.dotlan.net/map/Outer_Ring/IZ-AOB#kills24 (Npc kils 24hours) http://evemaps.dotlan.net/map/Outer_Ring/IZ-AOB#jumps24 (jumps 24 hours) Assume each jump is an interuption/ make you warp to safe. You can run those missions sure, at a much higher risk, interupted alot & only really available to those on that side of the map. for the 40-50 or so blitzing those missions, they have 5b+ in ships perfectly optimazed for it, you want to fly those to NPC null? Player created content should not play into an equation of CCP manifested environment. The idea here put out but Baltec and Jenn is no one is ever ganked in HS running missions, so it is prefectly fair for us on the other side to present the same in Null. That being said, I realize that running missions can be harder in Null. But with a cloak, MWD and a scout you are good to go as long as you can fit a depot. You could probably even take some of the more blingy fits out there but you can blitz lvl 4's just fine in a 500mil Mach. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 768	Posted - 2015.12.07 01:07:45 - [454] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Jerry T Pepridge wrote: baltec1 wrote: So would you like to reverse the tech moon nerf? Implying you directly received any of it anyway, , its personal income argument here not alliance wide. . Argument here is game balance, tech is just one example of poor balance that benefited a handful of people. OK how about the FW nerf that stopped us from earning 1 trillion in a single weekend? Its only a handful of people after all. The FW nerf was due to CCP realizing there was a problem in their code and fixing it. QQ more somewhere else, but code fixes for exploits shouldn't be the hill you decide to die on. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.07 01:07:55 - [455] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: That is the problem with Baltec and Jenn. Their issue with income in High Sec is with Incursions (which 1.5% run) and lvl 4's (Which are LP value dependent). Incursions just got a nerf in the form of Logi fitting, module fitting, cycle times, range. Incursions had a nerf before that in drone assist limits. Incursions are about to be nerfed harder by OGB changes. Is it enough for them? Nope, they minimalize it. None of those things have or will nerf incursion income. Market McSelling Alt wrote: Null sec got Anoms boosted this summer, are they happy? Nope Anoms don't work with large populations even with that buff and have a host of other issues. You have been told this countless times. Market McSelling Alt wrote: And their lvl 4 arguments revolve around a broken LP market for 3 total agents in High Sec, only two that are particularly useful. So really they have an issue with the market value of LP, while ignoring the fact they could make 2x as much running the same missions in Null. Actually its just about every faction LP store, even the caldari navy can net you close to 2000 LP Market McSelling Alt wrote: And LOL@ "FC's probe on alt accounts while running a fleet so missions are easy to multibox" Where you flying? MoA?! Just about every fleet in null operates like this. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 433	Posted - 2015.12.07 01:08:58 - [456] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Jerry T Pepridge wrote: baltec1 wrote: So would you like to reverse the tech moon nerf? Implying you directly received any of it anyway, , its personal income argument here not alliance wide. . Argument here is game balance, tech is just one example of poor balance that benefited a handful of people. OK how about the FW nerf that stopped us from earning 1 trillion in a single weekend? Its only a handful of people after all. I liked tech being OP & valuable was a conflict driver. you could argue, that more was lost in defending/taking tech (DRF Vs CFC/Morsis mihi northern coalition (not NC.) etc) - hand full, no. What do you think needs to happen here, what exactly is your argument, that null should be buffed, or the SOE agents should be nerfed? you have options, you can crash the price of all SOE items, or wait until it becomes saturated enough the LP/isk returns to normal/equilibrium Which will happen. The argument that nullsec can do same missions/even anom farming is BS. Coz 95% of null is there for PVP, the other 5% trying to "make a living" is contantly interupted by the 95%.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 278	Posted - 2015.12.07 01:09:47 - [457] - Quote Jerry T Pepridge wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: And their lvl 4 arguments revolve around a broken LP market for 3 total agents in High Sec, only two that are particularly useful. So really they have an issue with the market value of LP, while ignoring the fact they could make 2x as much running the same missions in Null. If you mean u can run SOE missions in nullsec the same way as highsec, your kidding yourself matey. http://evemaps.dotlan.net/map/Outer_Ring/IZ-AOB#kills24 (Npc kils 24hours) http://evemaps.dotlan.net/map/Outer_Ring/IZ-AOB#jumps24 (jumps 24 hours) Assume each jump is an interuption/ make you warp to safe. You can run those missions sure, at a much higher risk, interupted alot & only really available to those on that side of the map. for the 40-50 or so blitzing those missions, they have 5b+ in ships perfectly optimazed for it, you want to fly those to NPC null? There are lots of other Factions you can run missions for in nullsec, like Mordus. But I do agree that they are far more dangerous to run then in hi-sec and for that reason I feel it to be justified to make many more agents available that offer these missions there in nullsec. In addition, adding new types of level 5s would also be beneficial for nullsec PVE improvement.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.07 01:11:33 - [458] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: baltec1 wrote: Jerry T Pepridge wrote: baltec1 wrote: So would you like to reverse the tech moon nerf? Implying you directly received any of it anyway, , its personal income argument here not alliance wide. . Argument here is game balance, tech is just one example of poor balance that benefited a handful of people. OK how about the FW nerf that stopped us from earning 1 trillion in a single weekend? Its only a handful of people after all. The FW nerf was due to CCP realizing there was a problem in their code and fixing it. QQ more somewhere else, but code fixes for exploits shouldn't be the hill you decide to die on. And the problems we are pointing out are also problems with code that we are exploiting to the max. How about we bring back tracking titans again so we can earn 500mil/hr? I'm sure plex buyers would love for all of that raw isk to flood into the economy. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17046	Posted - 2015.12.07 01:21:55 - [459] - Quote Jerry T Pepridge wrote: What do you think needs to happen here, what exactly is your argument, that null should be buffed, or the SOE agents should be nerfed? PVE in all areas of space needs a top down revamp. Remove the ability to blitz missions, massively reduce incursion payouts in highsec, FW missions need to also be revamped so you cant blitz them in a bomber, Anoms need to be retired as the primary form of making isk in null and replaced with mission agents. Loot and LP markets also need to be revamped to better reward people who fly in the more dangerous areas of space. Moon mining needs to become active not passive income. Market McSelling Alt wrote: you have options, you can crash the price of all SOE items That's not an option, the SOE market will only crash if CCP nerfs the items it sells. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 433	Posted - 2015.12.07 02:28:42 - [460] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Jerry T Pepridge wrote: What do you think needs to happen here, what exactly is your argument, that null should be buffed, or the SOE agents should be nerfed? PVE in all areas of space needs a top down revamp. Remove the ability to blitz missions, massively reduce incursion payouts in highsec, FW missions need to also be revamped so you cant blitz them in a bomber, Anoms need to be retired as the primary form of making isk in null and replaced with mission agents. Loot and LP markets also need to be revamped to better reward people who fly in the more dangerous areas of space. Moon mining needs to become active not passive income. If the highsec bears in this thread actually read what I was saying they would realise that I'm calling for just as big nerfs in low and null areas of space. Market McSelling Alt wrote: you have options, you can crash the price of all SOE items That's not an option, the SOE market will only crash if CCP nerfs the items it sells. You can very easily crash any market in this game. I certainly can agree it does need to be looked at Top down, your ideas would bring some great conflicts, particular the moon mining, but i think alliances that hold sov need some income to balance all the isk required to "live" there. My idea is a little simpler. leave everything as it is, Missions in Nullsec need to be easier to complete, so the players there can use cheaper ships / pvp ships to do the content. Imagine If a PVP vexor could complete a nullsec L4 PVE mission.

Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 433	Posted - 2015.12.07 02:39:51 - [461] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: There are lots of other Factions you can run missions for in nullsec, like Mordus. But I do agree that they are far more dangerous to run then in hi-sec and for that reason I feel it to be justified to make many more agents available that offer these missions there in nullsec. In addition, adding new types of level 5s would also be beneficial for nullsec PVE improvement. Very true, i used to run Transtellar Shipping L4's in syndicate back in the day, but never min/maxed them. Making them easier to complete, requiring less tank/dps to complete is whats needed, lower the sec, easier to complete.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2148	Posted - 2015.12.07 04:36:30 - [462] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: Jerry T Pepridge wrote: baltec1 wrote: So would you like to reverse the tech moon nerf? Implying you directly received any of it anyway, , its personal income argument here not alliance wide. Im well aware of the struggles for nullsec PVE, toiled with it b4 i became rich enough to not worry about fun/hour. If you want to take action, tank the SOE prices, rather than cry about it tbh, else HTFU. That is the problem with Baltec and Jenn. Their issue with income in High Sec is with Incursions (which 1.5% run) and lvl 4's (Which are LP value dependent). Incursions just got a nerf in the form of Logi fitting, module fitting, cycle times, range. Incursions had a nerf before that in drone assist limits. Incursions are about to be nerfed harder by OGB changes. Is it enough for them? Nope, they minimalize it. Null sec got Anoms boosted this summer, are they happy? Nope And their lvl 4 arguments revolve around a broken LP market for 3 total agents in High Sec, only two that are particularly useful. So really they have an issue with the market value of LP, while ignoring the fact they could make 2x as much running the same missions in Null. And LOL@ "FC's probe on alt accounts while running a fleet so missions are easy to multibox" Where you flying? MoA?! I'm not a goon so I cant say what they do with their tech money, but I'm sure a lot of that goes into infrastructure, logistics, and SRP, so it is hard to say members don't benefit from it. But it is also a hard to measure figure. Incursion problems: pull players out of null and into highsec for isk making activities. Is a large isk faucet, when you look at the 1.5% of players run incursions, and then look at the graph showing how much isk is put into game by incursions that is where my problem arises. And also effectively caps LP markets for mission runners. Missions: Most level 4 agents offer better income than nullsec anoms. pretty much any corp with a decent BPC in a 0.5 or 0.6 system (maybe even higher sec?). Lanngisi is simply the perfect storm of conditions that push income up and is an easy example. incursion nerf is indirect and hasn't hit yet. I can't say what will happen. If anyone knows what the results of dropping 2 dps for an extra logi + on grid links it would be interesting to know. if I'm not mistake the main anom change was adding an extra one or two. which doesn't really change income, and barely increases the amount of players that can use a system. Also I don't really like the idea of afk game play. I agree the jump from FCing to multboxing missions isn't exactly useful. however it does illustrate that some people are either far more dedicated to making things work, or simply just more proficient than other players. If I can do something in eve there are many pilots that can simply do it better than me. That highsec missions pay as much as they do and are as convenient as they are just doesn't seem very eve to me. One of the stories that helped sell me on eve was of players running out to null, mining ABC ores for an afternoon and being able to buy a GTC. Now it seems like ABCs are damn near everywhere. Also there was a guy flying around ninjaing DED Plexes making billions. By comparison sitting around in highsec running lv4s just isn't a compelling story. I don't necessarily want to see nerfs like Jenn or baltec1 are proposing, but giving the people that want to get out of highsec better options for income in dangerous space doesn't seem like a bad idea. I also tend to think in terms of isk sinks/faucets, and less isk in game doesn't really seem like a bad thing. Should be interesting to see how many of those 700b x-l citadel bpos sell. Market McSelling Alt wrote: Player created content should not play into an equation of CCP manifested environment. The idea here put out but Baltec and Jenn is no one is ever ganked in HS running missions, so it is prefectly fair for us on the other side to present the same in Null. That being said, I realize that running missions can be harder in Null. But with a cloak, MWD and a scout you are good to go as long as you can fit a depot. You could probably even take some of the more blingy fits out there but you can blitz lvl 4's just fine in a 500mil Mach. I mostly agree however missions aren't available in a large portion of null. Also cloak+scout+depots are all things that will slow you down. do they slow you down enough that your profit makes it worth it? one of those things I just don't know. baltec1 wrote: That's not an option, the SOE market will only crash if CCP nerfs the items it sells. people can only buy so many probe launchers. that said throwing enough people at it that they do crash seems like a huge waste of time. and also potentially counterproductive as I'd guess at least some goons are running for the sanctuary out in x-7o, and making a bunch of isk there. @ChainsawPlankto
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4807	Posted - 2015.12.07 04:55:05 - [463] - Quote baltec1 wrote: How about we bring back tracking titans again so we can earn 500mil/hr? I think this was before my time; can you expand on this a bit? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2148	Posted - 2015.12.07 05:27:21 - [464] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: baltec1 wrote: How about we bring back tracking titans again so we can earn 500mil/hr? I think this was before my time, so can you expand on this a bit? A long time ago capital weapons used to have decent tracking, and siege modules had a huge tracking debuff so in seige dreads were designed to only hit other dreads or poses. on one of the capital rebalances they gave titans a huge damage bonus. This resulted in people warping titans into anoms at range and blapping pretty much everything. now titans have a role bonus "turrets fitted to this ship will do reduced damage to small targets" On the max skilled test server thingy I tried shooting something small (and stationary) with a titan gun, it did ~20 damage on a hit. It was kinda funny watching videos of titans one volleying npc battleships. But perhaps something not good for the game. Although how much of the nerf was because a tracking titan could be used effectively in pvp vs in ratting? Having titans in anoms seems like something that might actually be interesting and generate some content. although I imagine they would stay aligned pretty much all of the time, so maybe not that interesting. sadly I can't find a good video, although there are a bunch of titan/super carrier kill videos @ChainsawPlankto
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 278	Posted - 2015.12.07 05:33:26 - [465] - Quote Jerry T Pepridge wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: There are lots of other Factions you can run missions for in nullsec, like Mordus. But I do agree that they are far more dangerous to run then in hi-sec and for that reason I feel it to be justified to make many more agents available that offer these missions there in nullsec. In addition, adding new types of level 5s would also be beneficial for nullsec PVE improvement. Very true, i used to run Transtellar Shipping L4's in syndicate back in the day, but never min/maxed them. Making them easier to complete, requiring less tank/dps to complete is whats needed, lower the sec, easier to complete. Hmm, maybe different types of missions then for nullsec. Similar to burners that have 2 or 3 powerful rats to kill that requires ships to be PVP fitted to kill them. What about this idea of a Level 5 Capital class PVP burners in nullsec? The missions would be cyno jammed so that uninvited quests can't interrupt and has a gate that allows Caps to enter through.
Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 433	Posted - 2015.12.07 06:54:20 - [466] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: Jerry T Pepridge wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: There are lots of other Factions you can run missions for in nullsec, like Mordus. But I do agree that they are far more dangerous to run then in hi-sec and for that reason I feel it to be justified to make many more agents available that offer these missions there in nullsec. In addition, adding new types of level 5s would also be beneficial for nullsec PVE improvement. Very true, i used to run Transtellar Shipping L4's in syndicate back in the day, but never min/maxed them. Making them easier to complete, requiring less tank/dps to complete is whats needed, lower the sec, easier to complete. Hmm, maybe different types of missions then for nullsec. Similar to burners that have 2 or 3 powerful rats to kill that requires ships to be PVP fitted to kill them. What about this idea of a Level 5 Capital class PVP burners in nullsec? The missions would be cyno jammed so that uninvited quests can't interrupt and has a gate that allows Caps to enter through. Mobile cyno inhibitor adding PVE that requires carriers is way too high a skillcap. requiring a carrier + skills to do Null PVE is kin of a joke, i think nerfing L4 in null to be able to do in PVP ships is the go forward (if its broken at all. I think once the SOE products reach equilibriam (more sperging mission runners go there) this whole thing will blow over.
The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 56	Posted - 2015.12.07 08:31:39 - [467] - Quote Couple of points I read earlier that I would like to debunk: Removing the blitz "loophole" would not only hurt these 200m/hr runners. The ability to quickly finish a rubbish mission is important. Imagine recon, cargo delivery, or half the drone missions where you have to stay to the bitter end. I don't use Anizes guide, but I do sometimes like to just complete the objective and get out. This is not a problem for 99% of the people running missions, but reducing the lp return for partial clears would be an effective mitigator. Crash the SoE lp store? Check out the buy orders. That market is a long way from crashing. It would take a lot of people blitzing in Lann a long time to achieve that. I personally have a few nestors worth of lp's with SoE plus several million spread over many other corps, but cashing them all in bores me. The only market crashing I'm going to do is when I ram my iteron into Jita.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17047	Posted - 2015.12.07 08:41:11 - [468] - Quote Jerry T Pepridge wrote: You can very easily crash any market in this game. Not markets like SOE that are in huge demand and have a relatively wide distribution. Jerry T Pepridge wrote: I certainly can agree it does need to be looked at Top down, your ideas would bring some great conflicts, particular the moon mining, but i think alliances that hold sov need some income to balance all the isk required to "live" there. Income will come via taxing for things such as using infrastructure. A little more incentive to go live in the space you own. Jerry T Pepridge wrote: My idea is a little simpler. leave everything as it is, Missions in Nullsec need to be easier to complete, so the players there can use cheaper ships / pvp ships to do the content. Imagine If a PVP vexor could complete a nullsec L4 PVE mission. It can. A small gang of 5 pvp fitted ships is very efficient at running missions. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 433	Posted - 2015.12.07 09:08:48 - [469] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Jerry T Pepridge wrote: You can very easily crash any market in this game. Not markets like SOE that are in huge demand and have a relatively wide distribution. Do you have any figures to show ? these markets will be / are well on there way to be / already saturated. As more and more switch, and more and more get produced, the price can only go down to a point where something else(caldari navy probs) has better isk/LP ratio & has agent in idyllic location. the prices of the other lp stores will rise, as more people swap to soe. knowing this, what do you do with a spare 300b? to help along the process? baltec1 wrote: Jerry T Pepridge wrote: My idea is a little simpler. leave everything as it is, Missions in Nullsec need to be easier to complete, so the players there can use cheaper ships / pvp ships to do the content. Imagine If a PVP vexor could complete a nullsec L4 PVE mission. It can. A small gang of 5 pvp fitted ships is very efficient at running missions. id like to be able to solo it, in something most people can afford to lose (a t2 pvp fitted cruiser) after just one of these horrible eve pve missions you guys do.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17047	Posted - 2015.12.07 10:45:48 - [470] - Quote Jerry T Pepridge wrote: Do you have any figures to show ? these markets will be / are well on there way to be / already saturated. As more and more switch, and more and more get produced, the price can only go down to a point where something else(caldari navy probs) has better isk/LP ratio & has agent in idyllic location. the prices of the other lp stores will rise, as more people swap to soe. SOE LP has been steady for years, the sum of isk required to crash that market would be gigantic to the point of making the ice interdictions look cheap and the effect only temporary, a week or two at best. Nobody has pockets that deep. Jerry T Pepridge wrote: id like to be able to solo it, in something most people can afford to lose (a t2 pvp fitted cruiser) after just one of these horrible eve pve missions you guys do. Entirely possible, sig tanking combined with a rep works but you will take a hit isk/hr doing so. Running around in a small gang is more ideal as it provides dedicated logi, more firepower and the ability to respond to threats more effectively. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship

Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13100	Posted - 2015.12.07 14:01:32 - [471] - Quote Chainsaw Plankton wrote: Arthur Aihaken wrote: baltec1 wrote: How about we bring back tracking titans again so we can earn 500mil/hr? I think this was before my time, so can you expand on this a bit? A long time ago capital weapons used to have decent tracking, and siege modules had a huge tracking debuff so in seige dreads were designed to only hit other dreads or poses. on one of the capital rebalances they gave titans a huge damage bonus. This resulted in people warping titans into anoms at range and blapping pretty much everything. now titans have a role bonus "turrets fitted to this ship will do reduced damage to small targets" On the max skilled test server thingy I tried shooting something small (and stationary) with a titan gun, it did ~20 damage on a hit. It was kinda funny watching videos of titans one volleying npc battleships. But perhaps something not good for the game. Although how much of the nerf was because a tracking titan could be used effectively in pvp vs in ratting? Having titans in anoms seems like something that might actually be interesting and generate some content. although I imagine they would stay aligned pretty much all of the time, so maybe not that interesting. sadly I can't find a good video, although there are a bunch of titan/super carrier kill videos The way I saw ti done was with an Avatar Titan and a Scimitar. Back then you could apply remote tracking link to the titan. The scimitar would have remote tracking links, a remote sebo and a web. The remote sebo would let the titan lock faster and when the site was done the scimitar would just web sling the Titan to a new site. It was sick as all hell. There were only a few people capable of doing it, but when we started discussing the balance issues they said the same things as defenders of the current status quo: "But look at how much you have to invest in this to get it to work in terms of isk and training!!" High investment (in the case of ratting Titans, upwards of 90 billion isk and years of training) doesn't make something balanced.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2150	Posted - 2015.12.07 20:58:10 - [472] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Jerry T Pepridge wrote: You can very easily crash any market in this game. Not markets like SOE that are in huge demand and have a relatively wide distribution. Jerry T Pepridge wrote: I certainly can agree it does need to be looked at Top down, your ideas would bring some great conflicts, particular the moon mining, but i think alliances that hold sov need some income to balance all the isk required to "live" there. Income will come via taxing for things such as using infrastructure. A little more incentive to go live in the space you own. Jerry T Pepridge wrote: My idea is a little simpler. leave everything as it is, Missions in Nullsec need to be easier to complete, so the players there can use cheaper ships / pvp ships to do the content. Imagine If a PVP vexor could complete a nullsec L4 PVE mission. It can. A small gang of 5 pvp fitted ships is very efficient at running missions. Rough estimate ~50b a day in SoE stuff trade in jita. not rough estimate because I got curious, so includes Astero, Stratios, virtue implants, core/combat probes + launchers (12 items total, copy/pasted from in game to excel). Average daily SoE trade over the last year: 83,693,614,468.02 now I suppose I should go backwards on that and figure out how much LP that was dividing by typical isk/lp ratios it looks like around 40-50mil LP/day. (obviously inaccurate as who knows how many were sold a second time, it not more, I assume most of the buy orders are people that are going to try and resell) You know I don't think it would actually be all that hard to crash. Just throwing some fraction of the total volume could drop prices which should further drop prices as people undercut and could even lead to firesales further dropping price. I can imagine goons going on a mission running op and having 1000 people in each of the SoE hubs all running missions, but what does that really end up accomplishing and what is the payoff? And of course players will be able to switch to other corps. SoE is nice because it is braindead easy to convert lp, and you even get a good rate. If alliance level income mostly moves to personal income perhaps in many ways the expenses can also go down. A lot of the infrastructure costs seem to be there as isk sinks. perhaps the next design can move the sinks/taxes more to a personal level. although something like you have to pay a million isk every time you want to dock would just get annoying. and the ishtar is pretty strong at soloing missions. Small gangs sound like overkill. lately I've been tempted to try null missions in a cloaky interdiction nullfied t3, but I'm also lazy. A t1 cruiser could probably blitz level 3s alright. The Bigpuns wrote: Couple of points I read earlier that I would like to debunk: Removing the blitz "loophole" would not only hurt these 200m/hr runners. The ability to quickly finish a rubbish mission is important. Imagine recon, cargo delivery, or half the drone missions where you have to stay to the bitter end. I don't use Anizes guide, but I do sometimes like to just complete the objective and get out. This is not a problem for 99% of the people running missions, but reducing the lp return for partial clears would be an effective mitigator. Crash the SoE lp store? Check out the buy orders. That market is a long way from crashing. It would take a lot of people blitzing in Lann a long time to achieve that. I personally have a few nestors worth of lp's with SoE plus several million spread over many other corps, but cashing them all in bores me. The only market crashing I'm going to do is when I ram my iteron into Jita. I don't think that I'd want to see blitzing completely removed. The longer you sit in one place the more likely you are to end up dead and would imo hurt low/null mission running. And sitting around shooting NPCs is well boring. Although making it too easy to blitz isn't really a good thing either. It is very specific style of blitzing in a small set of specific locations with the addition of burners that puts you over 200m/hour. My initial idea is to balance missions around sec bands. so high/low/null. Probably put highsec at around the payout received in a 0.7 system. which would be a decent sized LP nerf. I'd also normalize burners to be in constellation and probably nerf the bonus payout, and maybe even the bounty. Both of these are a kick in the nuts to blitzing but I don't think will affect regular mission runners too much. It would also open up pretty much every agent and make them all about similar in terms of desirability with people mostly choosing based on constellation layout and LP stores. Low and null I'm tempted to say balance around the lower possible sec, and keep the 50% bonus LP and current bounties on burners. A full pve rework sounds like it could very well be a good thing, but seems like it would take a lot of time and effort. there is also the option to make standings matter and have declines be far more punishing then they are now. imo 99% of the current standings mechanics are a joke. @ChainsawPlankto
Johng Kahn eXceed Inc. 8	Posted - 2015.12.07 23:24:46 - [473] - Quote As usual in most claims of isk per hour i'm seeing trumped up numbers even if you do not count that your using 3 accounts to get this. I'm not seeing the time spent on logistics in that at all. There was mention of going to jita to sell, restocking ammo, and such. I personally ran out soe to get 8.0 standings for my alt corp. Not even including what BM's that i sold to Pro S. I had more then a dst's worth of pure crap that i later just reprocessed and sold the minerals in system. I did all this with duel rattles that cranked out more then 1300 dps each. I'm sure there are levels of blitzing and efficiency beyond my experience out there but i'm no slouch either especially when i just want it to all be over. Honestly with that kind of investment and accounting the 3 toons your not very far above what 3 hulks could do in highsec sitting on one belt and they do not have to run around exchanging lp and deciding what to sell and what not to. Of all the types of pve I have enguaged in " belt ratting carrier being the only type i have not" I would have to say that Running l4's is in the bottom two of my list for profitability and fun. If the ammount of toons and value to plex them is not included in the formula then the isk/hr is actually infinate cause i can just have 30 toons in domi running in 5 man fleets each landing in a site and afk clearing them as I work each set to next gate. Then your only bottle neck is how much computing power and bandwidth you have to work with.
Hasikan Miallok Republic University Minmatar Republic 1716	Posted - 2015.12.07 23:50:43 - [474] - Quote Overall this thread is totally illogical. *Claimed issue:* People make too much out of SOE missioning Rational Solution: Increase the ISK component of SOE specific LP store items Commonly Suggested Solution: Nerf hisec LP for everyone everywhere
Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 436	Posted - 2015.12.07 23:55:55 - [475] - Quote Hasikan Miallok wrote: Overall this thread is totally illogical. *Claimed issue:* People make too much out of SOE missioning Rational Solution: Increase the ISK component of SOE specific LP store items Commonly Suggested Solution: Nerf hisec LP for everyone everywhere 1) a handful of people Using 3 accounts, 5b in perfect cooker cutter ships are making too much from SOE Missions 2) it will reach a balance point where one store is more isk/lp, or accelerate by doing as you suggest 3) Nerf the inc dmg on L4's everywhere else (Low/null) so they can be done in cheaper/PVP ships solo.
Hasikan Miallok Republic University Minmatar Republic 1716	Posted - 2015.12.08 00:27:01 - [476] - Quote Jerry T Pepridge wrote: 3) Nerf the inc dmg on L4's everywhere else (Low/null) so they can be done in cheaper/PVP ships solo. Whilst that would work, i am not 100% sure how it gels with the "higher risk higher reward" equation for which EVE is famous. It also doesn't help people in renter space as there are no agents there.
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 779	Posted - 2015.12.08 00:29:32 - [477] - Quote Hasikan Miallok wrote: Jerry T Pepridge wrote: 3) Nerf the inc dmg on L4's everywhere else (Low/null) so they can be done in cheaper/PVP ships solo. Whilst that would work, i am not 100% sure how it gels with the "higher risk higher reward" equation for which EVE is famous. It also doesn't help people in renter space as there are no agents there. The first problem is getting over Risk v Reward... Eve is clearly not based on this. Eve is based on Effort v Reward and Ingenuity vs Reward. Once you get over that old myth, things become easier to understand. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 437	Posted - 2015.12.08 00:43:15 - [478] - Quote Hasikan Miallok wrote: Jerry T Pepridge wrote: 3) Nerf the inc dmg on L4's everywhere else (Low/null) so they can be done in cheaper/PVP ships solo. Whilst that would work, i am not 100% sure how it gels with the "higher risk higher reward" equation for which EVE is famous. It also doesn't help people in renter space as there are no agents there. You can probs spend 2-3 weeks training to get into a cruiser L4 My idea would be it can be done on cyno alts, etc.minimum SP. plant alts in mission pockets. The risk is still there, if its cheap more ppl will do it & more pvp will happen as a result. the argument "null is fine for missions" is rubbish, people suggesting it have never left highsec. People dont do many L4 missions in null & low, coz the ships required to complete them are terrible in PVP situations (hint: everything is PVP in low/null). Nerfing the Incoming dmg to make them able to be completed with PVP cruisers would put alot more people out there doing them. then the players still staying in hisec with there bling ships can still make isk with missions & so can nullsec.
King Aires Chicks on Speed Mordus Angels 58	Posted - 2015.12.08 00:52:26 - [479] - Quote Jerry T Pepridge wrote: Hasikan Miallok wrote: Jerry T Pepridge wrote: 3) Nerf the inc dmg on L4's everywhere else (Low/null) so they can be done in cheaper/PVP ships solo. Whilst that would work, i am not 100% sure how it gels with the "higher risk higher reward" equation for which EVE is famous. It also doesn't help people in renter space as there are no agents there. You can probs spend 2-3 weeks training to get into a cruiser L4 My idea would be it can be done on cyno alts, etc.minimum SP. plant alts in mission pockets. The risk is still there, if its cheap more ppl will do it & more pvp will happen as a result. the argument "null is fine for missions" is rubbish, people suggesting it have never left highsec. People dont do many L4 missions in null & low, coz the ships required to complete them are terrible in PVP situations (hint: everything is PVP in low/null). Nerfing the Incoming dmg to make them able to be completed with PVP cruisers would put alot more people out there doing them. then the players still staying in hisec with there bling ships can still make isk with missions & so can nullsec. Whatever dude, I happen to know for a fact that you can blitz burners in 0.0 all day every day even in a camped system and make billions. Whoever thinks High Sec has it made when you can blow through 20,000 lp per mission for some of the best LP rates in the game is lazy or stupid.
Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 437	Posted - 2015.12.08 00:55:09 - [480] - Quote King Aires wrote: Whatever dude, I happen to know for a fact that you can blitz burners in 0.0 all day every day even in a camped system and make billions. Whoever thinks High Sec has it made when you can blow through 20,000 lp per mission for some of the best LP rates in the game is lazy or stupid. thats nice, what about Angel extravaganza? or are those meant to be skipped for burner only? Which system offers only Burner missions?

King Aires Chicks on Speed Mordus Angels 60	Posted - 2015.12.08 00:57:27 - [481] - Quote Jerry T Pepridge wrote: King Aires wrote: Whatever dude, I happen to know for a fact that you can blitz burners in 0.0 all day every day even in a camped system and make billions. Whoever thinks High Sec has it made when you can blow through 20,000 lp per mission for some of the best LP rates in the game is lazy or stupid. thats nice, what about Angel extravaganza? or are those meant to be skipped for burner only? Which system offers only Burner missions? The one where you hit the decline button when you don't get one until you do... Shall we make a coloring book that shows you how to blitz?
Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 437	Posted - 2015.12.08 01:00:45 - [482] - Quote King Aires wrote: Jerry T Pepridge wrote: King Aires wrote: Whatever dude, I happen to know for a fact that you can blitz burners in 0.0 all day every day even in a camped system and make billions. Whoever thinks High Sec has it made when you can blow through 20,000 lp per mission for some of the best LP rates in the game is lazy or stupid. thats nice, what about Angel extravaganza? or are those meant to be skipped for burner only? Which system offers only Burner missions? The one where you hit the decline button when you don't get one until you do... Shall we make a coloring book that shows you how to blitz? You can if you like, regardless you wont be able to chain them together without ruining standings. you seem a little upset, it would suck to have to rely on missions to plex accounts. i pity you.
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 779	Posted - 2015.12.08 01:10:55 - [483] - Quote Jerry T Pepridge wrote: King Aires wrote: Jerry T Pepridge wrote: King Aires wrote: Whatever dude, I happen to know for a fact that you can blitz burners in 0.0 all day every day even in a camped system and make billions. Whoever thinks High Sec has it made when you can blow through 20,000 lp per mission for some of the best LP rates in the game is lazy or stupid. thats nice, what about Angel extravaganza? or are those meant to be skipped for burner only? Which system offers only Burner missions? The one where you hit the decline button when you don't get one until you do... Shall we make a coloring book that shows you how to blitz? You can if you like, regardless you wont be able to chain them together without ruining standings. you seem a little upset, it would suck to have to rely on missions to plex accounts. i pity you. So wait? You can't blitz burners forever? That must mean Jenn and Baltec have absolutely no point as the massive gains they are QQing about are temporary. Just checking. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 437	Posted - 2015.12.08 02:12:39 - [484] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: So wait? You can't blitz burners forever? That must mean Jenn and Baltec have absolutely no point as the massive gains they are QQing about are temporary. Just checking. I imagine with 3 alts there sharing missions & standings it would be negated somewhat.
Hasikan Miallok Republic University Minmatar Republic 1718	Posted - 2015.12.08 02:50:00 - [485] - Quote Jerry T Pepridge wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: So wait? You can't blitz burners forever? That must mean Jenn and Baltec have absolutely no point as the massive gains they are QQing about are temporary. Just checking. I imagine with 3 alts there sharing missions & standings it would be negated somewhat. No that is not it. The point in serious blitzing is you only need agent standings above negative 2 so you just decline everything but burners until you get down around negative 2 then start accepting the easily blitzed occasional non burner to keep yourself above negative 2. The way standings work means at close to negative 2 you can decline a lot more missions then you accept and still keep enough standings to keep missioning. Seems to me that particular mechanic is the same everywhere null, losec or highsec.
Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 438	Posted - 2015.12.08 03:05:10 - [486] - Quote Hasikan Miallok wrote: No that is not it. The point in serious blitzing is you only need agent standings above negative 2 so you just decline everything but burners until you get down around negative 2 then start accepting the easily blitzed occasional non burner to keep yourself above negative 2. The way standings work means at close to negative 2 you can decline a lot more missions then you accept and still keep enough standings to keep missioning. Seems to me that particular mechanic is the same everywhere null, losec or highsec. I'll take you word for it, thanks for the explanation. seems broken though, can see why baltec1 & the other are wanting it nerfed. hope any nerf they do doesnt mean you can't skip content & headshot missions (blitz them?) - that would suck for everyone.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2154	Posted - 2015.12.08 03:07:29 - [487] - Quote Hasikan Miallok wrote: Jerry T Pepridge wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: So wait? You can't blitz burners forever? That must mean Jenn and Baltec have absolutely no point as the massive gains they are QQing about are temporary. Just checking. I imagine with 3 alts there sharing missions & standings it would be negated somewhat. No that is not it. The point in serious blitzing is you only need agent standings above negative 2 so you just decline everything but burners until you get down around negative 2 then start accepting the easily blitzed occasional non burner to keep yourself above negative 2. The way standings work means at close to negative 2 you can decline a lot more missions then you accept and still keep enough standings to keep missioning. Seems to me that particular mechanic is the same everywhere null, losec or highsec. exactly. I can run almost only burner missions FOREVER using one account. Personally I just run several of the standard missions to keep standings at a decent level so I never have to worry about even looking at my standings. I could probably check standings more often and decline a few extra missions but I'm lazy and looking takes time. @ChainsawPlankto
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2154	Posted - 2015.12.08 03:21:09 - [488] - Quote Hasikan Miallok wrote: Overall this thread is totally illogical. *Claimed issue:* People make too much out of SOE missioning Rational Solution: Increase the ISK component of SOE specific LP store items Commonly Suggested Solution: Nerf hisec LP for everyone everywhere you have highly simplified it. pretty much all lv4 blitzing is higher than null income bar using a whole bunch of extra accounts. Lanngisi is just an example where it goes bonkers. and people have stated that lv3 blitzing can match null income. I don't have enough experiance with null income or lv3s so no comment from me on that part. if you just add isk to the purchase price of SoE stuff people increase the price of SoE goods. a lot of income comes from LP so it makes sense to nerf, however it is also a big isk sink so I like LP as a mechanic. @ChainsawPlankto
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2154	Posted - 2015.12.08 03:47:45 - [489] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: Hasikan Miallok wrote: Jerry T Pepridge wrote: 3) Nerf the inc dmg on L4's everywhere else (Low/null) so they can be done in cheaper/PVP ships solo. Whilst that would work, i am not 100% sure how it gels with the "higher risk higher reward" equation for which EVE is famous. It also doesn't help people in renter space as there are no agents there. The first problem is getting over Risk v Reward... Eve is clearly not based on this. Eve is based on Effort v Reward and Ingenuity vs Reward. Once you get over that old myth, things become easier to understand. chasing cheap ass vexors around is pretty damn unrewarding. I don't know that I'd go that low on requirement to finish lv4s in null. Although I'd guess there are probably some missions where that does work. and hey if eve is changing from risk reward to effort/ingenuity then I'm pretty alright with that, but I directly benefit from that It's just not something that seems congruent with what I know about eve design @ChainsawPlankto
Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 439	Posted - 2015.12.08 04:13:07 - [490] - Quote Chainsaw Plankton wrote: chasing cheap ass vexors around is pretty damn unrewarding. I don't know that I'd go that low on requirement to finish lv4s in null. Although I'd guess there are probably some missions where that does work. and hey if eve is changing from risk reward to effort/ingenuity then I'm pretty alright with that, but I directly benefit from that It's just not something that seems congruent with what I know about eve design Better than chasing cloaky nulified t3's, or interceptors. i like the lower skill requirement due to helping new players get into it low & null & grow teeth early. the longer your in hisec, the harder to get out of it. 1m SP alts doing l4's in nullsec would be amazing.

Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2154	Posted - 2015.12.08 04:16:11 - [491] - Quote Johng Kahn wrote: As usual in most claims of isk per hour i'm seeing trumped up numbers even if you do not count that your using 3 accounts to get this. I'm not seeing the time spent on logistics in that at all. There was mention of going to jita to sell, restocking ammo, and such. I personally ran out soe to get 8.0 standings for my alt corp. Not even including what BM's that i sold to Pro S. I had more then a dst's worth of pure crap that i later just reprocessed and sold the minerals in system. I did all this with duel rattles that cranked out more then 1300 dps each. I'm sure there are levels of blitzing and efficiency beyond my experience out there but i'm no slouch either especially when i just want it to all be over. Honestly with that kind of investment and accounting the 3 toons your not very far above what 3 hulks could do in highsec sitting on one belt and they do not have to run around exchanging lp and deciding what to sell and what not to. Of all the types of pve I have enguaged in " belt ratting carrier being the only type i have not" I would have to say that Running l4's is in the bottom two of my list for profitability and fun. If the ammount of toons and value to plex them is not included in the formula then the isk/hr is actually infinate cause i can just have 30 toons in domi running in 5 man fleets each landing in a site and afk clearing them as I work each set to next gate. Then your only bottle neck is how much computing power and bandwidth you have to work with. the "best" results are achievable with one character. there is another thread that last I looked was on the front page. hell have the link: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=454677&find=unread you are right about the whole not including logistics times, however that is something that is hard to measure, Times will vary a metric **** ton between players. Most ammos/drones/cap boosters are seeded in lanngisi at an only slightly inflated price, buying ammo is very easy. some have said people will buy stuff right in lanngisi, but I mostly just drop it off in jita. warp speed rigged blockade runner makes the trip very quickly. so there are ways to vastly reduce selling times. I can spend 5mins a day updating orders once or all day updating every 5 mins. Prices typically change enough each week that you can put things up at one price and leave them and they will sell. dual rattlesnakes are well... inefficient. rattles are quite frankly awful, but some people love them because of the huge EFT dps. 3 hulks involve a lot of moving/selling ore or minerals, and a lot of vulnerable to suicide ganks. to even compare that to lv4 running... lol no. @ChainsawPlankto
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2154	Posted - 2015.12.08 04:19:41 - [492] - Quote Jerry T Pepridge wrote: Chainsaw Plankton wrote: chasing cheap ass vexors around is pretty damn unrewarding. I don't know that I'd go that low on requirement to finish lv4s in null. Although I'd guess there are probably some missions where that does work. and hey if eve is changing from risk reward to effort/ingenuity then I'm pretty alright with that, but I directly benefit from that It's just not something that seems congruent with what I know about eve design Better than chasing cloaky nulified t3's, or interceptors. i like the lower skill requirement due to helping new players get into it low & null & grow teeth early. the longer your in hisec, the harder to get out of it. 1m SP alts doing l4's in nullsec would be amazing. those options certainly aren't better. but I'd say at 1m sp running null lv3s should be pretty good income. I still think it makes sense to keep that lv4 req a bit higher. @ChainsawPlankto
The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 56	Posted - 2015.12.08 08:10:20 - [493] - Quote I believe standings mechanics are changing soon, although I haven't seen a thread on it myself. This could be the death knell for blitzing that won't impact everyone else too.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17047	Posted - 2015.12.08 10:23:21 - [494] - Quote Hasikan Miallok wrote: Overall this thread is totally illogical. *Claimed issue:* People make too much out of SOE missioning Rational Solution: Increase the ISK component of SOE specific LP store items Commonly Suggested Solution: Nerf hisec LP for everyone everywhere It's not just SOE it's the entire PVE setup. Highsec offers better rewards than null sec from most level 4 agents and a good few level 3 agents match it, low sec offers the best isk/hr of all, beating even WH income and all you need to risk is a t2 fitted torp bomber. In null the primary isk maker is so easy you can run them afk but can only support a handful per system and inject too much raw isk. Ironically because anoms inject a large amount of isk it means that they are slowly becoming worth less as inflation happens. This is why nobody belt rats these days while back in 2005 you could find a raven in almost every belt in null. PVE has a lot of problems in all areas of space. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 779	Posted - 2015.12.08 13:05:20 - [495] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Hasikan Miallok wrote: Overall this thread is totally illogical. *Claimed issue:* People make too much out of SOE missioning Rational Solution: Increase the ISK component of SOE specific LP store items Commonly Suggested Solution: Nerf hisec LP for everyone everywhere It's not just SOE it's the entire PVE setup. Highsec offers better rewards than null sec from most level 4 agents and a good few level 3 agents match it, low sec offers the best isk/hr of all, beating even WH income and all you need to risk is a t2 fitted torp bomber. In null the primary isk maker is so easy you can run them afk but can only support a handful per system and inject too much raw isk. Ironically because anoms inject a large amount of isk it means that they are slowly becoming worth less as inflation happens. This is why nobody belt rats these days while back in 2005 you could find a raven in almost every belt in null. PVE has a lot of problems in all areas of space. And as we have said before. Mission for mission Low/Null pays out far more for the same missions than HS does. Don't like the risk? Don't do em in Null sec. It has nothing to do with how "good" high sec is, that is a player created problem. Next, WH income is unmatched, yes FW is nice and all, but WH is unmatched. It also has the greatest risk and effort. Belt ratting is still done by people without standings or skills required to do missions or anoms. That being said, it is a neglected piece of content that CCP has forgotten about over the years. It is on my personal list of things CCP should buff before they do anything more with sov or Gila nerfs. And then you went off the deep end. "Inflation". There is only one single part of the eve economy "inflating" and its Plex. Plex is not a normal item so it is never included in price index. EVERYTHING ELSE IS DEFLATING. 1 billion graphs, a dozen CCP reports and fanfest videos over the last half decade and you still lie straight through your teeth that the economy suffer inflation... CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17047	Posted - 2015.12.08 13:39:41 - [496] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: baltec1 wrote: Hasikan Miallok wrote: Overall this thread is totally illogical. *Claimed issue:* People make too much out of SOE missioning Rational Solution: Increase the ISK component of SOE specific LP store items Commonly Suggested Solution: Nerf hisec LP for everyone everywhere It's not just SOE it's the entire PVE setup. Highsec offers better rewards than null sec from most level 4 agents and a good few level 3 agents match it, low sec offers the best isk/hr of all, beating even WH income and all you need to risk is a t2 fitted torp bomber. In null the primary isk maker is so easy you can run them afk but can only support a handful per system and inject too much raw isk. Ironically because anoms inject a large amount of isk it means that they are slowly becoming worth less as inflation happens. This is why nobody belt rats these days while back in 2005 you could find a raven in almost every belt in null. PVE has a lot of problems in all areas of space. And as we have said before. Mission for mission Low/Null pays out far more for the same missions than HS does. Don't like the risk? Don't do em in Null sec. It has nothing to do with how "good" high sec is, that is a player created problem. Next, WH income is unmatched, yes FW is nice and all, but WH is unmatched. It also has the greatest risk and effort. Belt ratting is still done by people without standings or skills required to do missions or anoms. That being said, it is a neglected piece of content that CCP has forgotten about over the years. It is on my personal list of things CCP should buff before they do anything more with sov or Gila nerfs. And then you went off the deep end. "Inflation". There is only one single part of the eve economy "inflating" and its Plex. Plex is not a normal item so it is never included in price index. EVERYTHING ELSE IS DEFLATING. 1 billion graphs, a dozen CCP reports and fanfest videos over the last half decade and you still lie straight through your teeth that the economy suffer inflation... So it should be easy for you to show this deflation over the last decade. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 779	Posted - 2015.12.08 13:44:06 - [497] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: baltec1 wrote: Hasikan Miallok wrote: Overall this thread is totally illogical. *Claimed issue:* People make too much out of SOE missioning Rational Solution: Increase the ISK component of SOE specific LP store items Commonly Suggested Solution: Nerf hisec LP for everyone everywhere It's not just SOE it's the entire PVE setup. Highsec offers better rewards than null sec from most level 4 agents and a good few level 3 agents match it, low sec offers the best isk/hr of all, beating even WH income and all you need to risk is a t2 fitted torp bomber. In null the primary isk maker is so easy you can run them afk but can only support a handful per system and inject too much raw isk. Ironically because anoms inject a large amount of isk it means that they are slowly becoming worth less as inflation happens. This is why nobody belt rats these days while back in 2005 you could find a raven in almost every belt in null. PVE has a lot of problems in all areas of space. And as we have said before. Mission for mission Low/Null pays out far more for the same missions than HS does. Don't like the risk? Don't do em in Null sec. It has nothing to do with how "good" high sec is, that is a player created problem. Next, WH income is unmatched, yes FW is nice and all, but WH is unmatched. It also has the greatest risk and effort. Belt ratting is still done by people without standings or skills required to do missions or anoms. That being said, it is a neglected piece of content that CCP has forgotten about over the years. It is on my personal list of things CCP should buff before they do anything more with sov or Gila nerfs. And then you went off the deep end. "Inflation". There is only one single part of the eve economy "inflating" and its Plex. Plex is not a normal item so it is never included in price index. EVERYTHING ELSE IS DEFLATING. 1 billion graphs, a dozen CCP reports and fanfest videos over the last half decade and you still lie straight through your teeth that the economy suffer inflation... So it should be easy for you to show this deflation over the last decade. http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/68738/1/economy.indices_4.png Yep... There is the result of CPI over the course of the Game History... under 100, well under. Primary under a hundred. Secondary and Mineral barely moved up overall in over 10 years... that is what we would call, deflation. Meanwhile... http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/68738/1/velocity.png Velocity of isk. Even though you keep claiming it is so easy to make isk now... people seem to be using it less and less. Velocity down every year on average. Feel dumb now don't you, or are you going to overheat Spin to get away? CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 779	Posted - 2015.12.08 13:48:12 - [498] - Quote Oh and Baltec... as of this morning your FW isk printing machine you were so worried about was nerfed. More Ewar in missions, now they have scram and web rats and they just banned T3D from sites. So the nerfs keep flowing for the things you hate most... do you think it will do anything to make you happy?! CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4808	Posted - 2015.12.08 13:50:19 - [499] - Quote Did they add missile tracking disruptors as part of NPC electronic warfare? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13107	Posted - 2015.12.08 14:10:21 - [500] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: Oh and Baltec... as of this morning your FW isk printing machine you were so worried about was nerfed. More Ewar in missions, now they have scram and web rats and they just banned T3D from sites. So the nerfs keep flowing for the things you hate most... do you think it will do anything to make you happy?! lol, did someone step on your precious status quo? It's funny to see you get upset when i call you (your words) a Status Quo person but when CCP nerfs the SINGLE most unbalance pve feature in the history of the game (ie being about to make hundreds of millions of isk worth of LP per hour in a throwaway FRIGATE SIZED SHIP in low sec) you protest. That's just freaking amazing. Good job.

Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 779	Posted - 2015.12.08 14:18:10 - [501] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: Oh and Baltec... as of this morning your FW isk printing machine you were so worried about was nerfed. More Ewar in missions, now they have scram and web rats and they just banned T3D from sites. So the nerfs keep flowing for the things you hate most... do you think it will do anything to make you happy?! lol, did someone step on your precious status quo? It's funny to see you get upset when i call you (your words) a Status Quo person but when CCP nerfs the SINGLE most unbalance pve feature in the history of the game (ie being about to make hundreds of millions of isk worth of LP per hour in a throwaway FRIGATE SIZED SHIP in low sec) you protest. That's just freaking amazing. Good job. Careful now... you are starting to sound like a QQ baby. Just 2 pages ago you said Incursions were the single most unbalanced PVE in the game. Make up your mind sir. Pro Tip for the future: Markets are by far the most lucrative part of this game, the least amount of effort and relatively low risk if you know what you are doing. I don't have to shoot a single red cross to make your null sec worthless lol CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 915	Posted - 2015.12.08 14:30:46 - [502] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: Oh and Baltec... as of this morning your FW isk printing machine you were so worried about was nerfed. More Ewar in missions, now they have scram and web rats and they just banned T3D from sites. So the nerfs keep flowing for the things you hate most... do you think it will do anything to make you happy?! No, they didn't add scrams to FW missions. Caldari and Minmatar FW missions got some more webbing frigates allowed and Gallente FW missions got ECM nerfed a little in their missions. If anything, it is now more balanced between the 4 factions.
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 779	Posted - 2015.12.08 14:33:19 - [503] - Quote We going to talk about the buff to anoms now in the form of grid sizes? Not only can you use local as your intel, you can now see ships in warp 8k out. Meaning even ceptors will still be roughly 4 or 5 seconds away from deceleration before they can lock and will be visible on your overview. Add to that changes incoming to warp decel curves so ships don't just appear at the end of warp, instead you visibly see them slow down on your UI. Just one more thing to make Null sec safer and safer. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13107	Posted - 2015.12.08 14:33:36 - [504] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: Just 2 pages ago you said Incursions were the single most unbalanced PVE in the game. Make up your mind sir. This is page 25. 2 pages ago was page 23. I have no posts on page 23. WTF are you talking about? Quote: Pro Tip for the future: Markets are by far the most lucrative part of this game, the least amount of effort and relatively low risk if you know what you are doing. I don't have to shoot a single red cross to make your null sec worthless lol And this has exactly what to do with the fact that you are a status quo supporter? Also, what does this have to do with PVE balance? You are becoming unhinged (that tends to happen when one sees defeat looming, as in the changes that have affected FW missions and incursions).
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 779	Posted - 2015.12.08 14:36:10 - [505] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: Just 2 pages ago you said Incursions were the single most unbalanced PVE in the game. Make up your mind sir. This is page 25. 2 pages ago was page 23. I have no posts on page 23. WTF are you talking about? Quote: Pro Tip for the future: Markets are by far the most lucrative part of this game, the least amount of effort and relatively low risk if you know what you are doing. I don't have to shoot a single red cross to make your null sec worthless lol And this has exactly what to do with the fact that you are a status quo supporter? Also, what does this have to do with PVE balance? You are becoming unhinged (that tends to happen when one sees defeat looming, as in the changes that have affected FW missions and incursions). Adding Hyperbole to the Ad Hominem now... Don't ever change Jenn CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13108	Posted - 2015.12.08 14:37:30 - [506] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: We going to talk about the buff to anoms now in the form of grid sizes? Not only can you use local as your intel, you can now see ships in warp 8k out. Meaning even ceptors will still be roughly 4 or 5 seconds away from deceleration before they can lock and will be visible on your overview. Just one more thing to make Null sec safer and safer. Like I said, unhinged. You just verified what I said, yo see the writing on the wall and know you are losing this fight. You think it takes a ceptor that long to cross 8k in warp? You think visually seeing a ceptor 1.5 seconds sooner, equals more safety? If a ratting BS or HAC is stupid enough to still be ratting when a ceptor gets on grid they deserve to explode. Your letting your prejudice get the better of you, and posting erratically.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17048	Posted - 2015.12.08 16:10:34 - [507] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: We going to talk about the buff to anoms now in the form of grid sizes? Not only can you use local as your intel, you can now see ships in warp 8k out. Meaning even ceptors will still be roughly 4 or 5 seconds away from deceleration before they can lock and will be visible on your overview. Add to that changes incoming to warp decel curves so ships don't just appear at the end of warp, instead you visibly see them slow down on your UI. Just one more thing to make Null sec safer and safer. A ratting ship is in warp when said neural enters local, this makes zero difference to safety. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17048	Posted - 2015.12.08 17:47:34 - [508] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: And then you went off the deep end. "Inflation". There is only one single part of the eve economy "inflating" and its Plex. Plex is not a normal item so it is never included in price index. EVERYTHING ELSE IS DEFLATING. 1 billion graphs, a dozen CCP reports and fanfest videos over the last half decade and you still lie straight through your teeth that the economy suffer inflation... http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/68738/1/economy.indices_4.png Yep... There is the result of CPI over the course of the Game History... under 100, well under. Primary under a hundred. Secondary and Mineral barely moved up overall in over 10 years... that is what we would call, deflation. Ok lets look at this shall we. My favourite ship the Megathon has more than doubled in price in the last 5 years. Tritanium, lifeblood of EVE, has again, doubled in price. Pyrite, doubled. Mexallon, doubled. Even the drake has doubled in price. You could buy a drake and fit it for less than the hull costs today. Anyone who says inflation hasn't happened either hasn't been paying attention or is too new to know any different. Market McSelling Alt wrote: Meanwhile... http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/68738/1/velocity.png Velocity of isk. Even though you keep claiming it is so easy to make isk now... people seem to be using it less and less. Velocity down every year on average. Feel dumb now don't you, or are you going to overheat Spin to get away? That's not a good thing, it means we are making more isk than we can spend. We are hoarding isk. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 780	Posted - 2015.12.08 18:01:14 - [509] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: And then you went off the deep end. "Inflation". There is only one single part of the eve economy "inflating" and its Plex. Plex is not a normal item so it is never included in price index. EVERYTHING ELSE IS DEFLATING. 1 billion graphs, a dozen CCP reports and fanfest videos over the last half decade and you still lie straight through your teeth that the economy suffer inflation... http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/68738/1/economy.indices_4.png Yep... There is the result of CPI over the course of the Game History... under 100, well under. Primary under a hundred. Secondary and Mineral barely moved up overall in over 10 years... that is what we would call, deflation. Ok lets look at this shall we. My favourite ship the Megathon has more than doubled in price in the last 5 years. Tritanium, lifeblood of EVE, has again, doubled in price. Pyrite, doubled. Mexallon, doubled. Even the drake has doubled in price. You could buy a drake and fit it for less than the hull costs today. Anyone who says inflation hasn't happened either hasn't been paying attention or is too new to know any different. Market McSelling Alt wrote: Meanwhile... http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/68738/1/velocity.png Velocity of isk. Even though you keep claiming it is so easy to make isk now... people seem to be using it less and less. Velocity down every year on average. Feel dumb now don't you, or are you going to overheat Spin to get away? That's not a good thing, it means we are making more isk than we can spend. We are hoarding isk. We have done this before, and I will school you again. Ships, particularly BS sized, were changed a number of years ago and their build materials were increased. Now... that aside, no the price overall for primary goods like hulls have not gone up. You might be able to find a couple of hulls, over a specific set of years where the price increased, but overall, as CCP's data says, they have decreased in price. Are you seriously suggesting that CCP's economic data is wrong? Or are you so butt hurt that you are trying to cherry pick anything you can to save face? CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17048	Posted - 2015.12.08 20:15:02 - [510] - Quote Market McSelling Alt wrote: We have done this before, and I will school you again. Ships, particularly BS sized, were changed a number of years ago and their build materials were increased. Now... that aside, no the price overall for primary goods like hulls have not gone up. Notice how the materials have doubled in price? That has nothing to do with the battleship changes. If the materials have doubled in price guess what happens to the build costs. It also doesn't matter how or why the price goes up what matters is that its gone up. Between bigger build costs and material costs inflation has happened. Market McSelling Alt wrote: You might be able to find a couple of hulls, over a specific set of years where the price increased, but overall, as CCP's data says, they have decreased in price. The only ships that have fallen in price are the pirate faction ships and that is simply due to a massive increase in BPC drops. All the other ships are far more expensive than they used to be to the tune of doubling in price in near all cases. Market McSelling Alt wrote: Are you seriously suggesting that CCP's economic data is wrong? Or are you so butt hurt that you are trying to cherry pick anything you can to save face? I'm sating you have no idea how to use it. Here is the simple fact, I am paying well over twice as much for my ships than five years ago. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship

Market McSelling Alt Bernie Madoff Investment Services LLC 781	Posted - 2015.12.08 21:07:51 - [511] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: We have done this before, and I will school you again. Ships, particularly BS sized, were changed a number of years ago and their build materials were increased. Now... that aside, no the price overall for primary goods like hulls have not gone up. Notice how the materials have doubled in price? That has nothing to do with the battleship changes. If the materials have doubled in price guess what happens to the build costs. It also doesn't matter how or why the price goes up what matters is that its gone up. Between bigger build costs and material costs inflation has happened. Market McSelling Alt wrote: You might be able to find a couple of hulls, over a specific set of years where the price increased, but overall, as CCP's data says, they have decreased in price. The only ships that have fallen in price are the pirate faction ships and that is simply due to a massive increase in BPC drops. All the other ships are far more expensive than they used to be to the tune of doubling in price in near all cases. Market McSelling Alt wrote: Are you seriously suggesting that CCP's economic data is wrong? Or are you so butt hurt that you are trying to cherry pick anything you can to save face? I'm sating you have no idea how to use it. Here is the simple fact, I am paying well over twice as much for my ships than five years ago. This means I need twice the income than before and because anoms are fixed with bounties they have effectively halfed in value while the LP stores rise with this inflation. This is why belt ratting went from good income to worthless over the last 12 years. You are being obtuse. Megathron prices are identical today as they were in 2013 right after the changes. No change. Hyperion was 226mil median price in June of 2012, today they are a little less. If you have years of game time, and no increase in prices that isn't inflation buddy. Modules, T1 and T2 have all fallen in price. Ammo, fallen in price. Pirate/Faction gear fallen in price. build materials, salvage all dropped in price. Minerals went up in price... as seen on the graph. But industrial efficiency and competition has gobbled up any increase in prices. Learn to read the darn graph from CCP themselves. They aren't lying to you when they say that inflation in eve is not a concern and hasn't ever been. CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine. 40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
Hasikan Miallok Republic University Minmatar Republic 1719	Posted - 2015.12.08 23:03:24 - [512] - Quote I really have no opinion on whether ship prices went up in real terms or not - but if they did change mineral prices are only a small component of ship construction costs most of its blueprint. Just saying.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4810	Posted - 2015.12.08 23:34:11 - [513] - Quote PLEX prices have more than doubled over the past few years, and outside of Burners mission income has seen successive nerfs (including the reprocessing nerf). So if anything, you have to play 2.5x longer to PLEX your account every month. This isn't an argument for or against the current discussion - just a footnote. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2159	Posted - 2015.12.09 01:35:29 - [514] - Quote I used to be able to build multiple battleships a day out of reprocessed loot. Since then they have increased build quantities (for most ships in game, as they balanced the build costs to be in line with the most expensive versions), nerfed reprocessing, and removed t1 loot and drone poo from the loot tables. But also most tech 2 items cost 10-20 mil, and meta 4 stuff was expensive. when you look at a basket of goods I'm sure deflation is the overall trend. but for some things prices are up. 45mil domis are now 200. and the I have to make 4mil/day to get a gtc is now... 40m/day. And a 9mil bcu II is now 750k. Hulks used to cost 500m. And most meta/faction/deadspace loot has gone way down in price. For the most part we farm our resources at a faster pace than we grind isk. Would be awesome to have historical graphs. kinda annoys me that in game can only go back one year. there are also things like the NPC shuttle removal, as it capped trit at 2.29 or so. there was some other item that had it capped even lower that got nerfed before that. Onto null missions: Overall I think the progression with low/null missions works. But most null doesn't have access to missions. The Idea of an Agent module for citadels has been floated around. I would be interested to see how CCP does that. FW vs WH. I can't comment much as I haven't done either extensively. but with FW if you pick the highest tier side and run for them it sounds like the LP is bonkers. With WH you seem limited by the amount of anoms you have access too. Although looks like a cap escalation has 585m in blue loot. plus a few 100m from the rest of the site. markets: pure pvp, totally player driven. totally freaking awesome! As far as I'm concerned whatever isk you make there is yours, CCP shouldn't interfere with that. @ChainsawPlankto
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 278	Posted - 2015.12.09 04:27:38 - [515] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Market McSelling Alt wrote: And then you went off the deep end. "Inflation". There is only one single part of the eve economy "inflating" and its Plex. Plex is not a normal item so it is never included in price index. EVERYTHING ELSE IS DEFLATING. 1 billion graphs, a dozen CCP reports and fanfest videos over the last half decade and you still lie straight through your teeth that the economy suffer inflation... http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/68738/1/economy.indices_4.png Yep... There is the result of CPI over the course of the Game History... under 100, well under. Primary under a hundred. Secondary and Mineral barely moved up overall in over 10 years... that is what we would call, deflation. Ok lets look at this shall we. My favourite ship the Megathon has more than doubled in price in the last 5 years. Tritanium, lifeblood of EVE, has again, doubled in price. Pyrite, doubled. Mexallon, doubled. Even the drake has doubled in price. You could buy a drake and fit it for less than the hull costs today. Anyone who says inflation hasn't happened either hasn't been paying attention or is too new to know any different. Market McSelling Alt wrote: Meanwhile... http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/68738/1/velocity.png Velocity of isk. Even though you keep claiming it is so easy to make isk now... people seem to be using it less and less. Velocity down every year on average. Feel dumb now don't you, or are you going to overheat Spin to get away? That's not a good thing, it means we are making more isk than we can spend. We are hoarding isk. Speak for yourself. I just bought 3 Vargurs, 2 Lokis + 10 Subs, Tengu + 5 Subs, Astarte, 4 Barghests, mods for said ships AND 8 plexes all within the past 2 weeks. Do you have any idea how much isk that is??
Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 448	Posted - 2015.12.09 04:35:08 - [516] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: Speak for yourself. I just bought 3 Vargurs, 2 Lokis + 10 Subs, Tengu + 5 Subs, Astarte, 4 Barghests, mods for said ships AND 8 plexes all within the past 2 weeks. Do you have any idea how much isk that is?? Pfff not alot for 8 accounts over 2 weeks. terrible in fact. i take it you make no-where near the reported "300m an hour"
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 278	Posted - 2015.12.09 05:19:29 - [517] - Quote Jerry T Pepridge wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: Speak for yourself. I just bought 3 Vargurs, 2 Lokis + 10 Subs, Tengu + 5 Subs, Astarte, 4 Barghests, mods for said ships AND 8 plexes all within the past 2 weeks. Do you have any idea how much isk that is?? Pfff not alot for 8 accounts over 2 weeks. terrible in fact. i take it you make no-where near the reported "300m an hour" Who said that was all I made in those 2 weeks?? I was just stated that I don't hoard isk. FYI in case your math was off, that came to a total of 21.8 bill isk spent in the past 2 weeks. Are you saying you can make over 10 bill isk a week in your null space?
Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 448	Posted - 2015.12.09 05:24:12 - [518] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: FYI in case your math was off, that came to a total of 21.8 bill isk spent in the past 2 weeks. Are you saying you can make over 10 bill isk a week in your null space? More, i made 4.6b last night. only peasants undock.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 278	Posted - 2015.12.09 05:43:28 - [519] - Quote Jerry T Pepridge wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: FYI in case your math was off, that came to a total of 21.8 bill isk spent in the past 2 weeks. Are you saying you can make over 10 bill isk a week in your null space? More, i made 4.6b last night. only peasants undock. Wot? Then that means baltec and that other one was trolling in this thread this entire time.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2162	Posted - 2015.12.09 06:13:02 - [520] - Quote the data doesn't lie. There could be some flaws in some aspect of the analysis or some strange items in the CPI but hopefully the data set is random/big enough that it captures a good overall picture. Prices for some t1 ships changed by a lot, prices for nearly everything else went down. Overall I believe what it is saying. On the velocity of isk: personally I spend almost all my isk, but there are plenty of bored trillionaires with a butt ton of isk. plus who knows how much sitting in corp wallets. Just because you spent a few billion doesn't mean squat for the velocity of isk for the population of eve. Spend a trillion and I'll be ever so slightly interested. @ChainsawPlankto

baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17049	Posted - 2015.12.09 08:40:15 - [521] - Quote Chainsaw Plankton wrote: the data doesn't lie. There could be some flaws in some aspect of the analysis or some strange items in the CPI but hopefully the data set is random/big enough that it captures a good overall picture. Prices for some t1 ships changed by a lot, prices for nearly everything else went down. Overall I believe what it is saying. On the velocity of isk: personally I spend almost all my isk, but there are plenty of bored trillionaires with a butt ton of isk. plus who knows how much sitting in corp wallets. Just because you spent a few billion doesn't mean squat for the velocity of isk for the population of eve. Spend a trillion and I'll be ever so slightly interested. T2 went down when CCP broke the tech moon monopoly which was forcing the price of t2 items artificially high. Despite the efforts of the usual suspects it's simple fact that prices have risen. A fully t2 fitted drake used to cost 45 million, today you are looking at 54 million just for the hull. Back in the day you could pick up a freighter for 600 mil, today you're looking at 1.3 billion. Costs have gone up and CCP have had to step in to reduce the amount of isk entering the system several times in the past. This is why having anoms as the primary way of earning isk is a bad plan, they don't adapt to inflation because bounties can't rise while at the same time the inject the very isk that is causing them to lose value. Add on the fact you can run them afk and they can't support more than a few players per system and it becomes clear anoms can't continue to be the primary pve content in null sov. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4814	Posted - 2015.12.09 09:56:08 - [522] - Quote baltec1 wrote: This is why having anoms as the primary way of earning isk is a bad plan, they don't adapt to inflation because bounties can't rise while at the same time the inject the very isk that is causing them to lose value. Add on the fact you can run them afk and they can't support more than a few players per system and it becomes clear anoms can't continue to be the primary pve content in null sov. In case I missed it somewhere, what exactly is the proposal to buff null-sec income? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17049	Posted - 2015.12.09 13:05:11 - [523] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: baltec1 wrote: This is why having anoms as the primary way of earning isk is a bad plan, they don't adapt to inflation because bounties can't rise while at the same time the inject the very isk that is causing them to lose value. Add on the fact you can run them afk and they can't support more than a few players per system and it becomes clear anoms can't continue to be the primary pve content in null sov. In case I missed it somewhere, what exactly is the proposal to buff null-sec income? Replace the current military index bonus to anoms with a mission agent system. The military index determines what mission agents are available. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13121	Posted - 2015.12.09 13:47:13 - [524] - Quote For the record I still disagree completely with sov null missions. We see what can be done with abusing the mission running systems in other spaces, and null PVErs are as adept at finding thinngs to abuse as anyone else. I would WRECK this game is you gave me any form of mission in sov null (even if it were FW still "light a beacon for everyone to see in enemy territory" style). I prefer modifying anomalies. Add "Forlorn style" triggers to all anoms. Add random web/neut towers like in lvl 5 missions to anoms as well. Cut the bounties in half and make wrecks drop tags or times that have to be collected, shipped to empire and traded to npcs for the other half of anom income (then adjust that income to make the risk). Less liquid isk coming in, most people will have to stop grinding to loot (or rely on MTUs that can be scanned down and killed, or maybe give newbros a job). And tags can possibly be intercepted in transit. Tags partially or fully replacing bounties could also help alleviate the "cooperation penalty" anoms have. Because of the bounty system, the more people you pile into an anomaly, the less everyone makes because of how the system pays out. The incursion pay out system fixes this problem but might not be right for anomalies. What's better is how Wormhole Anoms pay out, which is the basis for my tag idea. NPC pirate tags already exist but are worthless, this could give them a purpose.
Cipher Jones The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars 1272	Posted - 2015.12.09 20:02:30 - [525] - Quote Quote: A ratting ship is in warp when said neural enters local, this makes zero difference to safety. Makes a HUGE diference in income. So I don't know what ISK you can get running missions (read sustained) in non-hisec, but IMHO variety is nice. 3 toons making 150 mil an hour is the same as running Serpentis extravaganza in a marauder as far as up to the time it takes you to earn your PLEX('s) for the month. about 24-25 hours of grind. I used that mission as an example because I just ran it and calculated the ISK per hour based on 1k/LP. The other thing that was nice about that is that I have a 2.5 year old running around, and I did that with about as little concentration as it takes. Can't do that in null, cant do that with 3 clients. I consolidated all of my characters onto one account and have this one for PvE combat, an industry, and one set up in a Stratios for long range/term exploration. I would rather do other stuff on those other 2 toons once I grind out my monthly bill than keep grinding the same thing over and over. The exploration toon has fun in null, but when the reds come she just cloaks up. no need to make ISK at that point. Accounts may not be used for business purposes. Access to the System and playing EVE is intended for your personal entertainment, enjoyment and recreation, and not for corporate, business, commercial or income-seeking activities.-á
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2164	Posted - 2015.12.09 20:52:42 - [526] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Chainsaw Plankton wrote: the data doesn't lie. There could be some flaws in some aspect of the analysis or some strange items in the CPI but hopefully the data set is random/big enough that it captures a good overall picture. Prices for some t1 ships changed by a lot, prices for nearly everything else went down. Overall I believe what it is saying. On the velocity of isk: personally I spend almost all my isk, but there are plenty of bored trillionaires with a butt ton of isk. plus who knows how much sitting in corp wallets. Just because you spent a few billion doesn't mean squat for the velocity of isk for the population of eve. Spend a trillion and I'll be ever so slightly interested. T2 went down when CCP broke the tech moon monopoly which was forcing the price of t2 items artificially high. Despite the efforts of the usual suspects it's simple fact that prices have risen. A fully t2 fitted drake used to cost 45 million, today you are looking at 54 million just for the hull. Back in the day you could pick up a freighter for 600 mil, today you're looking at 1.3 billion. Costs have gone up and CCP have had to step in to reduce the amount of isk entering the system several times in the past. This is why having anoms as the primary way of earning isk is a bad plan, they don't adapt to inflation because bounties can't rise while at the same time the inject the very isk that is causing them to lose value. Add on the fact you can run them afk and they can't support more than a few players per system and it becomes clear anoms can't continue to be the primary pve content in null sov. what time span are we looking at? t2 really went down when CCP introduced invention as a mechanic. I'd guess then also went down when CCP redid industry not too long ago but I have no numbers on that, getting rid of +50% waste on invented bpcs was pretty big (although they might have built that in by increasing build costs?). Rig costs went down when CCP introduced different sizes. If I'm not mistaken I spent 45mil just rigging my first drake. and 4mil each on meta3 launchers. A drake these days isn't all that expensive. Although if you compare to 2010 prices then yea it is up a bit from 30something mil. 2010 minerals were at their lowest low. I think that was when the t1 loot removal happened, and possibly drone poo too. before tech it was dysprosium, tech became good because CCP wanted to lower dyspro income and it backfired horribly as tech replaced it, just as Akita T predicted. He ran the spreadsheets off of what was on the test server and made billions off of it. Hell I dug up the thread: http://eve-search.com/thread/1207775-0/page/1 no idea if the links work. yes the drake price went up, but everything that gets fit to a drake has gone down. I don't particularity like CCPs interdiction on build costs of t1 ships. Trying to think of what they changed. Off the top of my head Supply side: removing t1 loot, reprocessing nerf, removal of drone poo. They did add a bunch of minerals to some ores so perhaps that lowered (or at least stabilized) prices at some point. Build side: increased minerals costs with tiericide (although not sure that would have changed the drake too much as it was the higher tier BC). Increased amount of highends. It looks like over the last year the mineral prices index is up, and that looks to be reflected in ship prices. however it also looks like over the last few months trend has been prices going down. I'd attribute that mostly to the +50% high end usage. Also the CPI has mostly a downtrend over the last year. agree completely on the anom part. before that it was mostly ratting and that was just god awful. something like 1 person per 10 belts, horribly dependent on truesec for decent spawns, a 2 person system was awesome. @ChainsawPlankto
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2164	Posted - 2015.12.09 21:30:10 - [527] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: For the record I still disagree completely with sov null missions. We see what can be done with abusing the mission running systems in other spaces, and null PVErs are as adept at finding thinngs to abuse as anyone else. I would WRECK this game is you gave me any form of mission in sov null (even if it were FW still "light a beacon for everyone to see in enemy territory" style). I prefer modifying anomalies. Add "Forlorn style" triggers to all anoms. Add random web/neut towers like in lvl 5 missions to anoms as well. Cut the bounties in half and make wrecks drop tags or times that have to be collected, shipped to empire and traded to npcs for the other half of anom income (then adjust that income to make the risk). Less liquid isk coming in, most people will have to stop grinding to loot (or rely on MTUs that can be scanned down and killed, or maybe give newbros a job). And tags can possibly be intercepted in transit. Tags partially or fully replacing bounties could also help alleviate the "cooperation penalty" anoms have. Because of the bounty system, the more people you pile into an anomaly, the less everyone makes because of how the system pays out. The incursion pay out system fixes this problem but might not be right for anomalies. What's better is how Wormhole Anoms pay out, which is the basis for my tag idea. NPC pirate tags already exist but are worthless, this could give them a purpose. I mostly agree however agents seem like a decent stopgap for now. I'd rather see something more interesting and different. Tags I'm not sure about. they seem to still be an isk faucet, however they do add a bunch of problems as you say. And have the potential for use in an LP store of some sort. I was thinking some sort of "challenge level" anom where spawns are dynamic depending on what you have in site, including content for capitals. possibly add a double or nothing round (triggered by a special deployable from concord or something?). Putting expensive assets in space and being able to have multiple people work together both sound like decent ideas to me. my biggest issue with these thoughts is how to balance the rewards? Eve players are very good at beating things and farming the hell out of it. Limiting spawns seems like one option, maybe one per constellation and it only respawns every so often. My other issue is I would want to make it somewhat easy to disrupt. so if a roaming gang shows up you have an interest in shooting them and not just docking up. You dock up and they can either run it for themselves or otherwise disable it somehow. Boredom is too effective a weapon. Perhaps tie availability to when your structures are vulnerable? @ChainsawPlankto
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4815	Posted - 2015.12.09 22:40:01 - [528] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: For the record I still disagree completely with sov null missions. I'm inclined to agree. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 458	Posted - 2015.12.10 06:41:05 - [529] - Quote 27 pages of highsec Vs nullsec income sperg & look what happens. they fixed the exploit that allowed missions to be completed with a blitz method. Arthur said in another thread he didn't blitz - but all the attention posted here has obviously made a difference.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4816	Posted - 2015.12.10 06:46:02 - [530] - Quote Jerry T Pepridge wrote: 27 pages of highsec Vs nullsec income sperg & look what happens. they fixed the exploit that allowed missions to be completed with a blitz method. Arthur said in another thread he didn't blitz - but all the attention posted here has obviously made a difference. I was going to say: "Someone was obviously paying close attention to these threads..." I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 458	Posted - 2015.12.10 06:51:43 - [531] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Jerry T Pepridge wrote: 27 pages of highsec Vs nullsec income sperg & look what happens. they fixed the exploit that allowed missions to be completed with a blitz method. Arthur said in another thread he didn't blitz - but all the attention posted here has obviously made a difference. I was going to say: "Someone was obviously paying close attention to these threads..." i think so too. not being able to blitz l4's isnt a bug, its an exploit fix. that was advertised here for peen / ego in the form of "200m/hour in highsec"
Hasikan Miallok Republic University Minmatar Republic 1731	Posted - 2015.12.10 07:19:05 - [532] - Quote Jerry T Pepridge wrote: not being able to blitz l4's isnt a bug, its an exploit fix. that was advertised here for peen / ego in the form of "200m/hour in highsec" it will only increase the isk/LP across the board, as the ones blitzing will either ragequit or do it properly. everyone is on even keel now, players that dont visit forums, players that brag here about isk/hour are now the same. EXCEPT - the changes do not really effect people blitzing burners the changes simply make AFK missioning more viable the biggest effect is on new players EXAMPLE: The change to the Cargo Delivery mission has no effect on my mission alt blitzing it in a very tanky intercepter BUT does mean new players will get smashed If it actually was a deliberate stealth attempt by CCP to nerf blizing its a major fail.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 664	Posted - 2015.12.10 07:29:35 - [533] - Quote If you think CCP makes any changes based on the complete and utter garbage that gets posted on these forums instead of, you know, actual metrics and figures they can draw from the game itself then you are the most deluded fool to ever walk this planet. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.04
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4816	Posted - 2015.12.10 08:08:33 - [534] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: If you think CCP makes any changes based on the complete and utter garbage that gets posted on these forums instead of, you know, actual metrics and figures they can draw from the game itself then you are the most deluded fool to ever walk this planet. I know for a fact that they have indeed expanded upon some of the ideas presented in the forums and listened and responded to player feedback. Whether or not that was the case in this instance or if this was merely a long overdue PvE update is open to speculation. I really don't have a problem with either the mission or FW changes - both were long overdue (the FW tears are particularly sweet). I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 664	Posted - 2015.12.10 08:15:56 - [535] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: If you think CCP makes any changes based on the complete and utter garbage that gets posted on these forums instead of, you know, actual metrics and figures they can draw from the game itself then you are the most deluded fool to ever walk this planet. I know for a fact that they have indeed expanded upon some of the ideas presented in the forums and listened and responded to player feedback. Whether or not that was the case in this instance or if this was merely a long overdue PvE update is open to speculation. I really don't have a problem with either the mission or FW changes - both were long overdue (the FW tears are particularly sweet). The feedback in the information center forum, sure, maybe, sometimes. But I've seen plenty of times where even that gets ignored completely too. Point is they didn't suddenly decide to (ineffectively) nerf all these things just because someone made a post on the forums. My guess would be the catalyst was the new financial data stuff they recently posted. Telling was the comment at how surprised the one dev was at how high incursion income was. People have been saying that for years but they only act on data (that they didn't have/look at) A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.04
Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 458	Posted - 2015.12.10 08:18:20 - [536] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: If you think CCP makes any changes based on the complete and utter garbage that gets posted on these forums instead of, you know, actual metrics and figures they can draw from the game itself then you are the most deluded fool to ever walk this planet. well regardless, its certainly ruffled your feathers. i realise your guide is just to help people (forum readers who care about pve). no-one knows what it is that has happened, it hasn't been confirmed/denied by game maker. all we know is the exploit has been closed a few people have confirmed the same and obviously fixed, call it weird timing. your guide still works though? you can just skip any mission and pick the high paying burners only and get away with it endlessly? @hasikan: why is the biggest effect on new players? how does it concern them if level 4 missions take slightly longer/require skills? ahh i get it, your implying isk/hour affects them. your also implying PVE is the only thing to do in the game. If the player in your example was determined enough he would google b4 doing it, you will have to explain what you mean, i dont think ive done that mission in a few years. is that the one where u warp in and its a belt, u get close to the corp hanger thing & loot an item then warp out? and a spawn of BS is there?
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 664	Posted - 2015.12.10 08:31:51 - [537] - Quote Jerry T Pepridge wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: If you think CCP makes any changes based on the complete and utter garbage that gets posted on these forums instead of, you know, actual metrics and figures they can draw from the game itself then you are the most deluded fool to ever walk this planet. well regardless, its certainly ruffled your feathers. i realise your guide is just to help people (forum readers who care about pve). no-one knows what it is that has happened, it hasn't been confirmed/denied by game maker. all we know is the exploit has been closed a few people have confirmed the same and obviously fixed, call it weird timing. your guide still works though? you can just skip any mission and pick the high paying burners only and get away with it endlessly? @hasikan: why is the biggest effect on new players? how does it concern them if level 4 missions take slightly longer/require skills? ahh i get it, your implying isk/hour affects them. your also implying PVE is the only thing to do in the game. If the player in your example was determined enough he would google b4 doing it, you will have to explain what you mean, i dont think ive done that mission in a few years. is that the one where u warp in and its a belt, u get close to the corp hanger thing & loot an item then warp out? and a spawn of BS is there? Like I already said, no you still need to run some Lv4s. There are still a long list of normal lv4s that work perfectly for this and my guide has been updated with them. The funny thing is the two missions that were effected weren't even what most burner blitzers ran in the first place. I had them in the guide because the isk/h is good and you actually got to shoot some stuff as opposed to Recon, Cargo delivery(I found no change), or a couple of others where you barely shoot anything at all. Hell it might actually BE just bugs, I'll only know when I get replies to my bug reports. To give you an idea Attack of the Drones and Beserk both have, with my skills, around 3mill/min income. Most burners, scarlet and recon have over 6mill/min. But it's a bit of a change of pace, 'relaxing get to shoot stuff and blow them up' instead of just the constant pressure/activity of burners or boring warp fest of Recon/Scarlet. You have to be able to enjoy it too or it just becomes work, and real work pays out WAAAAAAAAAAAY better. So the changes/bugs does nothing to my isk/h but reduces the fun I'm having. Yes, I guess ruffled feathers is right. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.04
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 664	Posted - 2015.12.10 08:37:35 - [538] - Quote Jerry T Pepridge wrote: @hasikan: why is the biggest effect on new players? how does it concern them if level 4 missions take slightly longer/require skills? ahh i get it, your implying isk/hour affects them. your also implying PVE is the only thing to do in the game. You're putting words into his mouth, don't do that. It's been a while since most of us have been newbies so you don't realize that having a bunch of BS spawn where before they didn't and theres nothing in the patch notes causes ship losses not due to pilot error. I can replace a ship lost about a 100 times over, a new player not as easily. Either it's a bug and needs to be fixed or they need to add it to the patch notes so people only lose ships due to pilot error and not due to a dev deciding something wasn't important enough to add to the patch notes. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.04
The Bigpuns Touring New Eden Haven. 56	Posted - 2015.12.10 14:29:48 - [539] - Quote Can I just ask what missions have actually changed? I haven't noticed any differences, but that says more about how little attention I pay to spawns and objectives, I just keep shooting until there's no more red...
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4823	Posted - 2015.12.10 14:30:40 - [540] - Quote The Bigpuns wrote: Can I just ask what missions have actually changed? I haven't noticed any differences, but that says more about how little attention I pay to spawns and objectives, I just keep shooting until there's no more red... I'm working on a short list. Feel free to let me know if you notice anything amiss... I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17051	Posted - 2015.12.11 16:58:41 - [541] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: The Bigpuns wrote: Can I just ask what missions have actually changed? I haven't noticed any differences, but that says more about how little attention I pay to spawns and objectives, I just keep shooting until there's no more red... I'm working on a short list. Feel free to let me know if you notice anything amiss... Done a few of the missions you listed and they are all the same on my end, must have been some kind of bug. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4840	Posted - 2015.12.11 17:22:52 - [542] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Done a few of the missions you listed and they are all the same on my end, must have been some kind of bug. If that's the case, it's still present - the same missions were still exhibiting those errors this morning. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Chainsaw Plankton Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 2180	Posted - 2015.12.11 17:55:41 - [543] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: Jerry T Pepridge wrote: @hasikan: why is the biggest effect on new players? how does it concern them if level 4 missions take slightly longer/require skills? ahh i get it, your implying isk/hour affects them. your also implying PVE is the only thing to do in the game. You're putting words into his mouth, don't do that. It's been a while since most of us have been newbies so you don't realize that having a bunch of BS spawn where before they didn't and theres nothing in the patch notes causes ship losses not due to pilot error. I can replace a ship lost about a 100 times over, a new player not as easily. Either it's a bug and needs to be fixed or they need to add it to the patch notes so people only lose ships due to pilot error and not due to a dev deciding something wasn't important enough to add to the patch notes. yesterday I warped into a storyline missions and went oh this isn't the one I thought it was, oh well and killed everything and finished it anyways. I even went into structure because I wasn't paying attention. To be fair a new player probably would have been paying more attention and not done that, and also would have probably just warped out. But I have the loadout and skills where I can get away with doing that and not really caring much. I can look at the screen see 10% armor and say if I just hit my MWD and fly at this angle I'll be fine. Omnitanked armor ship vs angels isn't always the best baltec1 wrote: Done a few of the missions you listed and they are all the same on my end, must have been some kind of bug. the ones I can personally say I've seen gone berserk need to kill all to finish the mission. or at least most, in my case I killed all but there might have been a few ships I could have left alive? maybe I'll test that more later, or maybe I'll just go back to declining gone beserk. my wallet log says it was 10.77mil for the mission over ~13 mins. I forgot to refit for a target painter so I wasted a little time on the cruisers. About inline with what I remember it taking, haven't done a full clear in a long time now. add 1.8 mil in bounty+ reward, and it is about 1mil/min liquid isk + whatever the LP payout is. Hard to call it a bad mission, although might not be in the burner blitz rotation any more. I didn't see the npc's pre spawned, but that is a very small change imo. if they are there when you warp in or a few seconds later makes almost no difference. recon 1/3 (angel pirates) the acceleration gate is 55km away instead of whatever it was. not really a big change, takes a few extra seconds in an MWD ceptor. Jerry T Pepridge wrote: 27 pages of highsec Vs nullsec income sperg & look what happens. they fixed the exploit that allowed missions to be completed with a blitz method. Arthur said in another thread he didn't blitz - but all the attention posted here has obviously made a difference. for something going on at least 5 years I have trouble calling it an exploit. Adding burners on top of it does make it a bit cheesy though. and that aspect hasn't seen any change and the people that look for efficiency will still be able to find it. I'd guess most mission runners that don't visit the forums or socialize have no idea ascendancy implants are even a thing. or run a burner in a shitfit and say that's too hard and never try again. or fit 300 dps 9001 tank ravens and are happy with 20m/hour. lets trade our LP for ammo, and minerals I mine myself are free! @ChainsawPlankto
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4841	Posted - 2015.12.11 18:12:13 - [544] - Quote Admit it. - you were engrossed by the new armor and hull damage effects. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.