Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 .. 11 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jmanis Catharg
Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 13:13:00 -
[271]
Edited by: Jmanis Catharg on 20/02/2008 13:13:48 Apart from the usual banter a thread like this carries, the OP's mention of
Quote:
The solution: move ALL lvl4 missions into lowsec.
This would both get more targets into lowsec and add that element of risk to carebear mission runners.
Which seems to be the solution most people come up with is pretty flawed, and I mentioned this in another thread somewhere. The giant problem with this solution is this.
PvP and PvE require two very different ship fittings, and neither is good at the others job. When you get to the real expensive end of fits, it polarises this even further. Quite often I've heard "Come on carebear pussies, take your CNR and Pith X-Types fits into low sec". Pshaw. I dare you to take your 35km domination scram/warp disrupt speedfit or your most expensive pure gank fit into Enemies Abound 5/5. Point being neither is going to last very long in either.
By putting the more challenging missions into low sec, you're increasing the risk of being destroyed by pirates by having a tough PvE specific-resist fit that quite literally disintegrates when a pirate hits you.
Heck, the tools of a PvPer are things like NOS, Warp Scramblers, ECM, Energy Neuts etc.. I'd be better off fitting Cargo Expanders to a mission than that stuff. But if I took my PvE fit to a gatecamp, I'd be a pretty useless team member.
Throwing the PvE content into low sec is never, ever going to draw the PvE'ers out to low sec. PvE content *requiring* a PvP fit will.
|
Marcus TheMartin
Gallente Deadly Addiction
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 17:48:00 -
[272]
Originally by: Cipher7 Edited by: Cipher7 on 20/02/2008 12:26:32
Originally by: Marcus TheMartin
What is a free kill and what is the other kind?
The equipment required to do L4's is vastly different from the equipment required for PvP, and is often high-end stuff that you would never risk on a fleet boat.
For example in PvP you would be foolish to fly a BS with no MWD, but in deadspace you can only use AB.
For PvP you need mids for scramblers and webbers, to make sure the other guy doesn't run away, in PvE you fill the mids with cap rechargers, to keep your tank up.
Lots of small details like ammo types, rat specific hardeners, drone types, rigging, etc etc.
Wait I know, bring friends right?
Do you call your friends to guard you while you rat?
Everybody has their own way of making a living.
Saying mission running is "risk free" is a copout, because any profession is risk-free if you do it right.
Anybody who PvP's for a living (Pirates are really the only ones that PvP for income, Alliance members PvP to protect their PvE operations) doesn't attack the strong, they attack the weak, only in situations where they know they can win, ie 10 man gatecamp to kill travelers at chokepoints, etc. If a stronger force arrives they dock.
That's the way you make money in PvP.
But where is the risk in that?
Risk is the opposite of making money.
Nobody likes risk. Not mission runners, not pirates, not alliance types, nobody.
Everybody is only looking for a fight they already know they can win.
If there's risk involved then you did your job wrong.
Explain to me one more time why Mission Runners should be exposed to any more risk than Pirates, Traders, and 0.0 ratters.
First off what I bolded for you is a MASSIVE generalization. The 10 man gate camp exists because there are some things that just one ship can't tank,tackle, and web who knows maybe a frieghter will jump in any one who jumps into that gang wasn't scouting. According to you it is unfair that PvE set ups get put up against PvP setups. Is the same not true when an anti pirate fleet shows up against ships that are fitted for gate camping?
There is plenty of risk in PvP. You claim that Gatecampers never die because they just dock up all the time it is a well known fact in C&P that the united are gate camping rancer all day every day so according to you they don't dieExhibit A
Pirates can be Shot Shot first without any hesitation at -5 War Dec'd (provided they aren't in an npc corp but a war dec wouldn't change much if they were already -5) ID'd in an intel channel making their presence in local a sign to dock up or warp out and Safe spot Baited (see: hot drop(see: capital ships(see: Jedi)))
0.0 Ratters can be Shot without concord intervention Baited War Dec'd (irrelevant in 0.0 though)
Traders can be Shot with concord intervention providing that their cargo is enticing enough
baited
war dec'd (if they aren't in npc corps)
Highsec Mission Runners can be Shot with concord intervention Wardec'd (if they aren't in npc corps but can drop corp anytime to avoid any unwanted combat that dosen't involve a kamikaze attack) baited
I'd say highsec mission runners face the least risk followed by small scale traders.
Unless I'm mistaken
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 19:29:00 -
[273]
Originally by: Cipher7
"Sorry man, can't gatecamp right now, I'm doing Blockade."
I had a even worse version in 0.0 "Form gang to guard the gate, hostiles in the adjacent system" and the damned Squad commander did go to hunt rats in the belt .
I was the only pirla left guarding the gate. (and no it was not in this character alliance).
|
Gamesguy
Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 23:22:00 -
[274]
Originally by: Jmanis Catharg
Throwing the PvE content into low sec is never, ever going to draw the PvE'ers out to low sec. PvE content *requiring* a PvP fit will.
No, but it will draw out the pvpers with their PvE alts out of highsec. And many people who arent carebears.
And all that crap about PvE fits vs PvP fits is just that, crap. I ran missions in gyerzen(dead end lowsec) for like 4 months, never got ganked once. Its called aligning.
I, and lots of others, run explorations in lowsec/0.0. Which is no more difficult to probe out than missions, never got ganked once.
|
Turin
Caldari Eternity INC. Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 23:29:00 -
[275]
Originally by: Kale Kold Me and my mate was thinking today about the risk versus reward to carebear mission runners. We all know that lvl4 missions have a good payout and lots of people run them with little or no risk.
We also know that CCP and players would like to see more people in lowsec.
The solution: move ALL lvl4 missions into lowsec.
This would both get more targets into lowsec and add that element of risk to carebear mission runners. Lets get things moving on this and start asking CCP for change.
Balance if ever i saw it!
Shy of spelling out all the reasons. Ill just say this. Your idea sucks, and would never work.
People would just run lvl 3 missions instead. All you would be doing is removing some of the game for most people.
_________________________________
|
Brutoth Tain
Independant Recon and Intelligence Agency
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 23:40:00 -
[276]
Originally by: Gamesguy
Originally by: Jmanis Catharg
Throwing the PvE content into low sec is never, ever going to draw the PvE'ers out to low sec. PvE content *requiring* a PvP fit will.
No, but it will draw out the pvpers with their PvE alts out of highsec. And many people who arent carebears.
And all that crap about PvE fits vs PvP fits is just that, crap. I ran missions in gyerzen(dead end lowsec) for like 4 months, never got ganked once. Its called aligning.
I, and lots of others, run explorations in lowsec/0.0. Which is no more difficult to probe out than missions, never got ganked once.
Games guy I think the "when we woz noobs we had to eat cardboard and walk 50 miles in the morning to see our agents" thing is getting old and doesn't prove anything as its a very different EVE now compared to what it was back then. ---------------------------------------------- Piebears <3 Risk Vs Reward.......You take the risk they take the reward. |
Marcus TheMartin
Gallente Deadly Addiction
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 01:43:00 -
[277]
Edited by: Marcus TheMartin on 21/02/2008 01:43:46 Once again the problem isn't the missions being in highsec. Its that you can make a decent living in controlled space so there is no need to go to lowsec. Redistribute the isk from Highsec Missions to lowsec missions.
Remove the ores and ice from highsec (except veld)
Stop faction npc's from spawning in highsec
and then a need for lowsec becomes evident without pumping isk into the game
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 01:51:00 -
[278]
Low sec will not thrive at current cluster population levels so long as game mechanics promote gank play.
Not much more to it than that.
The Real Space Initiative - V5 (Forum Link)
|
Marcus TheMartin
Gallente Deadly Addiction
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 02:15:00 -
[279]
Originally by: Adunh Slavy Low sec will not thrive at current cluster population levels so long as game mechanics promote gank play.
Not much more to it than that.
Lowsec will not thrive if evey thing you could ever need is available in highsec
|
Brutoth Tain
Independant Recon and Intelligence Agency
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 02:30:00 -
[280]
Edited by: Brutoth Tain on 21/02/2008 02:31:07 I really don't see people making the move, even if you smack high sec to a pulp with the nerfbat and just leave veldspar and level 2 missions a lot of high sec players will either leave the game or put up with the limited income.
And I can honestly see EVE dieing if it was done because the mineral supply would decrease and the amount of fluid ISK in the hands of a lot of players would cease to exist the markets would crash and probably not stabilise for months if not a year or possibly ever. Producers would go bankrupt as they would have stock they couldn't sell and traders would face massive losses on the stock they hold.
If people avoid pvp when stuff is as cheap as it is today do you really think they will want to pvp if they have to grind for 2 days to afford a cruiser and fittings? as it is today you can grind a fully T2 fitted BS in less than a day doing level 4 missions.
If people think EVE is Carebears online now if some people had their way it would be a lot worse. And besides given the demographics report its more likely that CCP would annex low sec and turn it into high sec than the other way around, all that would do is upset a few pirates not possibly kill the game, and no I'm not saying that's a good idea either its just food for thought for all the dinosaur vets who refuse to see the way the wind is blowing. ---------------------------------------------- Piebears <3 Risk Vs Reward.......You take the risk they take the reward. |
|
Nova Fox
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 02:58:00 -
[281]
Edited by: Nova Fox on 21/02/2008 03:01:36 The problem with the game IMO is lack of proper scaling from 1.0 to 0.1 sec space (0.0 dont count as thats all sandbox there.)
1.0 should be the worst place to try to secure isk resourcing. but the lower you go the fewer protections people are afforded and the higher the potential income. Unfournately low sec isnt profitable enough to justify the constant risks of being destroyed unless your group has an extrondinarly strong presence in the area so we see the other problem the people who cant deal with corps dont have time for corps or cant organize a corp cant really stay in low security space.
CCP stated they wanted to have a vicroy system (unless this is already in place) which would allow players to have partnership in the area, so for example baby empire allaince/corp takes up constellation vicroy, they will be able to keep other players out without sec loss or other possible benifits,
The sec loss itself is another contributing factor twoards low sec population most folks living in 0.0 and lowsec are depending on services provided in empire losing sec status isnt pretty for some players. To make more services avialble in lower underdevloped areas doesnt make to much sense in the scope of social growth also you cant force the market out there.
One suggestion
If anything imo they should add citizenship of some sort, this would semi protect players in lower securities if they belong to the controlling empires they are citizenship of.
Example
For amarr citizens are granted navy protection instead of concord in lower amarr sec space but they lose that protection wandering out of the amarr low sec area. Navys are slower to respond but still eventually show up to deal with the empire's enemy (they will istaspawn if a podding occurs they will be delayed long enought to allow quick ganks and getaways)
For the pirates they will no longer lose sec status for attacking players, instead they lose empire standings for attacking citizens, including citizens of folks on thier side, so in other words they have to go camp out in a hostile empires low sec instead of the one hosting them or risk getting shot at every gate and losing docking access to their homebases citizen or not.
Suggestion Two Make mission rats smarter and swap non drone targets more often, its bad enough a player has to tank most of the mission adding another player for an easy kill isnt much better. Along with target swapping missions should escalate and deescalate based on the number of players in the deadspace, the reinforcements are iskless easily IDed to be the reinforcements, and wont target the person who accepted the mission (or thier drones) nor do they count twoards the mission objectives in other words they only attack the extra players in the mission. This way players seeking to crash missions would have to take a bigger risk instead of going for easy kills.
|
Marcus TheMartin
Gallente Deadly Addiction
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 03:05:00 -
[282]
Originally by: Brutoth Tain Edited by: Brutoth Tain on 21/02/2008 02:31:07 I really don't see people making the move, even if you smack high sec to a pulp with the nerfbat and just leave veldspar and level 2 missions a lot of high sec players will either leave the game or put up with the limited income.
And I can honestly see EVE dieing if it was done because the mineral supply would decrease and the amount of fluid ISK in the hands of a lot of players would cease to exist the markets would crash and probably not stabilise for months if not a year or possibly ever. Producers would go bankrupt as they would have stock they couldn't sell and traders would face massive losses on the stock they hold.
If people avoid pvp when stuff is as cheap as it is today do you really think they will want to pvp if they have to grind for 2 days to afford a cruiser and fittings? as it is today you can grind a fully T2 fitted BS in less than a day doing level 4 missions.
If people think EVE is Carebears online now if some people had their way it would be a lot worse. And besides given the demographics report its more likely that CCP would annex low sec and turn it into high sec than the other way around, all that would do is upset a few pirates not possibly kill the game, and no I'm not saying that's a good idea either its just food for thought for all the dinosaur vets who refuse to see the way the wind is blowing.
Once again I didn't say remove lvl 4's from highsec I said redisribute their payouts so that lowsec provides the better reward currently highsec missions allow for "easy" living at eve's middle class
Where as the low sec belt pirate would be making a meager income at best barely scraping by with the way things are now.
Eve wouldn't die things would cost more (surprisingly things cost more pre invention but some how people kept subscribing whats up with that!?)
Traders would hold their stock as prices are bound to go up. Producers would for some reason sell their ships above mineral cost!? (madness I tell you)
|
Brutoth Tain
Independant Recon and Intelligence Agency
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 03:58:00 -
[283]
Originally by: Marcus TheMartin
Once again I didn't say remove lvl 4's from highsec I said redisribute their payouts so that lowsec provides the better reward currently highsec missions allow for "easy" living at eve's middle class
Where as the low sec belt pirate would be making a meager income at best barely scraping by with the way things are now.
Eve wouldn't die things would cost more (surprisingly things cost more pre invention but some how people kept subscribing whats up with that!?)
Traders would hold their stock as prices are bound to go up. Producers would for some reason sell their ships above mineral cost!? (madness I tell you)
Do you really believe people would like to go back to the old prices? Subscriptions kept rising because that was the accepted standard and those prices where the norm the playerbase is spoiled now and I really don't think people would enjoy grinding the same amount to buy a cruiser as they can for a BS currently.
Sure there is no doubt some T2 BPO holders wouldn't mind it but most would hate it. ---------------------------------------------- Piebears <3 Risk Vs Reward.......You take the risk they take the reward. |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 05:18:00 -
[284]
Originally by: Marcus TheMartin
Originally by: Adunh Slavy Low sec will not thrive at current cluster population levels so long as game mechanics promote gank play.
Not much more to it than that.
Lowsec will not thrive if evey thing you could ever need is available in highsec
Low sec and 0.0 have something high sec don't have, they have risk. Yes risk in it self is a reward, it can be fun to be in a risky situation, the same reason some people like horror movies. The trick is making the risk fun and gratifying for as many people as possible. Gank play is not fun and not gratifying for very long, for either side.
The Real Space Initiative - V5 (Forum Link)
|
Sanity Lost
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 05:23:00 -
[285]
Originally by: Marcus TheMartin
Once again the problem isn't the missions being in highsec. Its that you can make a decent living in controlled space so there is no need to go to lowsec. Redistribute the isk from Highsec Missions to lowsec missions.
Remove the ores and ice from highsec (except veld)
Stop faction npc's from spawning in highsec
and then a need for lowsec becomes evident without pumping isk into the game
No this wouldnĘt work.
You are saying remove what is in highsec to low sec with the intent that players would follow what they were doing into lowsec. This wouldnĘt happen. Players would stay in high sec and do more of what was left in high sec. thatĘs how high-sec players think. If you actually removed anything from high sec you would give the vast majority of players who play eve who stay in high-sec less to do and ultimately they would leave the game and no you wouldnĘt attract more people to the game.
|
Gamesguy
Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 05:33:00 -
[286]
Originally by: Sanity Lost
Originally by: Marcus TheMartin
Once again the problem isn't the missions being in highsec. Its that you can make a decent living in controlled space so there is no need to go to lowsec. Redistribute the isk from Highsec Missions to lowsec missions.
Remove the ores and ice from highsec (except veld)
Stop faction npc's from spawning in highsec
and then a need for lowsec becomes evident without pumping isk into the game
No this wouldnĘt work.
You are saying remove what is in highsec to low sec with the intent that players would follow what they were doing into lowsec. This wouldnĘt happen. Players would stay in high sec and do more of what was left in high sec. thatĘs how high-sec players think. If you actually removed anything from high sec you would give the vast majority of players who play eve who stay in high-sec less to do and ultimately they would leave the game and no you wouldnĘt attract more people to the game.
No they wouldnt, half the highsec population would move to griding L3 missions.
The other half are alts of 0.0/lowsec players, and they would move.
|
Marcus TheMartin
Gallente Deadly Addiction
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 05:48:00 -
[287]
Originally by: Sanity Lost
Originally by: Marcus TheMartin
Once again the problem isn't the missions being in highsec. Its that you can make a decent living in controlled space so there is no need to go to lowsec. Redistribute the isk from Highsec Missions to lowsec missions.
Remove the ores and ice from highsec (except veld)
Stop faction npc's from spawning in highsec
and then a need for lowsec becomes evident without pumping isk into the game
No this wouldnĘt work.
You are saying remove what is in highsec to low sec with the intent that players would follow what they were doing into lowsec. This wouldnĘt happen. Players would stay in high sec and do more of what was left in high sec. thatĘs how high-sec players think. If you actually removed anything from high sec you would give the vast majority of players who play eve who stay in high-sec less to do and ultimately they would leave the game and no you wouldnĘt attract more people to the game.
People will always need ice
People will always need minerals
The reduction of minerals and ice increases the prices people go to cash in on the market
With all non veld removed from highsec it wouldn't mean the end of mining as there will be a demand and some one will supply so long as they can make profit. The profit comes from the price jump. I see nothing wrong there
The only side affect I can see of this is that admiral 8 accounts and his merry band of mackinaws will actually have to be at the screen when playing.
Once again missions of all levels will still make money just the gap would be greatly widened between them and lowsec as opposed to the 200k figure that currently exists. But in order to do that without causing inflation you'd have to take out a portion of isk from highsec missions to beef up lowsec missions
|
Jack Jombardo
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 07:53:00 -
[288]
Why the hell does some of you try get me (mission runner/miner/trader) to low/0.0-sec? I do NOT like to go there!
I do not like to be camped, ganged, bashord all the time and lose my ship every day! I do not like to PvP all night long just to protect my base (POS)! I do not like to play for weeks, buy my shine new ship and see how it will explode from the next wannabe Pirate 10 second later!
If there would be some sort of FAIR fights ... maybe. But hell, 30++++ million SP with a buged of several billions against under 5 million SP with hardly 20 million ISK?
If you like to get more pilots to 0.0 - offer them safty without paying abnormal ISK numbers! Offer them the posibility to mine out there without losing there Bargs shortly after ariving a belt.
Care about them! Then they will come :)
0.0 is OK as it is, they Pilots out there are the real problem. Thous hundrets of mini Rambos who are shoting every Shuttle or Frig even if is the Rookie ship are the problem!
|
Cipher7
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 09:38:00 -
[289]
Originally by: Marcus TheMartin
Originally by: Adunh Slavy Low sec will not thrive at current cluster population levels so long as game mechanics promote gank play.
Not much more to it than that.
Lowsec will not thrive if evey thing you could ever need is available in highsec
Then lowsec need not exist.
The majority of the players decide how the game is gonna be, not the other way around.
If ppl want to play a certain way then the game has to serve them.
If they want to run around and pick roses, then by God the game better spawn enough roses.
Do you pay their subscription? No? Then stfu.
|
Gorefacer
Caldari Resurrection
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 10:07:00 -
[290]
Originally by: Vagel No, you dont do them wrong, but WAY too slow (compared to what you could make of ISK dooing level 3's solo in that setup!)
If you are a hardcore missionrunner, you invest to make it pay off fast.
BTW, i have been there, T2 fitted standart raven - and it's dooable. However - there will be a lot of missions you have to turn down. That is NOT the case in a well fitted faction CNR.
Never used a CNR, never seen a mission I HAD to turn down.
As long as you know the triggers, aggro spots, and dmg recieved/dealt types you can do all lvl 4s in a t2 fit Raven. As far as I can tell at least.
"You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus |
|
Menefrego
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 10:13:00 -
[291]
if want more players in lowsec is simple: give a mission to the mission runners like: destroy 10 pirate and you'll receive xxxx lp and xxxxxxxxxx isk (just to explain i don't know witch is the correct ammount, i play only since 2 month.. and where for pirate i mean every one i met in lowsec). really i don't know if what i say has sense, but: what do a mission runner do? mission. for isk.
|
Lo3d3R
MAFIA
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 10:21:00 -
[292]
Originally by: Pantaloon McPants Edited by: Pantaloon McPants on 13/02/2008 20:22:41 Dont talk to me about risk vs reward you pleb low sec pirate scum, why dont you take your risk vs reward and go play in 0.0 space. If anything they should just get rid of low sec waste of space and turn it into 0.0 or empire space so all that useless space can get used up and lighten the server load.
Theres a reason that 83.345% of eve players are in empire space and its not because of the clean water and disease free women. Some of us just want to log in shoot some rats, make some isk, buy some nice toys without getting constantly kicked in the balls and starting from scratch because some fat faced pirate and his drunken yob mates camped your mission system gate for 12hrs.
Pirates grow some balls and go pirate in 0.0
low sec is more fun then 0.0 !!! ___________________
Eating Chopped Bear: |
Marcus TheMartin
Gallente Deadly Addiction
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 16:41:00 -
[293]
Originally by: Jack Jombardo Why the hell does some of you try get me (mission runner/miner/trader) to low/0.0-sec? I do NOT like to go there!
I do not like to be camped, ganged, bashord all the time and lose my ship every day! I do not like to PvP all night long just to protect my base (POS)! I do not like to play for weeks, buy my shine new ship and see how it will explode from the next wannabe Pirate 10 second later!
If there would be some sort of FAIR fights ... maybe. But hell, 30++++ million SP with a buged of several billions against under 5 million SP with hardly 20 million ISK?
If you like to get more pilots to 0.0 - offer them safty without paying abnormal ISK numbers! Offer them the posibility to mine out there without losing there Bargs shortly after ariving a belt.
Care about them! Then they will come :)
0.0 is OK as it is, they Pilots out there are the real problem. Thous hundrets of mini Rambos who are shoting every Shuttle or Frig even if is the Rookie ship are the problem!
Oh I could care less if you come to lowsec what my issue is that you can live in high security space with everything you need readily available with no problems what so ever. No one likes to die, contrary to popular (your) belief dying all the time is the result of being stupid in lowsec as opposed to learning what you did wrong. According to The november quarterly economic newsletter only 10% of the population falls in the 20-30mill sp bracket an even greater drop in the 30-40 mill sp bracket. I am doubting that you've actually gone into lowsec and are just repeating scary stories you've heard from npc corp chat. is a completley different topic as there are tons of things that need work in 0.0 but what you presented is just complete ignorance of how 0.0 works.
0.0 is space that is controlled by corporations and alliances they shoot down those rookie ships and shuttles because they are scouts, spies, and accomplices to characters named wj4yh9aw.
Originally by: Cipher7
Originally by: Marcus TheMartin
Originally by: Adunh Slavy Low sec will not thrive at current cluster population levels so long as game mechanics promote gank play.
Not much more to it than that.
Lowsec will not thrive if evey thing you could ever need is available in highsec
Then lowsec need not exist.
The majority of the players decide how the game is gonna be, not the other way around.
If ppl want to play a certain way then the game has to serve them.
If they want to run around and pick roses, then by God the game better spawn enough roses.
Do you pay their subscription? No? Then stfu.
If the majority of the players decide how the game works why did the 8000+ raven pilots decide to remove the ridiculous range from torpedoes? they did decide that right? right?
|
Brutoth Tain
Independant Recon and Intelligence Agency
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 16:57:00 -
[294]
Marcus why does high sec ISK production need to be nerfed exactly? risk vs reward is bull**** as its more like effort vs reward or time sink vs reward. If people choose to live in high sec why is that a problem?
Every player who pays his sub has the same rights as the other players who pay their sub, so destroying a lot of players and corps chosen play style is just wrong. How many corps go to 0.0 and join alliances like Frege or KOS and get the crap kicked out of them so they have to return to high sec? of course if a corp cannot defend itself it has no place in 0.0 but where exactly should those corps reside? low sec isn't much better for some corps so their only choice is high sec.
Trouble is there is a minority fringe of players who just wet themselves with delight at the prospect of seeing that taken away from them and campaign on the forums to that end. Sometimes its piebears who think low sec will suddenly be filled full of faction fit CNRs or just ignorant "hardcore" players who think that because they shoot people they are disqualified from being classed as a carebear when they are the worst carebears around. ---------------------------------------------- Piebears <3 Risk Vs Reward.......You take the risk they take the reward. |
Marcus TheMartin
Gallente Deadly Addiction
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 17:15:00 -
[295]
Originally by: Brutoth Tain Marcus why does high sec ISK production need to be nerfed exactly? risk vs reward is bull**** as its more like effort vs reward or time sink vs reward. If people choose to live in high sec why is that a problem?
Every player who pays his sub has the same rights as the other players who pay their sub, so destroying a lot of players and corps chosen play style is just wrong. How many corps go to 0.0 and join alliances like Frege or KOS and get the crap kicked out of them so they have to return to high sec? of course if a corp cannot defend itself it has no place in 0.0 but where exactly should those corps reside? low sec isn't much better for some corps so their only choice is high sec.
Trouble is there is a minority fringe of players who just wet themselves with delight at the prospect of seeing that taken away from them and campaign on the forums to that end. Sometimes its piebears who think low sec will suddenly be filled full of faction fit CNRs or just ignorant "hardcore" players who think that because they shoot people they are disqualified from being classed as a carebear when they are the worst carebears around.
OF COURSE LOWSEC ISN'T BETTER WHAT DO YOU THINK THIS WHOLE DAMN THREAD IS ABOUT
You've also missed the part when I pointed out that many other lvl 4 missioning ships that aren't Raven Navy Issue nice reading on your part.
I have also never called any one a carebear in this thread, for the record I will define a carebear as some one who considers non consensual pvp the same as non consensual sex Rape. Redistributing isk payments and ores would not destroy play styles they could still mine all day it would just be veld as opposed to the alt army descending upon ice belts like swarms of locusts. Also real clever on that piebear remark do you do standup as well?
|
Brutoth Tain
Independant Recon and Intelligence Agency
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 17:35:00 -
[296]
Your still proposing nerfing of high sec to prop up the failing and broken low sec, what you suggest is moving all off the good stuff out of high sec and place it in low sec.
That is as damaging to the high sec play style as moving the last bit of decent stuff from low sec to high sec is to the pirates life style. I mean look at moon mining and level 5 missions and the some of the better low sec ores its all just sitting there utterly useless to the general population why not move it to high sec?
Because it would wreck the pirates play style and wouldn't be fair, no solution that takes from one group to give to another sucks and isn't right as everyone pays their for their subs and should all have the same rights to their chosen play style. ---------------------------------------------- Piebears <3 Risk Vs Reward.......You take the risk they take the reward. |
Tanshi Daiko
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 17:52:00 -
[297]
Worried at these people who are posting that every ore but veldpsar should be removed from highsec.
True, the price would go up, but.....that doesnt mean people will mine it, or mine it in enough amounts to meet demand.
what you would see is massive shortages as the market fails to correct. Mining Barges just arent built to resist pvp and suddenly, with no ore, there wouldnt be any ships made. Heck, any ship, even a battleship, thats built to mine reasonably well will struggle in pvp against player pirates (who have no such handicaps to their ships).
Add to that the massive increase in casualties as everyone struggles into lowsec and you will need ten times the number of ships.
There comes a point where all the money in the world cant buy something that doesnt exist.
|
Marcus TheMartin
Gallente Deadly Addiction
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 19:07:00 -
[298]
Originally by: Brutoth Tain Your still proposing nerfing of high sec to prop up the failing and broken low sec, what you suggest is moving all off the good stuff out of high sec and place it in low sec.
That is as damaging to the high sec play style as moving the last bit of decent stuff from low sec to high sec is to the pirates life style. I mean look at moon mining and level 5 missions and the some of the better low sec ores its all just sitting there utterly useless to the general population why not move it to high sec?
Because it would wreck the pirates play style and wouldn't be fair, no solution that takes from one group to give to another sucks and isn't right as everyone pays their for their subs and should all have the same rights to their chosen play style.
Moon mining isn't unique to lowsec moon mining has a risk too it even though it provides afk isk.
L5's are not run because they require teamwork where as highsec missions provide much greater returns.
The lowsec ores are not mined as much as highsec and 0.0 ores due to the fact that 0.0 has unique high demand ores and highsec has masses of required low value ores.
I would harldy say that removing ice and all non veld from highsec is "unfair" I would hardly say that making negligible risk isk reduced is "unfair". This isn't about fair its about how no one needs to leave highsec ever.
Originally by: Tanshi Daiko Worried at these people who are posting that every ore but veldpsar should be removed from highsec.
True, the price would go up, but.....that doesnt mean people will mine it, or mine it in enough amounts to meet demand.
what you would see is massive shortages as the market fails to correct. Mining Barges just arent built to resist pvp and suddenly, with no ore, there wouldnt be any ships made. Heck, any ship, even a battleship, thats built to mine reasonably well will struggle in pvp against player pirates (who have no such handicaps to their ships).
Add to that the massive increase in casualties as everyone struggles into lowsec and you will need ten times the number of ships.
There comes a point where all the money in the world cant buy something that doesnt exist.
There is a concept called teamwork I suggest you look it up it is filed under Multiplayer
|
Brutoth Tain
Independant Recon and Intelligence Agency
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 20:12:00 -
[299]
Originally by: Marcus TheMartin
Moon mining isn't unique to lowsec moon mining has a risk too it even though it provides afk isk.
L5's are not run because they require teamwork where as highsec missions provide much greater returns.
The lowsec ores are not mined as much as highsec and 0.0 ores due to the fact that 0.0 has unique high demand ores and highsec has masses of required low value ores.
I would harldy say that removing ice and all non veld from highsec is "unfair" I would hardly say that making negligible risk isk reduced is "unfair". This isn't about fair its about how no one needs to leave highsec ever.
Again nerfing high sec is your only answer just because high sec is functioning better than low sec that doesn't make it high secs fault, its low sec that's broken as this magical risk vs reward is broken as the risk doesn't match the reward.
Low sec ore is broken.
Like you even state yourself the ore is not mined because there is no need to mine it, high sec has the masses of much needed base ore and 0.0 has a large amount of specialist ore and the ore contains higher yields of the mid level minerals than the low sec ore does, and when it comes to mining a high sec hulk miner can never match a 0.0 hulk miners income.
Level 5s in general are busted.
Nobody runs level 5s because its to much hassle than they are worth as you need a team to complete them and each member of the team could earn more soloing a lower level mission in whatever sec space.
And I know some people will claim that level 4s make more ISK than you can in 0.0 but they talk out their arses because they would have you believe every mission they run is Guristas extravaganza or WC 4 and gives 30 mill in salvage and bounty's when in fact 80% of missions are crap and full of junk salvage and 450k BSs.
They should increase the low sec rewards to match the risk, high sec risk vs reward is balanced well enough and 0.0 risk vs reward is working fine to its only low sec that's out of whack. ---------------------------------------------- Piebears <3 Risk Vs Reward.......You take the risk they take the reward. |
Kolwrath
Amarr Imperial Shipment
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 20:54:00 -
[300]
Edited by: Kolwrath on 21/02/2008 20:53:51
Originally by: Marcus TheMartin
Remove the ores and ice from highsec (except veld) Stop faction npc's from spawning in highsec
and then a need for lowsec becomes evident without pumping isk into the game
1. Speaking as a miner, Veldspar is the most profitable ore in high sec. So your suggestions would do uhhhh nothing.
2. HIgh sec rat spawns are at most 10k-15k rats in a 0.5. How is removing them going to do anything?
Man this thread is full of great ideas from players who must be singing: "I am so smart, I am so smart, S M R T, I mean S M A R T".
Shesh ...
Originally by: Chaos Space Marines
Do you hear the voices, too?!?!
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 .. 11 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |