Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ronsonol
|
Posted - 2008.02.17 19:19:00 -
[211]
Originally by: Marcus TheMartin
Originally by: Annaphera No, I think there would be a general objection from those who aren't ready to become involuntary gank-targets. That is all the OP's suggestion, and now yours, are all about. I personally would cancel the account I have my mission runner on, and concentrate on mining if what you suggest came to pass. Trying to force people into lowsec by nerfing highsec IS NOT THE ANSWER! You want more people out there, put something on lowsec that can't be found anywhere else...or have Concord add massive bounties to anyone who kills in lowsec, providing incentive for pirates to hunt each other. That would give you something to do...except, you do want to actually take any real risk yourselves, do you?
The concept that pirates never face risk is idiotic. So many people that die insist on playing EVE on single player mode they forget that people work together to get things done.
Pumping isk into the game by boosting lowsec bounties as opposed to taking isk from highsec bounties shifts the isk faucet + isk sink balance out of proportion. Reducing Zzzz Isk from highsec reduces the rewards of risk free solo play.
I didn't say Move all lvl 4's into lowsec I said take isk from the highsec agents and put it into the lowsec agents. If you just boost the lowsec agents the mentality of "Oh god I'm gonna die" still stays in place as making a living is still possible in highsec as nothing has really changed.
Risk Free ISK? It isn't risk free or I would be flying one of the gimme frigs. I see your point but you are arguing for an essential change in the structure of the game. I understand that you want more people in specific parts of space. Many of us are saying that we do not want that change to be made. Raising the reward for low sec missions is a fantastic idea and a much more reasonable solution. If it doesn't work then we could try something else. If you moved the level 4 missions to low sec you would loose a lot of players. The low risk solo play method may not be what you like to do in Eve, but it is how I like to play it. You aren't paying my 15$ a month (30 as I have two accts). If CCP felt it was in the players' best interest to make this change I feel they may have done so already.
Short Version: I am sorry you are not having fun and are jealous of the isk vs. reward other players enjoy. CCP set it up this way for a reason (I would assume there are more of us than you so it makes them more money). Taking away from the complexity of Eve so you have more fun is silly given the assumed population distribution. So quit harshing the Carebears, man up and head to 0.0. I believe I read at least one post where someone would be willing to give you a little pvp out there.
|
Marcus TheMartin
Gallente Deadly Addiction
|
Posted - 2008.02.17 20:35:00 -
[212]
Originally by: Ronsonol
Risk Free ISK? It isn't risk free or I would be flying one of the gimme frigs. I see your point but you are arguing for an essential change in the structure of the game. I understand that you want more people in specific parts of space. Many of us are saying that we do not want that change to be made. Raising the reward for low sec missions is a fantastic idea and a much more reasonable solution. If it doesn't work then we could try something else. If you moved the level 4 missions to low sec you would loose a lot of players. The low risk solo play method may not be what you like to do in Eve, but it is how I like to play it. You aren't paying my 15$ a month (30 as I have two accts). If CCP felt it was in the players' best interest to make this change I feel they may have done so already.
Short Version: I am sorry you are not having fun and are jealous of the isk vs. reward other players enjoy. CCP set it up this way for a reason (I would assume there are more of us than you so it makes them more money). Taking away from the complexity of Eve so you have more fun is silly given the assumed population distribution. So quit harshing the Carebears, man up and head to 0.0. I believe I read at least one post where someone would be willing to give you a little pvp out there.
I am in 0.0 thanks for doing your research.
I never said move all LvL 4s to lowsec the op said that
I originally said redistribute the isk from highsec 1-4's then changed to redistribute from 2-4's to lowsec 2-4's. Simply increasing the rewards of lowsec dosen't phase your crowd (eve's middle class) one bit as you will still hug highsec as your funds haven't been affected in the slightest. So there is really nothing that would entice you into lowsec since you have everything you need in highsec.
|
Shemaul
|
Posted - 2008.02.17 20:49:00 -
[213]
Edited by: Shemaul on 17/02/2008 20:52:38 First weird idea that comes into my mind:
New Mission type: Imperial escort. U have to escort a NPC ship (trasport, freighter, what u want) with valuable cargo, through low sec sys. Npc ship will join your fleet, jumping and warping when fleet leader order to do so.
The agent should tell u what ship u need to escort the trasport according to the value of cargo (something like ships that can enter a complex).
So we choose ship and pvp fitting. So we make mission.
But pirates will faces at last something different than a 2 billion pve CNR.
Think about the mechanics to make this mission possible, but i guess this could be a nice way to introduce mission runners to pvp engagements, having more people in low sec and most of all have some combat with appropriate fitting if some pirates try to intercept cargo.
|
Marcus TheMartin
Gallente Deadly Addiction
|
Posted - 2008.02.17 20:53:00 -
[214]
Originally by: Shemaul
But pirates will faces at last something different than a 2 billion pve CNR.
You don't need to use an RNI to do missions
|
Shemaul
|
Posted - 2008.02.17 20:55:00 -
[215]
Edited by: Shemaul on 17/02/2008 20:55:49
Originally by: Marcus TheMartin
Originally by: Shemaul
But pirates will faces at last something different than a 2 billion pve CNR.
You don't need to use an RNI to do missions
U miss the point: cause u want to. Change period with this new one: But pirates will faces at last something different than a pve fitted ship. did u understand now or u have to whine no matter what people wrote just to find a suitable solution?
|
Marcus TheMartin
Gallente Deadly Addiction
|
Posted - 2008.02.17 21:07:00 -
[216]
Originally by: Shemaul Edited by: Shemaul on 17/02/2008 20:55:49
Originally by: Marcus TheMartin
Originally by: Shemaul
But pirates will faces at last something different than a 2 billion pve CNR.
You don't need to use an RNI to do missions
U miss the point: cause u want to. Change period with this new one: But pirates will faces at last something different than a pve fitted ship. did u understand now or u have to whine no matter what people wrote just to find a suitable solution?
Your solution wouldn't change much as it is the solo player populace that has the problem with people teaming up against them. A solo pvp ship still dies to multiple pvp ships. And once again you have changed nothing regarding hi sec isk pumps. Look at Lvl 5's sure they are the new thing to do but heres whats keeping people from doing them en mass
1. Lowsec 2. Unsoloable 3. Easier to make isk in highsec
|
Shemaul
|
Posted - 2008.02.17 21:13:00 -
[217]
Edited by: Shemaul on 17/02/2008 21:15:22
Originally by: Marcus TheMartin
Originally by: Shemaul Edited by: Shemaul on 17/02/2008 20:55:49
Originally by: Marcus TheMartin
Originally by: Shemaul
But pirates will faces at last something different than a 2 billion pve CNR.
You don't need to use an RNI to do missions
U miss the point: cause u want to. Change period with this new one: But pirates will faces at last something different than a pve fitted ship. did u understand now or u have to whine no matter what people wrote just to find a suitable solution?
Your solution wouldn't change much as it is the solo player populace that has the problem with people teaming up against them. A solo pvp ship still dies to multiple pvp ships. And once again you have changed nothing regarding hi sec isk pumps. Look at Lvl 5's sure they are the new thing to do but heres whats keeping people from doing them en mass
1. Lowsec 2. Unsoloable 3. Easier to make isk in highsec
Ok, this is not whine, but a good point.
If u make this kind of mission really profitable (very good reward for example, significative sec status or standing increase, or some good item dropped by agent) people could find funny to team up 2gether to make this kind of missions. More, as u know, good pvp always come when u team up. Who cares about solo player that wants to play eve like a single player game no matter what the game offer.
if u put this kind of mission in the options, people at last could have a chance that now they have not. Dunno if it could solve the problem, but it could be a nice try for sure.
P.S. i always do lvl4 with one or two mates, cause i find them very boring solo. I know that there are good number of kill mission runners doing the same. So it could be a nice try...for sure better than nothing...
|
Marcus TheMartin
Gallente Deadly Addiction
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 00:34:00 -
[218]
Originally by: Shemaul
Ok, this is not whine, but a good point.
If u make this kind of mission really profitable (very good reward for example, significative sec status or standing increase, or some good item dropped by agent) people could find funny to team up 2gether to make this kind of missions. More, as u know, good pvp always come when u team up. Who cares about solo player that wants to play eve like a single player game no matter what the game offer.
if u put this kind of mission in the options, people at last could have a chance that now they have not. Dunno if it could solve the problem, but it could be a nice try for sure.
P.S. i always do lvl4 with one or two mates, cause i find them very boring solo. I know that there are good number of kill mission runners doing the same. So it could be a nice try...for sure better than nothing...
Thats great that you do missions with buddies good job :high five:
But once again pumping out more riches to be grabbed will not attract the many that are content with their current earnings.
You have to nerf highsec mission payouts and boost lowsec payouts respectively
|
Shemaul
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 01:14:00 -
[219]
Edited by: Shemaul on 18/02/2008 01:15:44
Originally by: Marcus TheMartin
Originally by: Shemaul
Ok, this is not whine, but a good point.
If u make this kind of mission really profitable (very good reward for example, significative sec status or standing increase, or some good item dropped by agent) people could find funny to team up 2gether to make this kind of missions. More, as u know, good pvp always come when u team up. Who cares about solo player that wants to play eve like a single player game no matter what the game offer.
if u put this kind of mission in the options, people at last could have a chance that now they have not. Dunno if it could solve the problem, but it could be a nice try for sure.
P.S. i always do lvl4 with one or two mates, cause i find them very boring solo. I know that there are good number of kill mission runners doing the same. So it could be a nice try...for sure better than nothing...
Thats great that you do missions with buddies good job :high five:
But once again pumping out more riches to be grabbed will not attract the many that are content with their current earnings.
You have to nerf highsec mission payouts and boost lowsec payouts respectively
Stalemate. U keep your point, i'll keep mine.
I run mission since 2006, and i can tell u for sure that what u are saying is just a dream. U can nerf mission rewards in safesec how much u want. U can raise rewards in low sec how much u want. Nothing will change.
That's for a basic, simple reason: u always run the risk of a Pvp encounter with a Pve setting. This mean suicide. Clean and obviuos.
U guys are so blind, knowing little or nothing about theese mechanics.
People ratting in 0.0 with pve settings run like rabbits when hostiles number in local grows. They can, just because they don't have an agent ready to deny the reward and cutting down your standing if u run at the station like a wet pant kid without completing the job.
But hey, if a single mission in low sec will give 300 millions reward, u have the solution of the problem!!!! I can run this kind of risk with a jumpclone and a t2 drake. If u think this is balanced, u have my "agree" sign on your idea...
|
Cailais
Amarr VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 01:32:00 -
[220]
It really doesnt matter what you do - they'll always be something in game that's 'low risk' that has the most reward out of all the possible 'low risk' ventures you could do - be that mining in a 0.7 or missioning a lvl IV in a 0.5.
And that 'low risk' activity will draw 100% of those that want to progress in ISK terms without taking any chances.
If youre after a motivator to get people to try 'high risk' ventures, then you need to make that venture more fun, not necessarily more profitable. Ideally you also want that kind of venture to have a range of options to reduce the chance of 'insta-gank death' at the hands of the mythical gate camp blob.
Have a look at the link under my sig for my suggestions on how that might be achieved.
C.
Improved Low Sec Idea!! |
|
Brutoth Tain
Independant Recon and Intelligence Agency
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 01:59:00 -
[221]
I can only speak for myself but it wouldn't surprise me if others feel the way I do and I don't do missions for "fun" they bore me and are crap, I don't want buddies along, why not? because you always seem to get a berk who doesn't know what they are doing and mess up the mission and can cause you to loose your ship and cause more problems than they are worth.
Missions for me are not a social or team activity its just work for ISK, the current format of EVEs pve makes it not fun. If low sec mission payouts were adjusted for higher bounty's and reward and LP and the whole payout was doubled or tripled along with agents being randomised or more of them so pirates cant camp a "hub" I would almost certainly mission in low sec. If there was 1 million ISK bounty rats in low sec I would consider low sec ratting to, as it stands 130k just isn't attractive.
As it is now even if level 4s where removed from high sec I wouldn't move to low sec to do them I would just pimp a Drake and speed run level 3s, consequently my income would be reduced so I wouldn't spend much ISK on my pvp ships which reduces the potential loot for any pirates who killed me. ---------------------------------------------- Piebears <3 Risk Vs Reward.......You take the risk they take the reward. |
Marcus TheMartin
Gallente Deadly Addiction
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 04:15:00 -
[222]
Originally by: Shemaul
Stalemate. U keep your point, i'll keep mine.
I run mission since 2006, and i can tell u for sure that what u are saying is just a dream. U can nerf mission rewards in safesec how much u want. U can raise rewards in low sec how much u want. Nothing will change.
That's for a basic, simple reason: u always run the risk of a Pvp encounter with a Pve setting. This mean suicide. Clean and obviuos.
U guys are so blind, knowing little or nothing about theese mechanics.
People ratting in 0.0 with pve settings run like rabbits when hostiles number in local grows. They can, just because they don't have an agent ready to deny the reward and cutting down your standing if u run at the station like a wet pant kid without completing the job.
But hey, if a single mission in low sec will give 300 millions reward, u have the solution of the problem!!!! I can run this kind of risk with a jumpclone and a t2 drake. If u think this is balanced, u have my "agree" sign on your idea...
But where will that isk come from? Are you familiar with inflation?
In order to boost lowsec rewards you must nerf highsec rewards proportionately or *cues dramatic music* Inflation occurs.
I already stated that nothing will change by simply boosting lowsec rewards if highsec rewards still provide a stable eve middle class income as the predicted attitude would be "**** that I'm not going out there I'm no sheep etc." You have to cut from highsec to boost lowsec to a point where it becomes fine if you want to stay in highsec all your life but you'll never make anything of yourself from doing so.
|
Rawr Cristina
Caldari Cult of Rawr
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 04:43:00 -
[223]
Originally by: Cailais It really doesnt matter what you do - they'll always be something in game that's 'low risk' that has the most reward out of all the possible 'low risk' ventures you could do - be that mining in a 0.7 or missioning a lvl IV in a 0.5.
And that 'low risk' activity will draw 100% of those that want to progress in ISK terms without taking any chances.
QFT. Before missions, the carebear crowd would just strip belts in Hi-sec. I used to have the same mentality when I first started playing - I could have gone to 0.0 and ninja-mined Ark for a few days to make my fortune, but instead just sat in a deserted 0.9 system with a Geddon, 7 Miner IIs and 9 Harvester drones and mined all day.
Then I quit for 2 years
|
Sanity Lost
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 05:08:00 -
[224]
Originally by: Marcus TheMartin
But where will that isk come from? Are you familiar with inflation?
In order to boost lowsec rewards you must nerf highsec rewards proportionately or *cues dramatic music* Inflation occurs.
I already stated that nothing will change by simply boosting lowsec rewards if highsec rewards still provide a stable eve middle class income as the predicted attitude would be "**** that I'm not going out there I'm no sheep etc." You have to cut from highsec to boost lowsec to a point where it becomes fine if you want to stay in highsec all your life but you'll never make anything of yourself from doing so.
The problem with that is that most people stay in high sec and arenĘt interested in a minority that wants the majority to be forced into an area of space that essentially doesnĘt concern them. For this reason cutting down rewards in hi-sec will never happen.
I am however interested in ideas that will boost low-sec but to do that you will have to leave high-sec space alone and concentrate on ideas that will boost low-sec directly
|
Marcus TheMartin
Gallente Deadly Addiction
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 05:22:00 -
[225]
Originally by: Sanity Lost
The problem with that is that most people stay in high sec and arenĘt interested in a minority that wants the majority to be forced into an area of space that essentially doesnĘt concern them. For this reason cutting down rewards in hi-sec will never happen.
I am however interested in ideas that will boost low-sec but to do that you will have to leave high-sec space alone and concentrate on ideas that will boost low-sec directly
I am not trying to invoke anything that would force any one in any unsavory position
|
Cpt Fina
Mutually Assured Distraction
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 06:36:00 -
[226]
Originally by: Marcus TheMartin
But where will that isk come from? Are you familiar with inflation?
In order to boost lowsec rewards you must nerf highsec rewards proportionately or *cues dramatic music* Inflation occurs.
One shouldn't rule out the possibility to compensate a low-sec boost with increased isk-sinks overall. An increase in sinks like tax, npc-goods, insurance ect. could work as a relative decrease of reward in high-sec even though missions were left alone. I'd personally rather see CCP nerf the hell outta high-sec lv 4s tho.
|
Marcus TheMartin
Gallente Deadly Addiction
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 06:39:00 -
[227]
Originally by: Cpt Fina
One shouldn't rule out the possibility to compensate a low-sec boost with increased isk-sinks overall. An increase in sinks like tax, npc-goods, insurance ect. could work as a relative decrease of reward in high-sec even though missions were left alone. I'd personally rather see CCP nerf the hell outta high-sec lv 4s tho.
Yes there is always the possibility of adding additional isk sinks but this is a thread talking about the highsec cluster****
|
Cpt Fina
Mutually Assured Distraction
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 06:43:00 -
[228]
Edited by: Cpt Fina on 18/02/2008 06:43:52
Originally by: Marcus TheMartin
Originally by: Cpt Fina
One shouldn't rule out the possibility to compensate a low-sec boost with increased isk-sinks overall. An increase in sinks like tax, npc-goods, insurance ect. could work as a relative decrease of reward in high-sec even though missions were left alone. I'd personally rather see CCP nerf the hell outta high-sec lv 4s tho.
Yes there is always the possibility of adding additional isk sinks but this is a thread talking about the highsec cluster****
A boost to rewards in low/0,0-space and increased isksinks across the securitylevels will be an indirect nerf to high-sec. Alot of people say that they're ok with increasing rewards in low-sec but that ccp should leave high-sec the **** alone. Pretty funny that alot of them don't realize how the (very probable) isk-sink modification would hit.
|
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates Enuma Elish.
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 07:41:00 -
[229]
Originally by: Sanity Lost
Originally by: Marcus TheMartin
But where will that isk come from? Are you familiar with inflation?
In order to boost lowsec rewards you must nerf highsec rewards proportionately or *cues dramatic music* Inflation occurs.
I already stated that nothing will change by simply boosting lowsec rewards if highsec rewards still provide a stable eve middle class income as the predicted attitude would be "**** that I'm not going out there I'm no sheep etc." You have to cut from highsec to boost lowsec to a point where it becomes fine if you want to stay in highsec all your life but you'll never make anything of yourself from doing so.
The problem with that is that most people stay in high sec and aren’t interested in a minority that wants the majority to be forced into an area of space that essentially doesn’t concern them. For this reason cutting down rewards in hi-sec will never happen.
I am however interested in ideas that will boost low-sec but to do that you will have to leave high-sec space alone and concentrate on ideas that will boost low-sec directly
In turn, the REAL problem, as I see it, is there's just no point in taking the risk that is lowsec. The difference in mission pay is absolutely negligable.
I mean that quite seriously - just for the sake of it, head over onto the test server, and try and find an agent in lowsec that pays as well as ... well, wossname over in Motsu, or another high QL highsec agent.
They exist. Just about. You can make a whole 200k/hour more, perhaps.
Lowsec _is_ more dangerous. Lowsec _should_ be more dangerous. Highsec 'no risk' players will never move to lowsec. But at the moment there's a whole chunk of people looking at the risk vs. rewards of highsec vs. lowsec, or indeed nosec, and are reaching the conclusion that L4ing in HIGHSEC is how they should be making their money.
Would you agree this is plain wrong? -- Crane needs more grid 249km locking? |
Jill Antaris
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 09:25:00 -
[230]
Edited by: Jill Antaris on 18/02/2008 09:25:53 Also people use disposable T2 Fittings for Low Sec, but can use high End Faction Suff without risk(bare the suicede Gankers) in High Sec. So they will make less ISK with more Risk in Low Sec.
Also the Level 5 Missions need a big overhaul to get people realy doing them. There should be far more ISK\better Loot in it than in Level 4 Missions. Also the huge amount of Neut Towers forcing people to use passive Tanks and remote repping/boosting, therefore you need more people -> cutting the reward into very low parts. If CCP would Drop the Nos/Neuts form the Mission it would be interesting for good PVEers with the right fitting to find ways to solo them.
----------------------
Nerf Lasers! Thay need far to less CPU and Grid to Fit. Still using not enught Cap and do far to mutch Damage. O wait... they allready did... =( |
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 10:08:00 -
[231]
Originally by: James Lyrus
In turn, the REAL problem, as I see it, is there's just no point in taking the risk that is lowsec. The difference in mission pay is absolutely negligable.
I mean that quite seriously - just for the sake of it, head over onto the test server, and try and find an agent in lowsec that pays as well as ... well, wossname over in Motsu, or another high QL highsec agent.
They exist. Just about. You can make a whole 200k/hour more, perhaps.
Lowsec _is_ more dangerous. Lowsec _should_ be more dangerous. Highsec 'no risk' players will never move to lowsec. But at the moment there's a whole chunk of people looking at the risk vs. rewards of highsec vs. lowsec, or indeed nosec, and are reaching the conclusion that L4ing in HIGHSEC is how they should be making their money.
Would you agree this is plain wrong?
Low sec extra pay has always been about 60-100% extra mission pay, bonus and LP (comparing best low sec agents and best high sec agents).
That translate in about 3 millions per mission mission in straight isk and 4-5.000 extra LP.
As long as the LP had a value between 2.000 and 5.000 isk it was a significative difference even if completing the mission was slower. Now the value of 1 LP is 1.000 isk (even less if you go for a quick sell).
So the extra pay has moved from 10 to 25 millions for each mission to 5-8 millions.
At the same time from the introduction with Kali of the new scanning system risk has increased as scanning ships in missions is way more simple. So time to mission completation has increased as player, to avoid being scanned and killed, dock at the first sign of a possible pirate.
So instead of netting more isk low sec missions generally give less isk.
The interesting part is that the strongest force to move mission running almost exclusively in high sec has been what the pirates have hailed as a great thing. The new scanning system that make easier to find people doing a mission.
There has not been an increase in reward in high sec, au contraire it has been reduced multiple times and the LP loss of worth has hit high sec missioning too.
Simply the low probability to complete a mission in low sec without interruption has made them not interesting. Pirates have been too efficent in hunting the prey, killing or driving off most of it.
So now they are screaming "We have made low sec mission runnin unprofitable, to correct that CCP should make high sec missionrunning unprofitable too".
If you really want to correct what has caused the abandoning of low sec by missionrunning you should be screaming "nerf mission scanning, increase LP worth" but naturally you don't want that, you want that mithycal beast: the rick missionrunenr with full faction/officer fitting that will come to low sec to make isk.
This kind of pirate don't seem capable to think that his rick and easy prey don't exist unless it get the isk: a) doing mission in high sec for a copuple of years; or B) he buy isk.
They simply see some player with multi billion set up (mostly put in forum to enlarge the e-peen, but non existant in real play) and think all missionrunners are so loaded.
|
Shemaul
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 12:17:00 -
[232]
The main rule about all theese kind of post are made are "risk vs reward". please, explain me the meaning of "risk".
I guess risk means that u have the chance to be destroyed/podded. Great risk means that the chances of beiong destroyed/podded raise drammatically.
Example: i roam in 0.0 space with an assault ship. I have the risk to encounter another assault (moderate risk) or a gank squad (extreme risk). Anyway, u always have a small chance to save your ship, or tio win the combat.
Is that right?
Here we are not talikng about "risk", we are talikng about a russian roulette. Is that clear?
A pve fitted mission ship has NO CHANCE to survive a pvp encounter in low sec vs pirates.
This thing will prevail over all the other thoughts.
A missioner hate russian roulette. As u hear yourself targeted, first thing that come is scramble. End of the game. No fun, no chances, no nothing.
Change this rule and the whole matter will be easier to discuss.
|
Andrue
Amarr Federation Of Space Loonies Culture Shock Initiative
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 12:37:00 -
[233]
Edited by: Andrue on 18/02/2008 12:38:49 Risk v. reward is a simplification.
In fact the equation is 'hassle v. fun' since this is a game. The problem is that different people have differing ideas of what constitutes 'hassle' or 'fun'.
'Hassle' is having to fly around buying stuff to replace a lost ship.
From an Empire dweller's point of view the PvP crowd define 'fun' as being 'causing another player hassle'. The bottom line here is that those seeking to push high-sec players into low-sec or 0.0 are doing so because they want to annoy and irritate those players.
I can only assume that the reason some people think like that are because they have difficulty understanding other people. They lack empathy. They may also be a little bit thick or deluded. I suggest that because if they thought about things a bit more they'd realise that Eve is a game. It's entirely optional. You can never, ever, ever force anyone to go anywhere or do anything they don't want.
As has been state before:The choice for Empire dwellers isn't "High-sec, low-sec or 0.0". It's "high-sec or play another game".
We're not stupid, we're not interested in combat PvP and we will not volunteer to be your victims. -- (Sarcastic mission running veteran)
[Brackley, UK]
My budgie can say "ploppy bottom". You have been warned. |
Gamesguy
Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 13:09:00 -
[234]
Edited by: Gamesguy on 18/02/2008 13:10:46
Originally by: Venkul Mul
I see that the school of "cut and paste" so you can change the meaning has a new adept.
This is the whole quote.
You where saying that an account with a character in low sec should count as 1 account in low sec even it the other characters are in high sec. While I was saying that 1 account with a character in low sec and 2 in high sec count as 1/3 of account in low sec and 2/3 of account in high sec (or whatever the division on the account is).
I see you failed basic English comprehension. How can my opinion be wrong? You can disagree with it, but its never "wrong".
I said ccp SHOULD, you responded with that accounts ARE counted this way. Learn to read mkay?
Quote:
As I alredy pointed out I had alts running and residing in low sec for months while the main was in high sec (and 30 minutes of play against several hour give a clear definition of alt and main).
Then you're a unique case, most highsec dwellers never venture into lowsec, not even with a scout alt.
Quote: A lot of people have alts in low sec/0.0 stations around EVE for information gatering purpose.
Not really.
Quote:
You are saying that you haven't ever placed and leaved a alt in a low sec system where you travel often enough to check who was in the system before jumping in?
Never. I rarely use scouts. Common sense+knowing how to fit your ship is all I need.
And yes, I've transported billions in an alt hauler through lowsec/0.0 without a scout. Its not nearly as dangerous as people make it out to be, and I'm practically invulnerable with my travel fits. Intel channels+Scout spots+well fit ships=you dont die even with no scout.
Quote: It is one of the basic precautions you mighty pirates suggest very often .
I haven't pirated in god knows how long. Scouting is overrated, competent pirates will kill you even with a scout. Fitting and flying your ship properly is much more important.
Quote: But that don't make me a constant low sec dewller.
So a picture of the distribution of characters around eve, if you remove those with less than 2 millions SP, is pretty precise.
No, why would a highsec dweller have a high SP character in lowsec/0.0? But lots of 0.0/lowsec dwellers have alts in highsec that invent/manufacture/trade/run L4s etc, and they all have over 2m SP.
Quote:
But that give a precise image of how the people use the characters. You keep a trained character in high sec, it mean that you use high sec. You can consider yourself a 0.0 hard guy dweller, but your character live in the "soft" high sec.
Huh? I have characters in highsec because they're not much use in 0.0, there comes a point where you dont need 3 combat characters. And everyone has the mandatory hauling/jita alts.
Quote: Like most "PvP is king" type you willfully discard all the time you spend in high sec when considering the area where you live.
I spend time in highsec so I can sell my earnings for isk. Cant be helped.
Quote:
By my and my alliance mates mining it.
Please, I'd wager a very significant percentage of ice products are mined by macro miners. Certainly very few in 0.0 or lowsec mines ice.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 14:00:00 -
[235]
Edited by: Venkul Mul on 18/02/2008 14:03:57
Originally by: Gamesguy
Originally by: Venkul Mul
I see that the school of "cut and paste" so you can change the meaning has a new adept.
This is the whole quote.
You where saying that an account with a character in low sec should count as 1 account in low sec even it the other characters are in high sec. While I was saying that 1 account with a character in low sec and 2 in high sec count as 1/3 of account in low sec and 2/3 of account in high sec (or whatever the division on the account is).
I see you failed basic English comprehension. How can my opinion be wrong? You can disagree with it, but its never "wrong".
I said ccp SHOULD, you responded with that accounts ARE counted this way. Learn to read mkay?
Originally by: Gamesguy
Quote: So the distribution of players across the security levels shows a higher proportion of players in high-security space. Therefore the playerbase clearly favours a risk averse playstyle. Doesn't matter whether the characters in hi-sec are alts of people in 0.0 or not.
Wrong. For example I have two accounts with 6 characters between them. I have my pvp main who is almost never in highsec, I have another pvp alt that can fly transports/freighters that spends most of its time in 0.0 but occasionally makes a run into highsec.
My dear, we are then fellows in failing English as I was purposely repeating your opening in the post I was citing, where you where labeling "wrong" an opinion you didn't shared.
Originally by: Gamesguy
Originally by: Venkul Mul
As I alredy pointed out I had alts running and residing in low sec for months while the main was in high sec (and 30 minutes of play against several hour give a clear definition of alt and main).
Then you're a unique case, most highsec dwellers never venture into lowsec, not even with a scout alt.
Quote: A lot of people have alts in low sec/0.0 stations around EVE for information gatering purpose.
Not really.
How much high sec dwellers do you know to base your opinion on?
At least 1/2 of those I know have low sec scouts and those alts generally stay in low sec after scouting.
Both of ours are opinions, as you have already pointed out, but our opinions, as such, are equally valid.
|
Rawr Cristina
Caldari Cult of Rawr
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 14:19:00 -
[236]
Originally by: Venkul Mul
That translate in about 3 millions per mission mission in straight isk and 4-5.000 extra LP.
As long as the LP had a value between 2.000 and 5.000 isk it was a significative difference even if completing the mission was slower. Now the value of 1 LP is 1.000 isk (even less if you go for a quick sell).
So the extra pay has moved from 10 to 25 millions for each mission to 5-8 millions.
At the same time from the introduction with Kali of the new scanning system risk has increased as scanning ships in missions is way more simple. So time to mission completation has increased as player, to avoid being scanned and killed, dock at the first sign of a possible pirate.
So instead of netting more isk low sec missions generally give less isk.
More than just that to it really. It depends on a whole bunch of factors:
- Low sec agents, particually for secondary factions VERY RARELY give out missions vs empire factions (which give no bounties)
- Low sec agents are generally Q20
- Multiple agents are often seen in the same station. I used to mission for Khanid Navy in a 0.1 system, where there were THREE Q20 L4 agents in the same station. I was able to take out 6 missions at once when I used my other char also, meaning I could literally choose what missions I wanted to do.
- Many areas of low-sec are completely deserted. Regions like Lonetrek and Placid have many agent hubs but are so infested with pirates it simply isn't worth missioning there. Other regions, such as Khanid and many areas of Amarr/Minmatar-based lowsec are often unpopulated and thus great for running missions.
- Stay out of bottlenecks and you filter out general passing traffic from people actively pirating. This goes for all PvE activities in low-sec/0.0, really. There's nothing quite like a quiet, out-of-theway deadend system with pretty much nobody in all day.
In 2 months of low-sec mission running, I had to dock because of unknowns in local a grand total of twice. Not once was there any evidence that anyone had attempted to probe me - In the end I was easily making double that which I was making in Hi-sec.
Yes, it took some effort and to actually find that agent base and furthermore to get standings up for an entirely new corp - but for me it was worth it.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 14:25:00 -
[237]
Originally by: Gamesguy
Originally by: Venkul Mul
By my and my alliance mates mining it.
Please, I'd wager a very significant percentage of ice products are mined by macro miners. Certainly very few in 0.0 or lowsec mines ice.
Your question was from where the ice for my POS come, not all of EVE POS.
Honestly it is a shame that the mighty alliances of EVE fell the need to depend on sweatshop or macro for fuel, but it is not a problem created by high sec players.
Probably the idea of removing most of the ice belts in high sec has been a bad move in the war to sweatshop and macro. Beside my attempts in the past I have heard of players organizing ice mining operations in low sec only in one occasion, while my alliance has organized multiple ice mining operation in high sec.
Ice mining in low sec is even more suicide and unproductive that normal mining there, as if you need to flee you will almost certainly loose several minutes of work.
So it has become even more the realm of sweatshops or macro.
|
Megadon
Caldari Deathshead Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 19:31:00 -
[238]
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!
I had to look to see if this thread was necro'ed from 2005 and then I saw it was just formed a few days ago.
WOW WHAT AN ORIGINAL THOUGHT THAT'S NEVER BEEN DISCUSSED BEFORE!!! DAYUM YER A GENIUS.
You may also want to know that men have have already landed on the moon, it happened in the '70's, and polyester is no longer in fashion.
Boost Amarr
|
Marcus TheMartin
Gallente Deadly Addiction
|
Posted - 2008.02.18 19:51:00 -
[239]
Originally by: Megadon
I had to look to see if this thread was necro'ed from 2005 and then I saw it was just formed a few days ago.
WOW WHAT AN ORIGINAL THOUGHT THAT'S NEVER BEEN DISCUSSED BEFORE!!! DAYUM YER A GENIUS.
You may also want to know that men have have already landed on the moon, it happened in the '70's, and polyester is no longer in fashion.
You are one witty and edgy individual. You sure showed them whats for
|
Gamesguy
Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.02.19 08:17:00 -
[240]
Originally by: Venkul Mul
How much high sec dwellers do you know to base your opinion on?
Lots. Some of my oldest friends in eve are carebears. None of them have lowsec/0.0 alts.
Quote: At least 1/2 of those I know have low sec scouts and those alts generally stay in low sec after scouting.
Both of ours are opinions, as you have already pointed out, but our opinions, as such, are equally valid.
Nice dodge, you failed to answer the question. Why would a highsec dweller have a high SP lowsec/0.0 alt?
Quote:
That is exactly why I was suggesting the 2 millions SP threshold. A trade alt can have less than 2 millions SP, a seldom used high sec builder the same (and a often used high skill high sec builder is a character living and using high sec, so that character is a high sec dweller). A new character or a not used alt generally has less than 2 millions.
Hauling alts have to be able to use freighters/transports generally, so over 2m SP.
You keep dodging the question why a highsec dweller would keep a high SP alt in lowsec/0.0.
Quote: Essentially the difference is how we see the difference between the definition high sec dweller:
-for me if your character live and operate in high sec and is a active character, he is a high sec dweller, if he do the same in low sec/0.0 he is a low sec dweller;
- for you it is a choice you do "my high sec PvP character is in reality a low sec dweller as I (the player) prefer low sec".
Except the original poster claimed that most PEOPLE lived in highsec. 99% of people dont rp their characters as seperate, they're just alts of the same character, that character called a "main".
Ask anyone who has a high SP character in lowsec/0.0 and s/he will tell you that character is his/her main, and that the highsec alts are just there to support the main. And they will tell you that they consider themselves to be a lowsec/0.0 dweller.
This is why your method of seperating characters is wrong, because its the person behind the computer that matters, not the character.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |