EVE Search - Alright carebears why aren't you in 0.0? I want to know

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Alright carebears why aren't you in 0.0? I want to know

» 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 .. 18 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Mottgus Caldari HeartVenom Inc. Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2008.03.01 11:22:00 - [121] As I am sure it has been mentioned earlier in this post (cbf reading it all) null sec and empire are merely personal choice. For me, I am a carebear in 0.0. Some people may call me stupid, but I do it cause it makes the game more interesting. I play a game to be challenged, and yes.. Even decimated occasionally. If you want to mine and what not in high sec then go ahead. But there are us carebears in null! We are just carebears that have a little teeth.
Is forporn THE INTERNET.	Posted - 2008.03.01 11:26:00 - [122] Originally by: Burnharder I think making missions pay in Empire was the best business decision CCP made. Agreed, it was one of ccps best business decisions to date, unfortunately it was one of their worst game balance ones
Burnharder	Posted - 2008.03.01 11:28:00 - [123] Originally by: Is for** Originally by:** Burnharder I think making missions pay in Empire was the best business decision CCP made. Agreed, it was one of ccps best business decisions to date, unfortunately it was one of their worst game balance ones In what respect does it hurt game balance? You have to explain how it does that. You can't just state it as a fact without establishing your reasons.
Is forporn THE INTERNET.	Posted - 2008.03.01 11:31:00 - [124] Originally by: Burnharder Originally by: Is for** Originally by:** Burnharder I think making missions pay in Empire was the best business decision CCP made. Agreed, it was one of ccps best business decisions to date, unfortunately it was one of their worst game balance ones In what respect does it hurt game balance? You have to explain how it does that. You can't just state it as a fact without establishing your reasons. :sigh: Do you understand the basic premise of risk:reward
Burnharder	Posted - 2008.03.01 11:34:00 - [125] Originally by: Is for** Originally by:** Burnharder Originally by: Is for** Originally by:** Burnharder I think making missions pay in Empire was the best business decision CCP made. Agreed, it was one of ccps best business decisions to date, unfortunately it was one of their worst game balance ones In what respect does it hurt game balance? You have to explain how it does that. You can't just state it as a fact without establishing your reasons. :sigh: Do you understand the basic premise of risk:reward Sure, but the game is only built around that in certain respects. In empire it's mostly effort/time v reward. They are both valid forms of gameplay. CCP didn't set out to favour one over the other. They just choose the appropriate philosophy in each instance.
Mecinia Lua Galactic Express Frontier Trade League	Posted - 2008.03.01 11:35:00 - [126] There are a number of main reasons. 1. Rather than realizing the value of true industrialists most combat PVPers target them to the point they can't operate in 0.0. It would be in the better interest of the many PVP alliances to allow the industrialist to continue unmolested. This would help to provide the goods and services necessary to supply 0.0 markets. While yes it is always smart in real life to attack the logistics of your enemy, in EVE there is no real logistic supply lines as there is no way to restrict who can buy or not buy your goods. Thus as being a game it would be more in the interest of the game and populating 0.0 to let the industrialist settle in and only harass them occasionally. 2. To High of Rents. For most players of the game, the various current 0.0 alliances expect to high of rent from those just starting out. A staring out alliance cannot be expected to devote half its people to defense and to pay hundreds of millions a month in rent. They simply will not be able to pay that kind of rent long term with the loss of manpower. This is kinda related to 1. If you want more population get rid of the rents. Charge docking fees and refining fees at your outposts, but don't charge more than that. 3. POS Access. It is very tedious trying to maintain POSs. Most outposts in existance do not have the assembly lines and research lines necessary to support a moderate to heavy population in 0.0. POSs could make up some of this but most outposts are also very limited in Office space, making no real way to sa***uard high cost BPOs in 0.0. Another trouble is that to many main alliances protests if a smaller industrial alliances wants to erect a few buildingsPOS. Let's face it the assembly and research POSs do not pose a significant danger to anyone. Any of the major alliances could eliminate them with almost no effort. Fueling of POSs is tedious and extremely boring. This is a major problem with the current system. I mean we are thousands of years in the future and they can't make a battery or generator that can run for more than 3 weeks. I'd eliminate the ice for fuel, keep the strontium for reinforced, or only have it use the fuel when in reinforced mode. (You'd still need other ice products to run caps and such). 4. Space Access. The chokepoints inhibit 0.0 growth. It is either time to add more lanes or it is time to do away with the stargate system and advance technologically. (In Alpha all ships could jump without a stargate, they just had so few numbers they couldn't find one another, today we have probes and easily 50x the population. I don't think the old concerns would be as noticeable today). These are the main reasons you don't see more industrial alliances in 0.0. The game is stacked against them in 0.0 and you can only take so many beatings before you give up. Thoughts expressed are mine and mine alone. They do not necessarily reflect my alliances thoughts.
Is forporn THE INTERNET.	Posted - 2008.03.01 11:42:00 - [127] Originally by: Burnharder Originally by: Is for** Originally by:** Burnharder Originally by: Is for** Originally by:** Burnharder I think making missions pay in Empire was the best business decision CCP made. Agreed, it was one of ccps best business decisions to date, unfortunately it was one of their worst game balance ones In what respect does it hurt game balance? You have to explain how it does that. You can't just state it as a fact without establishing your reasons. :sigh: Do you understand the basic premise of risk:reward Sure, but the game is only built around that in certain respects. In empire it's mostly effort/time v reward. They are both valid forms of gameplay. CCP didn't set out to favour one over the other. They just choose the appropriate philosophy in each instance. ratting and missions take roughly the same amount of effort (mission probably taking a bit more effort) and the risk from ratting in 0.0 is way, way higher than that of mission running in empire, yet the rewards are roughly equal leaning slightly towards missions. How is that fair?
Dynast	Posted - 2008.03.01 11:43:00 - [128] Originally by: Is for** Originally by:** Burnharder Originally by: Is for** Originally by:** Burnharder I think making missions pay in Empire was the best business decision CCP made. Agreed, it was one of ccps best business decisions to date, unfortunately it was one of their worst game balance ones In what respect does it hurt game balance? You have to explain how it does that. You can't just state it as a fact without establishing your reasons. :sigh: Do you understand the basic premise of risk:reward You mean the part where you risk mission ships (even cheaply fitted ones) against fights which you will never, ever, in a million years, come away from alive? The risk in 0.0 is so absurdly high compared to the rewards that even if every source of income in Empire were reduced by 75%, they'd still be both more efficient.. and probably more enjoyable. Another of the reasons not to be in 0.0 is that most of the PvP in this game is pretty lousy. Very little impact from player skill because 90% of engagements are decided by numbers, and most of the remaining 10% are decided by ship fittings and skillpoints. For all that I adore the uninhibited freedom to start a fight, most of the fights non-PvP oriented players will face in 0.0 will be boring, pre-determined wastes of time and resources. And that's not even counting the large scale fleet fights, which have to be some of the lamest, most pathetic excuses for gameplay I've ever seen in an MMO, given that CCP's tech fails utterly to support them.
Chirruper	Posted - 2008.03.01 11:43:00 - [129] These threads are started by frustrated gate campers alt-tabbing while waiting. Ignore them.
Yuri VanKaer	Posted - 2008.03.01 11:48:00 - [130] Originally by: Mecinia Lua There are a number of main reasons. (well said)~stuff~ Best post I've seen in this thread so far. To build on what you said, if alliances were to implement safe conduct lanes for industrialists, there'd be far less reason for many of those who enjoy 0.0 life to come back to empire.(With controls of course. Fleet the guy up and warp as a group, if you're worried about spying. Pop 'em if they try to move on their own.)
Nova Fox	Posted - 2008.03.01 11:50:00 - [131] Im waiting for the implimentation on this... Citizenship, Factional Warfare, Role Play, an Low Sec improvments Oh my!
Magnus Nordir Caldari	Posted - 2008.03.01 11:52:00 - [132] Originally by: Chirruper These threads are started by frustrated gate campers alt-tabbing while waiting. Ignore them. This. ***************************** Everything is possible for him who believes. Insprinc haptbandun - Inuar vigandun
Tanshi Daiko	Posted - 2008.03.01 11:55:00 - [133] Its easier to destroy than it is to create. It's a sad fact of EVE that the big Alliance groups frequently measure success by violence rather than creation. Rather than being large, impressive independent empires, they come across as Mad Max style barbarian hordes. What we are seeing is an Ultima Online situation, where evil wins because good requires more thought and effort.
AndrewRyan	Posted - 2008.03.01 12:00:00 - [134] Originally by: Is for**** the risk from ratting in 0.0 is way, way higher than that of mission running in empire Depends where you are and what corp/alliance you are in, In NPC space or highly contested space the risk is way higher but usually you know everything that's going on for 20 jumps so you should have plenty of warning if some roaming gangs are out and about and you just dock/pos up and grab a pvp ship and form a gang or safe spot and cloak if someone shows up in local who shouldn't be there. If your half asleep and not paying attention its risky but then its your own fault if you die. ========================================= A Man chooses, a slave obeys.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2008.03.01 12:25:00 - [135] Originally by: Is for** Originally by:** Burnharder Sure, but the game is only built around that in certain respects. In empire it's mostly effort/time v reward. They are both valid forms of gameplay. CCP didn't set out to favour one over the other. They just choose the appropriate philosophy in each instance. ratting and missions take roughly the same amount of effort (mission probably taking a bit more effort) and the risk from ratting in 0.0 is way, way higher than that of mission running in empire, yet the rewards are roughly equal leaning slightly towards missions. How is that fair? Not true. In my experience ratting in 0.0 give more isk and the risk is negligeable. The true advantage of mission is that the pay is constant, ratting cahave good days with several factions drops (and those aret teen or even hundred of millions for each ship) and days where you only get lousy spawns or can't rat as you must defend your space. Simply the ratters count the common spawn as the average of what they get and forget to factor the faction spawns (and I an not even considering the officer spawns that can net billions for 1).
Joker Kaaos Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.03.01 12:31:00 - [136] Originally by: RuleoftheBone Originally by: Cipher7 Originally by: Haniblecter Teg ..In addition, to all the tards who think empire makes more ISK, all I have to direct you to is the dys market for moon ****. Single moon can bring in billions with all the effort of fueling a POS and moving product. There is a subsection of the 0.0 population which exploits the other %90 who live there. The average 0.0 dweller knows nothing about moon mining or POS. He barely knows of the existance of refine taxes. He doesn't know how much the CEO makes from taxes or how much the alliance leader makes. Regular alliance guy is in a BS he bought with his own money, the money he was graciously allowed to farm from the belts. Regular alliance guy doesn't know how much his leaders make. He figures since he lives in 0.0 he must be a mover and a shaker. He doesn't understand that he's actually a black sharecropper from the 1800's living on someone else's ranch. Massa flies a Titan, regular alliance guy aint never gonna have one unless he farms belts for the next 2 years. Regular alliance guy routinely comes to the forums and complains about level 4 mission runners. Those damn carebears. Why should they be able to make money without a master's permission? Why shouldn't they have to pay taxes and a refine fee like him? Why shouldn't they be at master's beck and call to defend the master's ranch? Why shouldn't they buy all their ships and t2 mods from Master's industrial alt? Why shouldn't they get bullied by master for not showing up 60 jumps away on Thursday at 4am? This should be stickied...along with the fact that most of the blah blah from 0.0 comes from those with a vast array of empire-based alts doing nothing but sitting in Jita trading/price checking. Free yourselves! As a noob, this is pretty much my impression. And I'm a PvP gamer. I'm not even 3 million SP yet - so I'm in no real rush to begin with - but I have no interest in being forced into joining a massive group of strangers in order to exist in 0.0 space. I don't want to be bossed around, required to show up for boring time-sink "fleet ops" and taxed. I don't want to be a tiny pawn in someone else's financial or PvP empire. The biggest problem I see are the chokepoints. It seems ridiculous to me to allow a few dozen people to block off access to such enormous percentages of space. And I also note the hypocrisy of many of the folks who insist everyone who isn't in 0.0 is a giant wuss. As I sit in good old State War Academy chat, I constantly see people talking about their 4-7 alts that they use for HIGH-SEC in order to fund their 0.0 PvP/Politican accounts. So what a lot of these people are saying is "why doesn't everyone want to pay for half a dozen accounts and spend 80 hours a week gaming?"
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2008.03.01 12:32:00 - [137] Originally by: Dynast Edited by: Dynast on 01/03/2008 11:48:16 Originally by: Is for** :sigh: Do you understand the basic premise of risk:reward You mean the part where you risk mission ships (even cheaply fitted ones) against fights which you will never, ever, in a million years, come away from alive? The risk in 0.0 is so absurdly high compared to the rewards that even if every source of income in Empire were reduced by 75%, they'd still be both more efficient.. and probably more enjoyable. Another of the reasons not to be in 0.0 is that most of the PvP in this game is pretty lousy. Very little impact from player skill because 90% of engagements are decided by numbers, and most of the remaining 10% are decided by ship fittings and skillpoints. For all that I adore the uninhibited freedom to start a fight, most of the fights non-PvP oriented players will face in 0.0 will be boring, pre-determined wastes of time and resources. And that's not even counting the large scale fleet fights, which have to be some of the lamest, most pathetic excuses for gameplay I've ever seen in an MMO, given that CCP's tech fails utterly to support them. Which also, incidentally, in effect removes another aspect of the game that many people greatly enjoy -- pimping their rides. Unless you're rich as Croesus, you can't fly faction fitted anything in 0.0 for any length of time. Ratting is pratically identical to mission runnign, you only need cheper ships and less skill when ratting. The risk of people killing you when ratting are low is you are a bit cautious. If you want rewards from PvP you must be extremly** good, gank new players at the hisec/low sec gates or suicide gank in empire. PvP is a negative sum game. In the end someone has less isk than before, so it is not possible to make it a revenue for a significative percentage of the players without some big change in how EVE work.
Terail Zoqial	Posted - 2008.03.01 12:32:00 - [138] Way too ,much trouble going to 0.0 atm. I have little time in eve and being in alliance would kill the fun. Fleet ops are usually tedious as hell, can't really mine much due to incoming hostiles, ratting is crap due to peeps maoning in local that they need the whole system. Then there's exploration, some alliances have deccent parts of space off limits due to the profit available. In short, if you want fun and a quick fix of eve, then high sec it is. If you have hours to play eve, then 0.0 is maybe for you.
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2008.03.01 12:53:00 - [139] Originally by: Mecinia Lua 4. Space Access. The chokepoints inhibit 0.0 growth. It is either time to add more lanes or it is time to do away with the stargate system and advance technologically. (In Alpha all ships could jump without a stargate, they just had so few numbers they couldn't find one another, today we have probes and easily 50x the population. I don't think the old concerns would be as noticeable today). \o/ The Real Space Initiative - V5 (Forum Link)
Roy Batty68 Caldari Immortal Dead	Posted - 2008.03.01 12:55:00 - [140] One thing I always wonder when i see these "not enough people in lowsec / 0.0" threads is: Are we sure it's really a problem? Anyway, for me it was about freedom of play. I was bored out of my mind in 0.0 and felt really restricted without any real justifying aspects to hold me there. Then my wife got involved in the equation which pulled me back to empire and then once she was gone again, I felt no real pull back to 0.0. My first impression of it kind of sucked and it stuck with me. Now that I have alot more skills under my belt, I intend to give it another try. It's just a matter of getting motivated. The problem with that is that my only current motivation is "giving it another try"... Because tbh, there doesn't appear to be FUN 0.0 ONLY CONTENT that isn't also plagued with problems as well, the worst of which is slide show lag and the least of which is drooling on the keyboard bordom. The hope that I am wrong about it remains, hence my intention to give it another shot. The complaining about it on these forums sure don't help though. Sig removed, inappropriate content. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Joker Kaaos Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.03.01 12:58:00 - [141] Originally by: Venkul Mul Ratting is pratically identical to mission runnign, you only need cheper ships and less skill when ratting. It also seems to me that mission-running carries a lot less risk of being gang-ganked than ratting does, in addition to its greater consistency. I would also mention the accumulation of loyalty points as something most people aren't mentioning in the balance of missions vs. ratting. I just got ganked and podded for the first time the other day running a low-sec mission, and my loyalty points cut the replacement cost for my set of +4 implants in half. ;p
Joker Kaaos Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.03.01 13:01:00 - [142] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Originally by: Mecinia Lua 4. Space Access. The chokepoints inhibit 0.0 growth. It is either time to add more lanes or it is time to do away with the stargate system and advance technologically. (In Alpha all ships could jump without a stargate, they just had so few numbers they couldn't find one another, today we have probes and easily 50x the population. I don't think the old concerns would be as noticeable today). \o/ I say again, as a noob this impresses me as the biggest disincentive to exploring or moving to and from 0.0 space. As someone above eloquently pointed out, all the frontier-types are choked off from the frontier unless they want to engage in open warfare with the kill-you-on-sight hordes. Get rid of the spacelane chokepoints and make people defend ALL of the space they "claim" and I'll be much more likely to take my independent-minded self out there to see if I can make my fortune...
Pestachi0	Posted - 2008.03.01 13:16:00 - [143] Good alliances require 20m sp. People in 0.0 have no honor and gank anyone that is neutral. You need great PvE skills which cancels out any pure industrial chars - 2 accounts? no thanks. Ratting all day every day is boring You need to travel back to empire to get your modules every time you die or pay 10x the empire price. You need 2 battleships just to protect 1 miner As soon as an op has more than 5 people then it involves endless sitting around It's impossible to find a 1 v 1 encounter. People just sit in gate camps or run like the wind.
Valan The Fated	Posted - 2008.03.01 13:16:00 - [144] The reason L4 missions in empire are bad is because thats where the huge inlfux of isk has come from. In 0.0 people lose ships so even though isk comes in from ratting its destroyed via PvP. Mission running brings in tons of isk, in some cases more than 0.0 and no ships are lost. How can a constant unchecked influx of isk be a good thing? /start sig I love old characters that post 'I've beeen playing the game four years' when I know their account has been sold on. /end sig
000Hunter000 Gallente Missiles 'R' Us	Posted - 2008.03.01 13:31:00 - [145] Heh. U wanna hear the reason is cuz where scared, pussies, whimps, losers, or whatever else comes to mind, that u asociate with empire dwellers and u would prolly be right on a big chunk. But let me tell u this my friend, i've lost billions of isk in ships and mods and items, i've fought war after war, I lived in low sec, i've lived in no sec, but i found out that in the end it makes me paranoid. I get tired of having to watch my back all the time so i live in empire, and i like it here, and if u think it is without risk and carefree? think again, empire wars can be just as or mebbe even more brutal then ur precious 0.0. But anyways, u can keep ur 0.0, cuz i don't want it, so good luck with it. _______________________________________________________ CCP, let us pay the online shop with Direct Debit!!!
Arouu	Posted - 2008.03.01 13:52:00 - [146] Originally by: Mynameistoby My character is chillin out maxin relaxin all cool sitting in station outside of the school When a couple of guys, who were up to no good, starting firing missiles at mah shield tank.
Tiodus Gallente City of Certitude	Posted - 2008.03.01 13:58:00 - [147] Originally by: Magnus Nordir Originally by: Chirruper These threads are started by frustrated gate campers alt-tabbing while waiting. Ignore them. This. Yes. -Tiodus -------------------- /O\ Can't pvp /O\ --------------------
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2008.03.01 14:14:00 - [148] Edited by: Venkul Mul on 01/03/2008 14:18:52 Originally by: Joker Kaaos Originally by: Venkul Mul Ratting is pratically identical to mission runnign, you only need cheper ships and less skill when ratting. It also seems to me that mission-running carries a lot less risk of being gang-ganked than ratting does, in addition to its greater consistency. I would also mention the accumulation of loyalty points as something most people aren't mentioning in the balance of missions vs. ratting. I just got ganked and podded for the first time the other day running a low-sec mission, and my loyalty points cut the replacement cost for my set of +4 implants in half. ;p Counting the LP. In high sec, where you run less risk to be ganked your LP are worth less than 1.000 isk each, if you run for pirate corporation you have good chances to be ganked (at least as much as a 0.0 ratter) but the LP are worth more. BTW: you have brought them for 65 millions + 65K LP, so 130 millions, in market I have got mine for 80-90 million each with a little patience. So each of your LP was worth 385 isk. Make it 500 to be generous. That make 5 million in LP for each level 4 low sec mission with a high payout. A ratter in a decent alliance has a warning of approaching enemies, support in range if he want to fight, pre preparated safespots and probably a cloak if he don't want to fight. Risk is minimal. (been there, done that, found it less interesting that missions) Originally by: Valan The reason L4 missions in empire are bad is because thats where the huge inlfux of isk has come from. In 0.0 people lose ships so even though isk comes in from ratting its destroyed via PvP. Mission running brings in tons of isk, in some cases more than 0.0 and no ships are lost. How can a constant unchecked influx of isk be a good thing? For the Nth time: PvP don't destroy isk, it only move them from the players losing the ship to the player selling the ship. And then it generate new isk from insurance. So PvP is a big isk generation, you lose asset and generate isk, but the isk that you use to buy the asset don't leave the game, they only change hands.
Darius Brinn Gallente Taggart Transdimensional	Posted - 2008.03.01 14:32:00 - [149] Edited by: Darius Brinn on 01/03/2008 14:33:05 Why don't many people go to 0.0? Because it's a cesspool. Every player there wants a piece of miners. I can make 25 millions an hour in there, you say. That's if left undisturbed. Which won't be the case. I'd rather make a bit less and be safer until I feel ready. What I mean with this is...I hope all 0.0 pirates die of boredom and ratting.
Burnharder	Posted - 2008.03.01 14:44:00 - [150] Originally by: Valan The reason L4 missions in empire are bad is because thats where the huge inlfux of isk has come from. In 0.0 people lose ships so even though isk comes in from ratting its destroyed via PvP. Mission running brings in tons of isk, in some cases more than 0.0 and no ships are lost. How can a constant unchecked influx of isk be a good thing? If you can explain why it's a bad thing, then maybe this point would be worth hearing. The fact is that despite the constant influx of ISK into the game, prices are VERY LOW now compared to, say, 1 year ago when I was last in game (especially since invention has broken a lot of tech II monopolies). There are more things to spend high sums of ISK on than their used to be as well. Mission runners are the main buyers of faction items (they aren't often used in PvP) - and those faction items come from low sec/0.0 ratting, so the 0.0 crowd are profiting from this as well as selling their minerals (morphite, mega, zyd, moon products, reactions) to the empire industrial set. More money in the system is only bad if production fails to keep pace. So far, I don't see this happening.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.