Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Spenser for Hire
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 19:39:00 -
[1] - Quote
How long? How long, I say? How long will you guys engage your Ant-High-Sec, Anti-Carebear propaganda???
I just read another thread ( Anti-CareBear Propaganda ) in which, lo and behold, EVE's Death, EVE's dying, EVE's steady march toward the grave is being attributed to High-Sec Mission runners and the great ISK faucet known as the high-sec Incursion!
The thread called for "level 4 missions run by zero-risk NPC-corpers" to be removed from High-Sec. And of course, there's no need to guess where they will be placed. You guessed it; Null Sec, Where they will become the property of the responsible, high-risk players who won't use them as ISK faucets or "run them thousands of times until them become mundane routines."
The thread refers to this "removal of isk-generating faucets from high-sec" as a "carrot and stick" strategy. It will incentivize High-sec'ers to venture into Null-Sec.
I can only wonder how long this Anti-High-Sec propaganda will be spewed out, and how long it will be accepted. Shouldn't the strategy of removing resources from High-Sec be called into question? Isn't it nothing more than a strategy to eliminate High-Sec altogether, bit by bit, piece by piece, until it essentially becomes a part of Null-Sec? Isn't the automatic placement of all valuable and meaningful resources in Null-Sec the real problem? Isn't the idea that Null-Sec is the only place where meaningful resources should exist the real problem? If anyone has an 'entitlement' complex it is most certainly the Null-Sec'ers who believe that all of the games meaningful resources should be automatically placed in their sector of space and within easy reach!
Instead of "incentivizing" the High-Sec Carebears, why not "incentivize" the Null-Sec'ers??? Why not give the Null-Sec'ers the Stick?!
Far be it from me to approve, or even condone anything done by the Goons, but when the Goons held ICE hostage it was an interesting, game enhancing event that somewhat lifted the price of ICE commodities. However, once they stopped Suicide-gankin' Macks, their hold on the price of ICE stopped as well. Why not give Alliances (or corps even) the ability to do this ALL THE TIME, without having to engage in Suicide-ganking? Why not redistribute various, game crucial resources to specific areas of Null-Sec, redistribute them to swatches of space that are controllable by player-Alliances, not all bunched up in one area but spread out so that no one alliance no matter how big could control ALL the resources???
As I understand it (I could certainly be wrong) all Null-Sec space is essentially the same. Any resource in one area of Null is in all the other areas of Null-Sec. Alliances are essentially self-sufficient. The only reason one Alliance might talk to another is about building a Titan. This is what has to change.
There should be MORE incentive for alliances to fight over Null-territory. Players should be able to control and influence the market without having to resort to Universe-wide Suicide ganking. Controlling an area of Null should be more than a status symbol.
So, please. Stop your Anti-High-Sec propaganda. Your "Carrot and Stick" is nothing more than a "Bait and switch". You want victims, not better more meaningful game-play. The anti-High-sec propaganda is nothing more than prejudice. Soon, an American job application will include the phrase: We don't discriminate against Blacks, Jews, Gays or Carebears.
|
Stellar Vix
State War Academy Caldari State
11
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 19:41:00 -
[2] - Quote
Delete the OP while you are at it...
and to think you call yourself Caldari.
and before you say post with your main, this is my main, ask anyone in SWA who is most in charge there.
-Vix |
Drew Solaert
University of Caille Gallente Federation
70
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 19:41:00 -
[3] - Quote
All I see here is another highsec mission runner too scared to go out and do something else beyond the NPC corp.
HTFU. |
Feligast
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1152
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 19:44:00 -
[4] - Quote
Drew Solaert wrote:All I see here is another highsec mission runner too scared to go out and do something else beyond the NPC corp.
HTFU.
While I completely agree with the sentiment,
Drew Solaert University of Caille Gallente Federation
Irony |
Hainnz
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
103
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 19:47:00 -
[5] - Quote
Just tell them to GBtDF (Go Back to Dark Fall) |
Karn Dulake
Souls Must Be Trampled The.Alliance
402
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 19:52:00 -
[6] - Quote
" Soon, an American job application will include the phrase: We don't discriminate against Blacks, Jews, Gays or Carebears"
No this should be an Anti American Thread. Other places exist in the world apart from America.
Also this is EVE we can descriminate against who we like. Its part of the sandbox
I dont normally troll, but when i do i do it on General Discussion. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5252
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 20:06:00 -
[7] - Quote
Spenser for Hire wrote:I can only wonder how long this Anti-High-Sec propaganda will be spewed out, and how long it will be accepted. 8 years and going strong.
Quote:Shouldn't the strategy of removing resources from High-Sec be called into question? No. As long as highsec isGǪ wellGǪ high sec, the Gǣstrategy of removing resourcesGǥ that were accidentally placed there and which provide far too much reward for what you have to do to get them, a strategy of removing stuff should be in place.
More to the point, though, can you name one resource that has actually been removed from highsec?
Quote:Isn't the automatic placement of all valuable and meaningful resources in Null-Sec the real problem? Isn't the idea that Null-Sec is the only place where meaningful resources should exist the real problem? No. Nullsec comes with inherent more danger, so it gets the inherently more rewarding stuff.
Quote:Instead of "incentivizing" the High-Sec Carebears, why not "incentivize" the Null-Sec'ers??? Why not give the Null-Sec'ers the Stick?! GǪto do what, exactly?
Quote:Why not redistribute various, game crucial resources to specific areas of Null-Sec, redistribute them to swatches of space that are controllable by player-Alliances, not all bunched up in one area but spread out so that no one alliance no matter how big could control ALL the resources??? You mean the way it already is? Also, spreading things out means there's less to fight over because you're likely to have what you need already. So your plan is thoroughly self-defeating. The reason they had to GÇ£resort toGÇ¥ (they didn't, obviously, but still) suicide ganking is because ice was so widely available that a critical resource was plentiful in highsec, where it probably shouldn't existGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Stellar Vix
State War Academy Caldari State
11
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 20:10:00 -
[8] - Quote
I for one welcome ice removal in high sec. Replace with comets.
-Vix |
Calfis
The Dark Tribe Against ALL Authorities
64
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 20:15:00 -
[9] - Quote
OP has been paying game solo for a year and is extremely mad that he may be forced to cooperate with other human beings in a massively multiplayer online game. |
tikktokk tokkzikk
Glorious Revolution The 99 Percent
36
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 20:17:00 -
[10] - Quote
I'd really wish to experience the (good?) old days where money mattered! It once was a big deal to own and fly a battleship.
|
|
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
626
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 20:19:00 -
[11] - Quote
The reason is simple. The common (and quite widely accepted) "more risk = more reward" philosophy means that lowsec/nullsec space should have "more reward" in store for people who venture beyond the hisec level 4 missions and hisec incursions and into space where they are seriously at risk of losing ships.
As it stands now, hisec offers more reward than lowsec or nullsec offer because of various ISK faucets available for gross abuse in hisec. There are two ways to go about fixing this:
- Nerf hisec (as those you criticize ask for)
- Buff low/nullsec (as you ask for)
Both would fix the income unbalance problems. However, there are a few arguments for why to do the former rather than the latter. Buffing nullsec would have two effects:
- More ISK gets dumped into the economy, worsening the state of inflation it is already in
- Most of this ISK would be in the hands of nullsec powerblocs, which really don't need new chances to solidify their already too-powerful grip on large swathes of space
Nerfing hisec also fixes the imbalance, while also reducing the amount of ISK flowing into the game (combating inflation), and making low/nullsec more valuable relatively, which provides more incentive to move out to the space not controlled by big blocs.
Also, keep in mind that nerfing hisec does not only impact hisec-only players. Many nullsec players have alts that they use to run missions or incursions -- just because hisec is equally or more profitable than nullsec, at much less risk.
That's the gist of the whole thing, anyway. It's not that nullsec doesn't need rebalancing itself (the moon goo chokepoint is dumb). Also, merely increasing the cause for conflict in 0.0 without increasing rewards causes it to be even more risky, making hisec that much more appealing.
Take a chill pill, give me your stuff, and stop posting angry threads based on raw ignorance.
Rifterlings - Small gang lowsec combat corp specializing in frigates and cruisers (all races, not just Rifters!). US Timezone veterans and newbies alike are welcome to join. Come chat in the "we fly rifters" in-game channel. Free fitted frigates for members! |
BuckStrider
Hardcore p0wnography
9
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 20:27:00 -
[12] - Quote
I'm sorry that you re not enjoying EVE.
Might I suggest this game as an alternative....Many have gone there,none have returned. |
Ann133566
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
98
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 20:34:00 -
[13] - Quote
I don't want to tell yu how you should play a game, but.... Some people seem to forget that this is a PvP MMO and try to treat it like a single player RPG with a chat window.
What is the point in getting rich and playing it safe? I don't get it. Where's the challenge in it? What's the fun part? I bet my latest noob alt has done more in this game than some of these bears have. Two months old and he's already joined a pirate corp and blown some expensive **** up. I'm a average player at best, and depend on others to get me through tough spots. In return I make sure we all have fun and nobody loses out if things go wrong. And I always see to it that there is always something interesting happening be it a frig competition or raiding someones WH. In short I never forget this is an MMO and that having the right people by your side is far more important than having a trillion ISK.
If I had a guy that just sat in his station or just ran missions all night I would kick him out the corp. With these guys theres always some excuse. They are a waste of space, they don't bring anything to the corp or EVE they have no backbone or real interest in this game. They think they do, but they don't. It's always "I'll wait till I gain some ISK". Or "I'll wait till I learn LVL 5 Cruisers". I have zero respect for players that hide in high-sec. I don't care if you're a awful player and lose every fight you enter, but not even trying or giving up.... you just fail at this game. Go play the sims.
This is EvE. Cowards will go no further. |
Ocih
Space Mermaids Somethin Awfull Forums
105
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 20:37:00 -
[14] - Quote
**** or get off the pot. You want EVE to be l33tboi hardcore PvP? Kill High Sec. Get rid of it. Pure Null EVE. Not going to happen though and we all know why.
|
Corina Jarr
Spazzoid Enterprises Purpose Built
594
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 20:42:00 -
[15] - Quote
1) CCP isn't going to remove lvl4s from High sec. They might retune rewards eventually (haha), but not remove them.
2) Incursions to me are a problem not because of isk generation but because the greedy runners force those who can't run incursions to move while the runners farm for a week.
3) Carebear hating has been going since the game went 1.0, and likely won't stop until the game dies because CCP does something stupid and doesn't try to correct it. That will be the death of EVE. Not carebears, not griefers. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1086
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 20:47:00 -
[16] - Quote
If you really want to incentivize different area's of EVE...
Remove alloy drops in the drone regions.
Make certain minerals only available from high Sec. Make certain minerals only available in Low Sec. Make certain minerals only available in Null Sec.
Minerals fuel the entire economy, and have been devalued for far too long. As their value increases due to restricted availability the entire market is affected.
Prices will rise, and they need to. Mining as a profession is revitalized, and it needs to be. Low Sec interaction becomes a high value necessity, as it needs to be. Null Sec, Low Sec and High Sec are forced to keep the flow of materials going strong in all directions, as needs to happen.
The politics and power groups in all securty levels strongly affect the markets in all area's of the game.
Then you consider restricting the availablity of the other key element to the economy, namely Ice Products.
This would have a far more sweeping positive effect on the game as a whole than moving level 4 missions ever would. When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
Burseg Sardaukar
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
100
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 21:39:00 -
[17] - Quote
Well, I'm going to post this everywhere:
Lowsec dudes (that want to maintain decent sec) have recently been ****** over with a change to the sec-status gain mechanic with rats.
Apparently its "working as intended" that rats now only give the sec increase to whoever gets the final blow on it. So this really fucks over small-gangs working together to rat up sec, when that same gang gets the full hit for killing someone.
Explain how it makes sense that only the finalblow gets sec increase on a rat, but EVERYONE loses sec on a target for killing it?
This needs to the rectified, or at least explained. We have a blog, it is terrible. How to fix Bounty Hunting |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
628
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 21:42:00 -
[18] - Quote
Burseg Sardaukar wrote:Well, I'm going to post this everywhere:
Lowsec dudes (that want to maintain decent sec) have recently been ****** over with a change to the sec-status gain mechanic with rats.
Apparently its "working as intended" that rats now only give the sec increase to whoever gets the final blow on it. So this really fucks over small-gangs working together to rat up sec, when that same gang gets the full hit for killing someone.
Explain how it makes sense that only the finalblow gets sec increase on a rat, but EVERYONE loses sec on a target for killing it?
This needs to the rectified, or at least explained. Hisec is overrated. Rifterlings - Small gang lowsec combat corp specializing in frigates and cruisers (all races, not just Rifters!). US Timezone veterans and newbies alike are welcome to join. Come chat in the "we fly rifters" in-game channel. Free fitted frigates for members! |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1087
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 21:43:00 -
[19] - Quote
Burseg Sardaukar wrote:Well, I'm going to post this everywhere:
Lowsec dudes (that want to maintain decent sec) have recently been ****** over with a change to the sec-status gain mechanic with rats.
Apparently its "working as intended" that rats now only give the sec increase to whoever gets the final blow on it. So this really fucks over small-gangs working together to rat up sec, when that same gang gets the full hit for killing someone.
Explain how it makes sense that only the finalblow gets sec increase on a rat, but EVERYONE loses sec on a target for killing it?
This needs to the rectified, or at least explained.
At a guess I'd say it's to ensure that it's harder to gain back sec status than it is to lose it... to ensure that if you chose that life style (which is fine) you are prepared to live with your choice for a while.
What needs to be rectified is the fact that there is no viable option that promotes a "pirate hunter" profession. When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
Serene Repose
Perkone Caldari State
343
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 21:47:00 -
[20] - Quote
As long as the pirate infested waters remain, the ads will read, "Come visit the sunny Caribbean. For a good time, bring all your money." As long as these "high-risk" players enjoy CCP's protection they'll be out there by themselves wondering, "Where are all the victims?"
Smokestack lightnin' shinin' just like gold. |
|
Alara IonStorm
1723
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 21:57:00 -
[21] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote: At a guess I'd say it's to ensure that it's harder to gain back sec status than it is to lose it... to ensure that if you chose that life style (which is fine) you are prepared to live with your choice for a while.
What needs to be rectified is the fact that there is no viable option that promotes a "pirate hunter" profession.
I think Low Sec and Null / NPC Null should be 2 distinct areas of space that do not need to intersect.
Make Lo-Sec a Pirate Pardise with Sec Status killing Pirate PvE, hidden Outposts that cater to Low Sec Status, NPC Pirate Faction support structure and bounties based on ship lose to those that kill pirates. Make it so the Navy is not Piracy with a flag and most of all make casual Piracy disappear. Major Penalties to those that commit acts of Piracy and want to return to high sec that day.
Make Piracy for the Pirates and more supported. If you are a day tripper who wants to live in High Sec then you are killing Pirates, if not feel free to get your PvP fix in NPC Null or be ready to become a Pirate. |
Tarryn Nightstorm
Hellstar Towing and Recovery
252
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 22:11:00 -
[22] - Quote
Spenser for Hire wrote:
[...] However, once they stopped Suicide-gankin' Macks, their hold on the price of ICE stopped as well. Why not give Alliances (or corps even) the ability to do this ALL THE TIME, without having to engage in Suicide-ganking? [...]
I hate to spoil a good self-justifying rant--they can be so much fun!--but just one thing, bru:
You/we had the ability to do this "all the time," at least theoretically:
War-decs.
And then it was you, the saintly, persecuted carebears who screamed for their nerfing, and sure enough you got it with the now-legalised dec-shielding exploit. Leaving suicide ganking as the only legitimate "straight combat/offensive" way to do exactly what you're asking for, exactly in the way you seem to be asking for it.
You should have more of a care (Heh. Handsome Tarryn made a pun. And laughed at his own joke, so there!) about what you wish/whinge for in future, because you may get it. Again.
In irae, veritas. |
Spenser for Hire
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 22:14:00 -
[23] - Quote
Someone at CCP said: "We will listen to what players do, not what they say."
Holding ICE Hostage, controlling the ICE market is something that players actually desired to do.
How serious their effort was, whether they succeeded or failed, is totally irrelevant. It was, it IS something that players wanted to do. Something they wanted to do in the Sandbox.
However, the game's mechanics make it nearly impossible to do, much less sustain. they had to resort to attempts at Universe wide Suicide-ganking.
The Goons' attempt to Hold ICE hostage, whether real or not, testify to the fact that there are things that players want to do that game mechanics, that the game structure, makes it impossible to do.
Make it possible to Hold ICE hostage. Make it possible for an Alliance to completely control crucial game resources. Make it possible for an Alliance to drive the price of a crucial game resource sky-high! Make it possible for one Alliance to bring another alliance to its knees by controlling resources, by controlling a sector of space that is the only source of a particular resource.
Listen to what the players DID. Make it possible to Hold ICE Hostage.
Petrus Blackshell wrote: Nerf hisec (as those you criticize ask for) Buff low/nullsec (as you ask for) [/list] Both would fix the income unbalance problems. However, there are a few arguments for why to do the former rather than the latter. Buffing nullsec would have two effects:
- More ISK gets dumped into the economy, worsening the state of inflation it is already in
- Most of this ISK would be in the hands of nullsec powerblocs, which really don't need new chances to solidify their already too-powerful grip on large swathes of space
Take a chill pill, give me your stuff, and stop posting angry threads based on raw ignorance. You point to no concrete evidence for your statements. Also, you are clearly Politicing; Saying that "...Null-sec Powerblocs ...don't need new chances to solidify their already too-powerful grip..." Using Out-of-Game means to control In-Game states.
If a Powerbloc is too-powerful, that's up to players to decide. If a Powerbloc's hold on a region of space needs to come to an end, that is up to players to decide. Game construction should NOT be used as a means of keeping the size of an Alliance in check. |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
630
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 22:23:00 -
[24] - Quote
Spenser for Hire wrote:Game construction should NOT be used as a means of keeping the size of an Alliance in check. The problem rests with an alliance from Fountain being able to participate in a fleet battle in Geminate and be back home, all in the span of several hours. "Force projection" is a term you hear tossed around a lot. "Too powerful" the way I expressed it was a bit vague. I meant "powerful enough that you cannot pose even a minor challenge to its fringe assets without being a large power bloc yourself".
If that were solved, and it wouldn't be an impossible effort to get a good foothold in 0.0 I bet more hisec people would be willing to venture out there.
On a different note...
Spenser for Hire wrote:ICE
Why do you yell every time you say "ice"? Rifterlings - Small gang lowsec combat corp specializing in frigates and cruisers (all races, not just Rifters!). US Timezone veterans and newbies alike are welcome to join. Come chat in the "we fly rifters" in-game channel. Free fitted frigates for members! |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
217
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 22:32:00 -
[25] - Quote
Petrus Blackshell wrote:The problem rests with an alliance from Fountain being able to participate in a fleet battle in Geminate and be back home, all in the span of several hours. "Force projection" is a term you hear tossed around a lot. "Too powerful" the way I expressed it was a bit vague. I meant "powerful enough that you cannot pose even a minor challenge to its fringe assets without being a large power bloc yourself".
If that were solved, and it wouldn't be an impossible effort to get a good foothold in 0.0 I bet more hisec people would be willing to venture out there. Well, you'd defnitely have real alliances as in group controlling bits of space rather than centrally organized.
Still, moving about 30 titans from one end of the empire would be much shorter than the time it takes to wipe out the people trying to take some of your sov, unless you mean to restrict them to a Jump followed by a timer of 24hours or something. Take all the tech Build all the titans Drop all the POSes
Bees incoming, nerf ERRYTHING ERRYDAY |
Tarryn Nightstorm
Hellstar Towing and Recovery
252
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 22:33:00 -
[26] - Quote
Stellar Vix wrote:I for one welcome ice removal in high sec. Replace with comets.
-Vix
Ice should be exclusive to losec, found through exploration only, with random, powerful spawns of advanced AI NPCs. These will hopefully ensure extreme difficulty/impossibility of botting, thus serving as a disincentive to null bot/RMT-lords to try and take these systems over (And make no mistake, they could do so, easily, if there was anything they actually wanted in empire-space.). Try seeing how much fun that would be, being owned/extorted/chased away constantly by these parasites.
Maybe make ice refineable in losec stations only, as well? Genuinely unsafe-but-rewarding content--wormholes are the best example at present--that, through mechanics, is guaranteed suicide for bots. In irae, veritas. |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
632
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 22:38:00 -
[27] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Still, moving about 30 titans from one end of the empire would be much shorter than the time it takes to wipe out the people trying to take some of your sov, unless you mean to restrict them to a Jump followed by a timer of 24hours or something.
That is one suggestion others have put forward. I am not super-knowledgeable on sov warfare. I just know enough to know it's broken and why, but not enough to suggest balanced fixes.
Rifterlings - Small gang lowsec combat corp specializing in frigates and cruisers (all races, not just Rifters!). US Timezone veterans and newbies alike are welcome to join. Come chat in the "we fly rifters" in-game channel. Free fitted frigates for members! |
Feligast
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1153
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 22:40:00 -
[28] - Quote
Petrus Blackshell wrote:If that were solved, and it wouldn't be an impossible effort to get a good foothold in 0.0 I bet more hisec people would be willing to venture out there.
This is the most hilariously wrong statement in this entire thread. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
217
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 22:42:00 -
[29] - Quote
Petrus Blackshell wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote:Still, moving about 30 titans from one end of the empire would be much shorter than the time it takes to wipe out the people trying to take some of your sov, unless you mean to restrict them to a Jump followed by a timer of 24hours or something. That is one suggestion others have put forward. I am not super-knowledgeable on sov warfare. I just know enough to know it's broken and why, but not enough to suggest balanced fixes. I was being only half serious, actually.
A certain ~honoureable~ group would protest that it would leave them open to the predations of another group that tends to enjoy the heavy use of subcaps over supercaps. Take all the tech Build all the titans Drop all the POSes
Bees incoming, nerf ERRYTHING ERRYDAY |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
633
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 22:47:00 -
[30] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote: I was being only half serious, actually.
A certain ~honoureable~ group would protest that it would leave them open to the predations of another group that tends to enjoy the heavy use of subcaps over supercaps.
There is usually a downside to actually committing to deploying a massive capital fleet halfway across the galaxy, yes. Rifterlings - Small gang lowsec combat corp specializing in frigates and cruisers (all races, not just Rifters!). US Timezone veterans and newbies alike are welcome to join. Come chat in the "we fly rifters" in-game channel. Free fitted frigates for members! |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |