open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked What would it take to get carebears out to low and nulsec?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 ... : last (16)

Author Topic

Blastil
Posted - 2008.11.03 18:14:00 - [271]
 

Originally by: Ratchman
Originally by: Yelan Zhou
A PvP flag system would bring the carebears to nullsec.One clicks at a little box and one becomes unattackable.
Sorry but YOU asked.


How about a system that allows people to 'hire' a Concord presence in a specific system? Concord would ONLY attack those ships that fired on the contracted ship or fleet. The caveat of this would be that Concord would turn on the contracted ship or fleet if they decided to fire on anyone else. That way, a Concord escort could only be used by ships not participating in PVP.


You already can in the crime and punishment forum. Only its not concord, its players. Using NPC's to handle a PLAYER PROBLEM is NOT the way to play EVE. I long for the day when there IS no concord, only concord employed pilots, but I doubt that will ever happen...

Tsual
Minmatar
Posted - 2008.11.03 18:43:00 - [272]
 

Originally by: Cat Molina

Low-sec is for pirates/non-conformist/misfit PvP'ers. Many in gangs, some solo, some just trying out combat because they've run missions for a year and are bored. Keep it that way. Miners need not apply; our belts aren't really real... just cardboard backdrops in a place where frigates, dessies, and cruisers fight.



Once in a while it is worth the adventure for a lone miner, put together a scythe, seek a nice 0.2 system ninja mine a bit high end and enjoy the momentary illusion of having balls made out of alloyed tritanium.Wink

Rhapsodie Lightspeed
Caldari
Interstellar Institute For Information Exchange
Posted - 2008.11.03 18:54:00 - [273]
 

Remove gate camping as a form of "pvp"(Sorry if you think gate camping is pvp). I'd like to work in low sec, the idea of suppling pirates and others of their ilk is what I was looking for when I signed up for the game. What I found was a bunch of kiddies sitting on gates giving you zero chance to do anything...So I gave up on that and just work "carebear" sec.

T'Laar Bok
Posted - 2008.11.03 19:06:00 - [274]
 

Originally by: Dessa DesPlains


*** FREE LESSON ***


Good points but sorry, I've been there and done that and its not worth the effort.

It takes long enough as it is to mine without constantly warping to a safe spot/docking and waiting ˝hr+ for the reds to go away. You go back to the belt, just get setup to mine again and another red pops in to have a look around and off you warp again. repeat.

Easier and more isk vs time in hisec.



Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2008.11.03 19:23:00 - [275]
 

Quote:
*** FREE LESSON ***

Also to comment on that, i wonder if you have ever been in low sec for longer than 5 minutes.

While the wirates have issues with not enough targets in low sec, there are quite a bit people/macro's just travelling through low sec for various reasons. In 0.0 you dock up every time a random neutral enters the system where you were ratting. In low sec this would mean that undocking isnt worth the trouble because you will dock in 5 minutes again anyway.

Poreuomai
Minmatar
Mirkur Draug'Tyr
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2008.11.03 19:26:00 - [276]
 

Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Poreuomai
So my question is, what are 0.0 alliances doing to make hi-sec industrial corps join them ?


The issue here is that most 0.0 alliances already have industrial corps, who also contribute people who are willing to fight. Why should they share their resources and markets with industrial corps who aren't also will to help defend?

I agree with you there, but the issue then isn't carebears unwilling to mine bistot (I'm sure they'd love to), but the fact that many alliances are (quite understandably) generally happy for carebears to remain in hi-sec.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2008.11.03 20:27:00 - [277]
 

Originally by: Poreuomai
Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Poreuomai
So my question is, what are 0.0 alliances doing to make hi-sec industrial corps join them ?


The issue here is that most 0.0 alliances already have industrial corps, who also contribute people who are willing to fight. Why should they share their resources and markets with industrial corps who aren't also will to help defend?

I agree with you there, but the issue then isn't carebears unwilling to mine bistot (I'm sure they'd love to), but the fact that many alliances are (quite understandably) generally happy for carebears to remain in hi-sec.


No, the issue is carebears who think they're doing us some kind of favour by mining bistot in the space we defend. As if 10% refine tax covers the whole of their obligations. Sure it's a good start, but it's only start, and they're generally unwilling to go any further. There are exceptions of course, but far too few.

in the end it's simpler to just say: if you're not prepared to fight, you don't belong in 0.0

CHAOS100
The Ankou
Raiden.
Posted - 2008.11.03 21:27:00 - [278]
 

carebears are in high sec because it is no risk (unless you are carrying nice stuff in a hauler).

low sec is a risk.

null sec is like WTF i need to fight peepol?

hence nothing as the bob guy said on the first page

Dmian
Gallente
Gallenterrorisme
Posted - 2008.11.03 22:20:00 - [279]
 

This thread is useless now.

PvP players don't want carebears in 0.0 unless they turn into PvP players.
Carebears don't want to go to 0.0, because they enjoy doing missions or building things.
Pirates are happy with their low-sec no-risk playground.
So, why bother?

Everybody is happy. Why put preassure to change a game style that makes everybody happy?

The game is OK as it is, really.

Jmanis Catharg
Caldari
Dusk Blade Logisitcals
Posted - 2008.11.03 22:25:00 - [280]
 

Edited by: Jmanis Catharg on 03/11/2008 22:39:57
Quote:
No, the issue is carebears who think they're doing us some kind of favour by mining bistot in the space we defend. As if 10% refine tax covers the whole of their obligations. Sure it's a good start, but it's only start, and they're generally unwilling to go any further. There are exceptions of course, but far too few.

in the end it's simpler to just say: if you're not prepared to fight, you don't belong in 0.0

And there lies a massive problem. What the heck is anyone obligated to do.

One of the big reasons I chose a high-sec industrial home is because I can't really afford much time on the game, 15-30 minutes a day, an hour if I'm lucky. But that doesn't happen daily either, likely I play only 4 days in a week. My only real obligation was a moral one to repay people for the money they'd invested in my activities.

I tried running a low-sec POS once. Now I'm more than capable of avoiding gatecamps and keeping a low profile in dangerous places. Does not mean gatecamps don't tie up your time resource avoiding them, and so what was a 10 minute task for me to come on, deliver manufactured goods, restock the lines, list on market and log off now became something I couldn't do unless I had 2 hours up my sleeve minimum. Add to that the days when I had to be on and I *had* to get through gatecamps which I'd otherwise avoid because the POS needs fuel *today* and it was just too much hassle.

With the upcoming changes to Blockade Runners, this becomes a helluva lot easier for me, especially with the covert cyno field available to them, and so I've reactivated my accounts to step out into low/null sec to do this again.

I *thought* an alliance wouldn't mind extra income for nothing in return (as I linked before) but I was wrong. The bull**** restrictions, obligations and all that **** as if I somehow *owe* the people in 0.0 something is not what I play this for.

Ever tried telling your girlfriend the reason you're running late to work is because your alliance on an internet spaceship game wants you on this *mandatory* op or you'll be kicked out, despite your protests?

Meh, but I'm getting all anti-alliance again. Point is, these changes are getting me back out to low/0.0, but if you want me *on your team* it's going to be a case of "what can you offer me?", not "what can I offer you?", because that's what's kept me out of lowsec/0.0 so far.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2008.11.03 22:42:00 - [281]
 

Originally by: Jmanis Catharg
but if you want me *on your team* it's going to be a case of "what can you offer me?", not "what can I offer you?"


Thank you for illustrating my point. In 0.0, alliances compete against each other. Those that commit to the fight will prevail over those who have a lot of dead weight. There's no game rule or moral imperative here: it's simply what I have observed. An organised team will beat the hell out of a mob of selfish individuals every time.
You say "I *thought* an alliance wouldn't mind extra income for nothing in return (as I linked before) but I was wrong." as if providing income was in any way special. News flash: almost all of those PvPers rat, and they pay taxes on what they rat, and spend most of what's left on ships to fight for the alliance. The idea that 10M/day - 2-3 BS spawns - is somehow a notable contribution would be laughable to them.

Seriously, your attitude is that "the team" owes you... and then you're surprised when you're shunned? You reject the concept of any obligation to support the team in order to have safe access to those belts and moons and rats and you wonder why they're not interested in sharing.

Neutrino Sunset
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse
Sanctuary Pact
Posted - 2008.11.03 22:47:00 - [282]
 

I'm by no means a die hard empire dweller, of the only two corps I've been in the first was a lowsec corp and the other was in an 0.0 alliance. I have no qualms about travelling through lowsec and can't remember the last time I was ganked there. But while I don't think of lowsec as some kind of no go area and would enjoy doing something a bit more adventurous while I'm currently between corps, unless I want to engage in piracy I can't think of any reason to go there.

The mission rewards in no way reflect the risks. Even a cheap as chips T2 only, no faction at all BS will cost you at least 20M in mods and 30M in insurance to lose, without any rigs those lvl 4s are going to be a hard grind, so with rigs you are probably looking at something that will cost in the order of 100M isk to lose. Travelling between lowsec systems and missioning in a PvE fitted BS no matter how careful you are you should probably expect to lose one every half dozen missions, (unless you want to go as far as turning down any missions outside of your agent's system). Which means that if you hope to make any kind of profit at all the missions ideally need to be able recoup the cost of the ship in 2 or 3 missions, and I think even the most anti-PvE among us know that that is not remotely the case. In my experience the best paying level 4s net about 20M and that includes going back and looting and salvaging everything, the average level 4s are closer to 10M.

I've done a fair amount of lowsec exploration too. My experience of it was that it takes ages for very little payout.

Fixing the above problem is no easy task, you certainly can't just double the mission and exploration rewards, although a little buff probably wouldn't hurt. One simple change which would make a significant difference though would be to make the directional scanner filterable on probes. If you are mission running in low sec even if you are religiously trying to be vigilant the mechanics make it practically impossible for you to be safe. You can be scanned out in less than 30 seconds. The amount of time it then takes the pirate to warp to you does not enter into the equation, since once he has got his scan reading he can destroy the probe but can still warp to you, so you only have 30 seconds max to spot the probe. Managing aggro in a lvl 4 mission in a lumbering BS while simultaneously scanning and scrolling through the scan results window every 30 seconds is a mechanic that is borked beyond all credibility. But what alternatives are there, cancelling any mission you are in the middle of when a hostile arrives in system? I expect this proposal to provoke howls of derision but I honestly can't think of a good reason why we shouldn't be able to do this, especially considering the unpalatable alternative of fully instanced missions. And anyway even if this were added you know there would still be plenty of lazy/stupid/inexperienced victims who still won't use it.

The security status mechanics also contrive to make it hard for combat oriented industrial corps and anti-pies to operate effectively. By combat oriented industrial corp I mean a corp that wants to set up industrial operations in lowsec but which is prepared to fight to defend itself. You can't hope to effectively defend haulers and barges by waiting for pirates to aggress and then fighting back, the industrial ships are too weak to survive for long enough for it to work. A more effective way to defend an industrial operation in low sec would be to actively hunt down the pirates and lock down a system prior to conducting an operation, however once you've aggressed a few pirates you will soon be an outlaw yourself.

Low sec status may have little more consequence for pirates other than bragging rights. However for a low sec industrial char it can be a crippling handicap, not to mention being undesirable from an RP perspective.

continued...

Neutrino Sunset
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse
Sanctuary Pact
Posted - 2008.11.03 22:47:00 - [283]
 

With the latest security mechanic change if a player with +5 sec aggresses a player who is already an outlaw he gets a 10% reduction in the sec hit (and vice versa). Imo that's pants and does practically nothing to remedy this poor situation. Make it more like a 50% reduction and then you'd be further along the path to having a viable mechanic, although personally I think anyone with sec status 5 should be able to aggress anyone with sec status <0 in lowsec with no penalty at all. Then you'd be able to set up a lowsec industrial operation that could effectively defend itself without all the characters in it becoming outlaws themselves. You'd also probably see a few combat only anti-pie corps setting up in lowsec for the express purpose of providing security for industrialists, for a fee of course :)

In addition to the above here are a few other changes which I think I would like to see.

Add a mobile mining shield (much like a POS shield but weaker) that can be deployed at an asteroid belt like a mobile bubble. Idea originally by Cpt Branko I believe. If pirates really want to drive the mining op away they can still do so by taking the shield down with a BS gang or a few caps, but at least the miners have a chance to get their barges out, or have their alts turn up in sniper BS. The proposed scannable asteroid belts that we have been hearing about on and off for two years won't really help for the same reason as low sec exploration/mission running is unprofitable.

Give every pirate (<0 sec status) a Concord sponsored bounty proportional to the cost of his clone, e.g. 50% of the cost of his clone at -0.1 and the full cost of his clone at -5.0 or below.

Buff low sec ore.

----

And that's it really. If lowsec had these kind of mechanics I'd be there tomorrow. I wouldn't necessarily expect to earn more than in Empire but I'd certainly expect it to be a lot more fun.

Jmanis Catharg
Caldari
Dusk Blade Logisitcals
Posted - 2008.11.03 22:53:00 - [284]
 

Edited by: Jmanis Catharg on 03/11/2008 23:29:01
Quote:
Seriously, your attitude is that "the team" owes you... and then you're surprised when you're shunned? You reject the concept of any obligation to support the team in order to have safe access to those belts and moons and rats and you wonder why they're not interested in sharing.

I find the concept of 'not being interested in sharing' hilarious in light of topics like this.

But seriously, I think you're missing the whole point of my argument.

I can commit hardly any time to the game, only enough to support a carebear indy lifestyle. I would be more than happy to shift that to 0.0.

I say again, I can commit hardly any time, which means I'll hardly use alliance resources such as mining belts, ratting, using stations and alliance jump bridges etc..

So *why on earth* would I want to join an alliance which foot me with time commitments my playstyle simply can't meet, and bills for "being part of the alliance" that simply make it not worth the effort of being down there. Alliance policies make it more worthwhile for carebears to stay in high sec rather than join them in nullsec.

As for low sec, it was just too dangerous, until CCP makes these changes, which'll get me back down there, though I hardly speak for carebears everywhere.

Thank god they can't hold sovereignity in NPC 0.0 and low-sec.

edit: BTW, yes, 10 mil a day is small. Compared to the fact I'm only making 40 mil a day maybe?

Annaphera
Minmatar
United Freemerchants Society
Posted - 2008.11.03 23:42:00 - [285]
 

Originally by: Dirk Magnum
Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 03/11/2008 04:23:04
Originally by: Annaphera
---


Nobody would be forced into anything. When I used the word "force" in my earlier post what I meant was that if people want to maintain a market where consumers can really stretch ISK rather far then miners would be required to enter Low Sec to gather the lower-end ores in bulk quantities.
So, in order to play the role they want to, they will be forced to take risks that no sane person would in an unarmed ship. Trying to force them (us) to do that will result in canceled accounts, which is why there is no way CCP will do it. High sec works as-is, as does null sec. It is low that has the issue, and that issue is mostly the attitude of it's players. A good portion of them want soft, high-profit targets to blow up and laugh at, and seem quite shocked that no one wants to come hand them the fruits of hours of game-play. So they whine in the forums, and propose changing high sec to try to force (or drive, or make, or whatever word you want to use) soft targets into low sec. No change will convince most non-PvPers to put themselves at that big a disadvantage; most will quit, first.

Originally by: Dirk Magnum
Saying that people shouldn't be forced to accept a playstyle they aren't comfortable with is only okay if interpreted in a certain fashion. The correct interpretation IMO would be "you can play however you want in Eve as long as you accept the consequences." This would mean that if my suggestion for Low Sec being the hub for low-end ore collection were implemented then miners could either go there or accept inflated prices for T1 items. Of course T2 items already require Low and Nullsec components to build so those wouldn't necessarily be affected by the ore change quite as much.
You forgot an option - or cancel their accounts and find a game that doesn't force them to be easy pickings.

Originally by: Dirk Magnum
The main reason that I don't like statements such as
Quote:
play in a style they have no wish to play in

is because interpreted in the wrong way and taken to the logical extreme this statement turns into "nobody should be susceptible to non-consensual actions by other players", which is clearly antithetical to the Eve philosophy.
Nope - you accept the non-consensual actions that are within the rules, or find a different game. If I play an FPS, I should expect that other players will be out to shoot me; if I can't deal with that, I don't play. You are advocating that the very rules should be changed to make people accept a drastically higher level of non-consensual combat, when they are in defenseless ships, and you expect them to just accept it. My position is, most won't. I'm pretty sure CCP knows that, too; for proof, look no further than the proposed transport changes...which, by the way, seem to be drawing a lot of fire from who? The low sec pirates, who else...

Obyrith
Posted - 2008.11.03 23:58:00 - [286]
 

Edited by: Obyrith on 04/11/2008 00:39:24
Originally by: Malcanis
Those that commit to the fight will prevail over those who have a lot of dead weight.
...
The idea that 10M/day - 2-3 BS spawns - is somehow a notable contribution would be laughable to them.


What you're missing by taking this attitude is that without the industrialists, your PvPers have exactly the same amount of work to do, but you have 10M less per day per carebear to spend on fighting. But every Tuesday and Friday all the asteroids will respawn anyway. Unless you're going to mine the bistot to exhaustion yourself every three and a half days, you're actually losing 10M/day in revenue by not letting 'selfish' people mine and refine it.

If even that degree of freeloading creates practical problems for you, what's to stop you allowing mining and ratting in second-tier systems within your territory that your PvPers don't use? Believe me, industrialists would be almost as happy to mine Spod and rat with a lower probability of faction spawns, so long as they don't have to become non-consensual PvPers to do it. They'd still refine the ore in your stations and pay tax, and you'd be investing exactly the same in them as before: zero. What does this relationship involve that justifies the term "dead weight"?

NewAgeMiner
Posted - 2008.11.04 01:06:00 - [287]
 

tbh the sort of self-professed 'hardcore pvp' alliances they require people to be on all the time or to log on at any time of day for ops or get booted are usually filled by unemployed/nerdy teenagers with no serious RL commitments.

I think some of these people need to put down the mouse and take up a life...... ugh

C'Ristine Chapill
Posted - 2008.11.04 01:12:00 - [288]
 

Originally by: Obyrith
Edited by: Obyrith on 04/11/2008 00:39:24
Originally by: Malcanis
Those that commit to the fight will prevail over those who have a lot of dead weight.
...
The idea that 10M/day - 2-3 BS spawns - is somehow a notable contribution would be laughable to them.


What you're missing by taking this attitude is that without the industrialists, your PvPers have exactly the same amount of work to do, but you have 10M less per day per carebear to spend on fighting. But every Tuesday and Friday all the asteroids will respawn anyway. Unless you're going to mine the bistot to exhaustion yourself every three and a half days, you're actually losing 10M/day in revenue by not letting 'selfish' people mine and refine it.

If even that degree of freeloading creates practical problems for you, what's to stop you allowing mining and ratting in second-tier systems within your territory that your PvPers don't use? Believe me, industrialists would be almost as happy to mine Spod and rat with a lower probability of faction spawns, so long as they don't have to become non-consensual PvPers to do it. They'd still refine the ore in your stations and pay tax, and you'd be investing exactly the same in them as before: zero. What does this relationship involve that justifies the term "dead weight"?


Oh you hit the nail on the head there.

It's an economic issue... in two parts:

1. The risk is too high in low sec for anyone to really want to get involved unless they are shooting at things.

2. 0.0 Alliances never develop their markets. And having been in three 0.0 alliances I have never seen a market developed. There just isn't a game mechanic which encourages a market to develop. So alliances don't do it. (And as an aside- it make little sense to me. Since bringing in industrial corps to mine and build ships seems way easier than flying all your rigs [caps excluded] in from empire.

What the alliances do however accomplish is create lots of pew pew. But they never allow their industrialists to set up a competitive market for their own profit (which indeed would be something worth defending.). Rather they mandate (much like dictators) how much the industrialist needs to pay, build, or donate to the cause. And then they set special "alliance pricing" for alliance member to alliance member sales. I hate that- someone please create a free market??)

One of the alliances I was in cost 225 mil upfront to join, plus two posses deployed within two weeks, and 10% of everything I mined was theirs, and they would blow up my pos if I had a refining array on it. This tactic isn't going to get industrialists to work with you.

Industrialists are a funny bunch. We usually do not come in blobs. The best of us are in corps under 20 members. We have exceptional skills at mining and building. We are expert at shipping and logistics. Given the chance a few 20 member indy corps *could* light up a market fairly quickly.

Sadly, with all those good points, there still is no reason that a 0.0 alliance would foster a free market in their space. I don't blame them There's currently no advantage to running your own free market. It's better to dominate through mandatory mining ops, taxes, and pos restrictions.

Since alliances are basically "big corps", and corporations in themselves are big financial sociopaths- it's no wonder much of EVE industry is in Empire. People go where the market is.

Things might be different for BoB and Goons though. Both seem self sustaining and I'd love to get a look at their market sometime.

My thoughts.

Sylper Illysten
Caldari
Ex Coelis
The Bantam Menace
Posted - 2008.11.04 01:22:00 - [289]
 

A few thoughts on how to make low sec more attractive:

1) Roaming naval/security patrols in 0.1 to 0.4 systems, the lower the security level of the system. less patrols. This is low sec not no sec, if pirates are sitting on a gate killing every transport trying to entre your system, eventually the authorities are going to send a force out to clear the gate, think of how the police deal with crime/drug hot spots. So pirates kill a few ships in a 0.1 system, no change, they camp the same gate for 3 days firing on everything that moves, eventually the authorities (concord/navy/spacelane patrol) show up to run them off.

2) A hi-slot module that contains a single shot high speed distress drone. When a ship is attacked in low sec it records the data on the attacking craft after which it can be launched, heading for the nearest concord/navy/spacelane patrol station to summon aid. Of course, a fast targeting frigate might shoot the drone down as it approached the gate/is launched and it takes time for help to arrive. It might give pirates incentive to ransom again rather than shooting everything and picking over the bones.

Eluhaf
Posted - 2008.11.04 01:44:00 - [290]
 

Originally by: Malcanis
I have seen the "PvPers vs non PvPers in 0.0" argument over and over again. The most common argument I see is that the alliance will benefit by having the industrial guys supply it. Sounds great in practice, but the reality is that those cheap or free ships, modules and ammo never seem to materialise. They often appear on the market and juicy 0.0 markups, though - but if I'm going to pay that kind of markeup, I might as well get my own Jita-price ships&mods jumped up from high-sec.



This is the problem, jump drives and jump bridges have made it is too easy to live in 0.0 (and too a certain extent in low-sec). Remove the ability to fund or supply PVP with plentiful high sec isk and industrials and you will force people to generate isk through 0.0 operations. As it stands now most Pvpers are funded and supplied in high sec.

Korizan
Hysterically Unforgiving
Posted - 2008.11.04 01:51:00 - [291]
 

Originally by: Eluhaf
Originally by: Malcanis
I have seen the "PvPers vs non PvPers in 0.0" argument over and over again. The most common argument I see is that the alliance will benefit by having the industrial guys supply it. Sounds great in practice, but the reality is that those cheap or free ships, modules and ammo never seem to materialise. They often appear on the market and juicy 0.0 markups, though - but if I'm going to pay that kind of markeup, I might as well get my own Jita-price ships&mods jumped up from high-sec.



This is the problem, jump drives and jump bridges have made it is too easy to live in 0.0 (and too a certain extent in low-sec). Remove the ability to fund or supply PVP with plentiful high sec isk and industrials and you will force people to generate isk through 0.0 operations. As it stands now most Pvpers are funded and supplied in high sec.


Actually that is true but not true.
0.0 has always been for the most part supplied from high-sec.
THere is a really good reason all the belts in high-sec are mined out.
Cause high-sec supports 0.0.
Jump ships and jump gates have made it easier to do the transfer but there has been no major shift as far a production sense their introduction in the game.




Tiger313
313th Squadron
Posted - 2008.11.04 02:18:00 - [292]
 

I think I have a pretty good idea what keeps carebears in hisec: it's a rather steep change going from hisec to lowsec. Hisec you're relatively safe, but the moment you go into lowsec you're game to anything that shoots.

You get some very basic training shooting by hunting down some NPC rats in PVE missions, but PVE and PVP are nowhere near comparable.

Most people don't like the idea of going somewhere knowing for 99% sure that they'll get instagibbed. So they play it safe. Just as much as a pirate does, calling in his buddies to sit on a gate with him, just in case something comes through that gate that's just a bit too big for him to chew on.

If the differences between PVE and PVP were less significant tactics/fittings wise, and if the security gap between hisec, lowsec and nullsec were less steep, I'm pretty sure you'd seemore of an influx into lowsec and 0.0.

Mind you, I'm not proposing to dumb down the differences, not at all. Just right now you basically have three safety levels really, you could visualize that by drawing a floor with a two step stairs, floor being 0.0, first step being lowsec and second step being hisec. If it'd be a diagonal from top down to bottom, that'd be much more attractive for people, seeing as they can push their boundaries at their own discretion, as opposite to having to take the plunge into the deep. how to accomplish this is gonna be CCP's task to find out though. Smile

Jmanis Catharg
Caldari
Dusk Blade Logisitcals
Posted - 2008.11.04 02:42:00 - [293]
 

Edited by: Jmanis Catharg on 04/11/2008 02:46:52
Edited by: Jmanis Catharg on 04/11/2008 02:44:49
Edited by: Jmanis Catharg on 04/11/2008 02:43:57
Originally by: Korizan
Originally by: Eluhaf
Originally by: Malcanis
Stuff







It's still a source of the problem though, the logistics in getting stuff to (or manufacturing in) 0.0.

The misinterpretation of what "Beneficial to the alliance" means is a prime example of why you won't see bears out there usually.

The alliance means "You'll charge us less than jita/supply for free". Why?? It's logistical effort to shift stuff from Jita to 0.0, or it's logistical effort to get materials into 0.0 to manufacture these goods, why the hell should they come cheap/free?

The industrialist means "You can spend more time pewpewing and less time doing logistics and having manufacturing alts". They want reward for their time and effort. "Being in 0.0 graced by the presence of 0.0 fighters" is not reward, and nor is having any effort put into any other 0.0 activities stripped away by said alliance's policies.

If they insist on those sorts of policies, of course it's more sensible for a carebear to stay in hi-sec, especially when your options are:

High sec:
Minimal logistics able to be performed mostly AFK.
A known profit margin on goods with expected outcomes.
Ability to utilise some POS functionality in a high sec environment, with lacking functions made up for by zero-tax services (except for reactions/capship production).
No need for 'defence budgets' so to speak.

compared to:
Nullsec:
Goods are demanded for less than standard Jita prices or free (equals less profit, or even loss).
Logistics can be time consuming and difficult, especially if an enemy drops a camp on your supply line.
Restrictions on launching POS modules means more lucrative POS operations aren't an option.
Using alliance station services attracts heavy taxes (more loss)

Where's the alliance supposed to get money from? The big bucks it gets fighting for Dysprosium moons, mining A, B and C and the hot officer drops and ratting (in spare time) it gets from the in-demand systems.

Gonada
The Scope
Posted - 2008.11.04 03:11:00 - [294]
 

newsflash

95% of the guys that pew pew, also have industrialist alts making stuff for the alliances as well, or high sec alts in pos's doing the same.



all your petty bickering is really about one thing: how to ruin EVE, make it into your little non violent heaven.

too bad you dont understand the basic tenants of eve, but i'm certainly not going to tell you.

well, theres other games for you out there, i suggest you go ruin those, ohh wait , you did that allready.




Jmanis Catharg
Caldari
Dusk Blade Logisitcals
Posted - 2008.11.04 03:15:00 - [295]
 

Edited by: Jmanis Catharg on 04/11/2008 03:16:18
Quote:
95% of the guys that pew pew, also have industrialist alts making stuff for the alliances as well, or high sec alts in pos's doing the same.

No **** sherlock. So do you care to explain why topics like "Low/nullsec needs more carebears"/"what would it take to get bears into low/nullsec" keep coming up if they're so unneeded?

If not then **** off and stop, oh wait, trying to ruin the game for others!

Joe Cyber
Posted - 2008.11.04 03:26:00 - [296]
 

Edited by: Joe Cyber on 04/11/2008 03:41:28
Edited by: Joe Cyber on 04/11/2008 03:36:53
Originally by: Gonada
newsflash

95% of the guys that pew pew, also have industrialist alts making stuff for the alliances as well, or high sec alts in pos's doing the same.




This is something I have always had an issue with. Limit all accounts to 1 character or require 24 hours to switch characters. One character that is a pirate, YARRRR!! yarrr; and another that is a high-sec mission running carebear. The lowsec discussion always drip with hypocrisy.

If you want to run more than one account fine.


On a more productive note:

Change warp-in to a solar system to a random location across the entire solar system. Camping would be less productive. Those who camp now, would actually need do some work.

Obyrith
Posted - 2008.11.04 04:16:00 - [297]
 

Edited by: Obyrith on 04/11/2008 04:40:39
Originally by: Gonada
newsflash
95% of the guys that pew pew, also have industrialist alts making stuff for the alliances as well, or high sec alts in pos's doing the same.


all your petty bickering is really about one thing: how to ruin EVE, make it into your little non violent heaven.

too bad you dont understand the basic tenants of eve, but i'm certainly not going to tell you.


Class A example of how to miss the point. No offence meant: your perspective on this is accepted as dogma by many Eve players.

Fact: dozens of alts controlled by single players are no substitute for hundreds of actual players driving an economy by pursuing their own interests 24/7. Why do you think Jita has an economy, anyway? The truth is, you've been busy with PvP, so you haven't thought about it. Okay, then.

The reason Jita has an economy is because all the money generated by all the carebears in Eve running missions and collecting bounties ends up being funnelled towards that system and other market hubs. But it only goes there because it's convenient for it to go there. If there was a lot of PvE in null-sec that wasn't immediately used to fund PvP, 0 sec's combination of remoteness and lucrativeness might create a market centre there, too. Currently we have no way of finding out. But understand that Rens is only 20 or so jumps from Jita and yet markets exist in both places that are distinct enough to make trading between them profitable.

Where do you think new isk originates? It doesn't come from mining Dyspro; that's a commodity. It exists because CCP do what the Federal reserve does and pump it into the system via PvE from missions and ratting. I point this out not to make any claims about the importance of carebearing, but to bemoan the fact that the antipathy between the two ways of looking at Eve has prevented anyone from trying to exploit both mindsets to the advantage of both.

One of the questions asked of Zulupark in the recent Q&A thread was: how much money does the Caldari Navy Assembly plant in Jita suck out of the economy per day via sales and transaction charges? Zulupark didn't know but said he'd ask. I'd be willing to bet that it could fund a crapload of PvP.

Olleybear
Minmatar
I R' Carebear
Posted - 2008.11.04 04:22:00 - [298]
 

Make missions unable to be scanned out.

I used to fly a faction fitted raven, probably worth about 2 bil( or more ) in todays isk, for low sec mission running. I've even taken that same faction fitted raven against small pos's in low sec and *gasp and swoon*, into pvp.

Then came the ability to scan out mission runners and to top it off, the ability of cloaked ships activating your mission gates while cloaked so even if you had an alt watching the gate, it wouldn't do you any good.

That took away my ability to make isk in low sec. So I left. Mine in low sec to make isk? BAHAHAHAHA!!!! Rat in low sec to make isk? Right! Mission in low sec? In my multi-billion isk Raven/Fleet Tempest? No way in hell now.

Want to bring me, a person who has taken his faction fit Raven into pvp, into low sec again?

Stop taking my ability to make isk in low sec away from me. Low sec is no longer worth fighting for.

Souvera Corvus
THE PAROXYSM
Session Changes
Posted - 2008.11.04 05:55:00 - [299]
 

Originally by: Olleybear
Make missions unable to be scanned out.

I used to fly a faction fitted raven, probably worth about 2 bil( or more ) in todays isk, for low sec mission running. I've even taken that same faction fitted raven against small pos's in low sec and *gasp and swoon*, into pvp.

Then came the ability to scan out mission runners and to top it off, the ability of cloaked ships activating your mission gates while cloaked so even if you had an alt watching the gate, it wouldn't do you any good.

That took away my ability to make isk in low sec. So I left. Mine in low sec to make isk? BAHAHAHAHA!!!! Rat in low sec to make isk? Right! Mission in low sec? In my multi-billion isk Raven/Fleet Tempest? No way in hell now.

Want to bring me, a person who has taken his faction fit Raven into pvp, into low sec again?

Stop taking my ability to make isk in low sec away from me. Low sec is no longer worth fighting for.


Having been there when he used to fly said Raven I'll vouch for him Very Happy.

I'll go further in saying that in the days when say, Hedaleolfarber was populated by mission runners from NMTZ/5thC and [FDN], numerous fights could be had in and around Hedal/Gonheim/Isto and many large pirate organisations (INFOD etc) could be found deccing those living there to get fights.

In addition, because of mission loot and re-pro Hedal almost functioned as a low-sec trade Hub increasing the traffic in and around MH which again meant more fights.

As scanning mission runners out became almost a certainty (risk/reward?) and as the mission runner population in and around Hedal decreased, pirates found that the only way to get the targets that they wanted was more gatecamps on the MH access points.

People then twigged to that and just stopped coming to low-sec entirely.

So what we have now is pirates and the like asking CCP to move missions to Low-sec so that they can get back the low-sec population they used to have before scanning became an almost certain thing.

They won't come.

Want more targets?

Then making exisiting low-sec missions more lucrative would be a start.

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2008.11.04 07:22:00 - [300]
 

Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Jmanis Catharg
but if you want me *on your team* it's going to be a case of "what can you offer me?", not "what can I offer you?"


Thank you for illustrating my point. In 0.0, alliances compete against each other. Those that commit to the fight will prevail over those who have a lot of dead weight. There's no game rule or moral imperative here: it's simply what I have observed. An organised team will beat the hell out of a mob of selfish individuals every time.
You say "I *thought* an alliance wouldn't mind extra income for nothing in return (as I linked before) but I was wrong." as if providing income was in any way special. News flash: almost all of those PvPers rat, and they pay taxes on what they rat, and spend most of what's left on ships to fight for the alliance. The idea that 10M/day - 2-3 BS spawns - is somehow a notable contribution would be laughable to them.

Seriously, your attitude is that "the team" owes you... and then you're surprised when you're shunned? You reject the concept of any obligation to support the team in order to have safe access to those belts and moons and rats and you wonder why they're not interested in sharing.


It is clear that the way Jmanis Catharg express himself is like waving a red d**** before a bull for you, but have you stopped thinking about his base argument?

A lot of alliances and corporation forget that the relationship between corpmember and corporation/alliance should be two way. It should benefit the corporation/alliance and the corpmember.

A lot of corporation seem to think: "We gave you a nice system in 0.0 so all your time belong to the corporation. If we can spare some of it we will allow you to do things for yourself. But only if there is some extra time after mandatory corp and alliance operations."

Generally if you enter in that kind of agreement you are payed for it in RL.

While you should devote a part of your time to the corp it should not eat all of it and then ask for another 10%.

For pure or almost pure PvPers is easier as they enjoy the combat part so they feel less the pressure of the time dedicated to the corporation, but for someone that don't particularly like PvP doing mandatory combat operations every day is wasted time. In a game you will accept wasting time in activities you don't like only up to a specific point.



Pages: first : previous : ... 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 ... : last (16)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only