Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 119 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 36 post(s) |
Roemy Schneider
Vanishing Point.
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 06:41:00 -
[2251]
Originally by: Korodan
Originally by: Kanatta Jing
Originally by: Roemy Schneider since we never got the revamp of loot tables to compensate for the increased tech1 volumes, allow me to get back to the idea we had back then:
hauler spawn upgrade plz
Hmmm, if they put a Hauler Spawn as a random pop up in anomalies... That would be neat.
But make sure it only has valuable minerals - no one wants to haul 240k of trit through 0.0. Make sure it's **** like Zydrine and Megacyte.
hummm actually i was aiming for "useful" rather than another wealth faucet, especially with ratters getting out of the belts and into the plexes. alternatively, we could have them drop LOADS of modules/ammo; imagine a spawn with 100k doom torps or 10k passive targeters -.- - putting the gist back into logistics |
Sarah Norbulk
Dawn of a new Empire The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 06:42:00 -
[2252]
YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
I'd like to here the answer to this myself.
|
Bilbo II
Serenity Engineering and Transport Company Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 06:48:00 -
[2253]
Originally by: Sarah Norbulk YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
I'd like to here the answer to this myself.
As would I
|
Bloodhands
hirr Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 06:49:00 -
[2254]
Originally by: Sarah Norbulk YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
I'd like to here the answer to this myself.
Very good question indeed.
|
Aralis
Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 06:51:00 -
[2255]
Originally by: Ranger 1 Edited by: Ranger 1 on 09/11/2009 06:31:52
Originally by: Esplin YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
I don't suppose you have considered that while yes anomalies will be as profitable as level 4 missions, you will also have additional lucrative sources of income not readily available in high sec.
More lucrative, hidden belts might mean you will have to actually have some people on hand that know how to mine properly (and profitably). Repeated claiming that nobody mines in null sec because it isn't as profitable as ratting makes you look a bit... inept. Sorry.
Upgraded mini-profession sites (which admittedly could use some tweaking), high end complexes, and access to more and better Wormholes are all money makers that are either not readily available or will be rarer or of lower quality than in Empire space.
Of course there are still your high end moons, which while not as valuable as before are still a resource most often found in null sec (or at worst within easy range of null sec).
I don't think what we currently have proposed in Dominion is perfect yet, far from it. However singling out one of the several high end upgradeable revenue streams that will be available to you, and then quoting each other endlessly because because one of them is "merely" as profitable as the best monetary resource in the game is pretty short sighted.
Utterly irrelevant. You can only do one of these things at a time. Unlimited numbers of you could do level 4 missions. So at BEST you only need to count the best resource in 0.0.
|
Jethro Hawkins
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 06:52:00 -
[2256]
YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
Quoted it before, will keep quoting it. What's the worst that happens? CCP won't answer... probably.
Please don't break the game until I actually can fly my capital ship wish list please.
|
Korodan
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 06:54:00 -
[2257]
Originally by: Jethro Hawkins YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
Quoted it before, will keep quoting it. What's the worst that happens? CCP won't answer... probably.
Please don't break the game until I actually can fly my capital ship wish list please.
|
Scouty McScoutersen
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 06:55:00 -
[2258]
the obvious answer is they don't want to increase 0.0 isk and cause inflation, or decrease empire isk and cause carebear (ie most of the people playing this game) ragequits.
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 06:59:00 -
[2259]
Originally by: Scouty McScoutersen Edited by: Scouty McScoutersen on 09/11/2009 06:55:54 the obvious answer is they don't want to increase 0.0 isk and cause inflation, or decrease empire isk and cause carebear (ie most of the people playing this game) ragequits.
nullseccers are screwed and the only way to stay viable is to have an alt running missions in empire, oh well
Yes oh well. Dont bother trying to fix it scouty mcsoutersen has declared it impossible. Some inflation in the game would not be that harmfull as eve currently seems to be in a deflation and will be more so with the current sov prices. Empire dweller spending power goes down, null sec spending power goes up, hooray!
YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
|
Korodan
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 07:01:00 -
[2260]
Originally by: Scouty McScoutersen Edited by: Scouty McScoutersen on 09/11/2009 06:55:54 the obvious answer is they don't want to increase 0.0 isk and cause inflation, or decrease empire isk and cause carebear (ie most of the people playing this game) ragequits.
nullseccers are screwed and the only way to stay viable is to have an alt running missions in empire, oh well
At this point we need inflation because some ships are selling at near insurance fraud prices, if it gets to a certain point you could literally have people buying ships, insuring them, then just undocking and blowing it up.
|
|
Scouty McScoutersen
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 07:03:00 -
[2261]
Originally by: ep1k
Yes oh well. Dont bother trying to fix it scouty mcsoutersen has declared it impossible. [/b]
why bother since the current system is working fine and hasn't caused ragequits OR inflation ? get a mission running alt, problem solved
ofc after the expansion will be different because non NPC 0.0 will become uninhabited desert with these proposed changes
|
ep1k
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 07:07:00 -
[2262]
Originally by: Scouty McScoutersen
Originally by: ep1k
Yes oh well. Dont bother trying to fix it scouty mcsoutersen has declared it impossible. [/b]
why bother since the current system is working fine and hasn't caused ragequits OR inflation ? get a mission running alt, problem solved
ofc after the expansion will be different because non NPC 0.0 will become uninhabited desert with these proposed changes
Because its a terrible system that noone wants. put the rewards where the risks are. They want more people in dangerous space, put more income there. And you talk like inflation is 100% a terrible thing. Its not, and deflation is a much worse thing.
|
Mkiaki
Gallente Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 07:09:00 -
[2263]
Learn to grind Goons, it's what the rest of EVE has to do.
|
Scouty McScoutersen
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 07:09:00 -
[2264]
Originally by: ep1k
Because its a terrible system that noone wants.
well ccp wants it because 1) it stops carebears from quitting and 2) makes pew pewers to get additional account for missioning it up. if this game has proven anything its that ppl will eat any amounts of **** to go the extra mile
|
Dharh
Gallente Ace Adventure Corp
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 07:12:00 -
[2265]
Originally by: Korodan Edited by: Korodan on 09/11/2009 07:10:17
Originally by: Scouty McScoutersen Edited by: Scouty McScoutersen on 09/11/2009 06:55:54 the obvious answer is they don't want to increase 0.0 isk and cause inflation, or decrease empire isk and cause carebear (ie most of the people playing this game) ragequits.
nullseccers are screwed and the only way to stay viable is to have an alt running missions in empire, oh well
At this point we need inflation because some ships are selling at near insurance fraud prices, if it gets to a certain point you could literally have people buying ships, insuring them, then just undocking and blowing it up.
edit: I'm not at a machine that can run EVE right now, can someone tell me if any T1 ship selling in Jita has finally reached insurance fraud prices? Last I checked they were getting pretty damn close.
This has happened a few times in EVE history. Eventually the cost of the ships rise again due to the demand. Go figure.
|
Kepakh
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 07:15:00 -
[2266]
1) Moon income is supposedly getting spread over other moons. That means only what you mine is changing, the income will remain most likely the same. 2) People in 0.0 are already ratting, running sites and some say that they even mine. This will remain unchanged and you get improvement in form of space upgrades to do it more comfortably.
Will those changes improve 0.0 gameplay? Not really. Will it make the game better in future? Maybe. Could it be done better? Most likely. Is Dominion a fail? Of course it is.
No sky is falling(yet). |
Kayl Breinhar
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 07:15:00 -
[2267]
Originally by: Mkiaki Learn to grind Goons, it's what the rest of EVE has to do.
You've obviously never had to fuel a tower or 500+. We grind more than you. And thanks for the single-out so everyone knows you're just being a troll and not looking to add anything but a Nelson laugh from your jewgold-inlaid ivory tower in Motsu.
|
Korodan
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 07:16:00 -
[2268]
Originally by: Mkiaki Learn to grind Goons, it's what the rest of EVE has to do.
Ever have to haul POS fuel?
|
Ranger 1
Amarr Dynaverse Corporation Vertigo Coalition
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 07:17:00 -
[2269]
Edited by: Ranger 1 on 09/11/2009 07:22:18
Originally by: Aralis
Originally by: Ranger 1 Edited by: Ranger 1 on 09/11/2009 06:31:52
Originally by: Esplin YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
I don't suppose you have considered that while yes anomalies will be as profitable as level 4 missions, you will also have additional lucrative sources of income not readily available in high sec.
More lucrative, hidden belts might mean you will have to actually have some people on hand that know how to mine properly (and profitably). Repeated claiming that nobody mines in null sec because it isn't as profitable as ratting makes you look a bit... inept. Sorry.
Upgraded mini-profession sites (which admittedly could use some tweaking), high end complexes, and access to more and better Wormholes are all money makers that are either not readily available or will be rarer or of lower quality than in Empire space.
Of course there are still your high end moons, which while not as valuable as before are still a resource most often found in null sec (or at worst within easy range of null sec).
I don't think what we currently have proposed in Dominion is perfect yet, far from it. However singling out one of the several high end upgradeable revenue streams that will be available to you, and then quoting each other endlessly because because one of them is "merely" as profitable as the best monetary resource in the game is pretty short sighted.
Utterly irrelevant. You can only do one of these things at a time. Unlimited numbers of you could do level 4 missions. So at BEST you only need to count the best resource in 0.0.
I do get your point, but you missed mine I think. High sec has basically one highly lucrative income source, null sec will have several to choose from to match your taste. This is taking the amount of resources that you currently have spread across large tracts of space and concentrating them in a much smaller area. You have the same earnings potential as those people you have bitterly complained about in the past. And you will have this increased (over what you have now) earnings potential without the pain in the ass of having to spread out over countless systems to give everyone room to harvest them as you currently do.
Yes, Dominion was designed to siphon off some of the over abundance of non-participation requiring wealth that most null sec alliances have (this part is more directly pointed at those alliances that boast of their limitless income) and instead put more money making potential into the hands of the members (compared to what they have now). Lets face it, CCP would be foolish to make Dominion so lucrative that it causes more harm than good, and does nothing to reduce the over abundance of isk that makes its way into alliance leadership hands.
So equal financial footing, but with more risk. Lets face it, its the risk part of that equation that has the appeal for most people looking to get into (or already in) null sec. That is the price you pay for the unlimited pew pew that so many in this thread state is the main reason for them being there to begin with. You want the pew pew (and the freedom/ability to shape your space to match your vision of it), so you accept the risk... all financial issues are now on equal footing and therefore a non-issue.
Complaining that Dominion will force people to care bear, and then complaining that said care bearing isn't profitable enough is a bit much.
===== If you go to Za'Ha'Dum I will gank you. |
gambrinous
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 07:18:00 -
[2270]
Originally by: Scouty McScoutersen
Originally by: ep1k
Because its a terrible system that noone wants.
well ccp wants it because 1) it stops carebears from quitting and 2) makes pew pewers to get additional account for missioning it up. if this game has proven anything its that ppl will eat any amounts of **** to go the extra mile
well I can only speak for myself and the dozen or so that I personally know with alts, but neither me or any of them bought an extra account to run missions. It is mostly to help out (scout/haul/dual box) or train stuff you otherwise wouldn't on your main. Running missions is just an extra, and obvious, thing to do with it because it's lucrative, easy, and risk free - although mind numbingly boring)
|
|
Scouty McScoutersen
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 07:19:00 -
[2271]
Originally by: Ranger 1
Complaining that Dominion will force people to care bear, and then complaining that said care bearing isn't profitable enough is a bit much.
how is it a 'bit much', it's like the central problem with these changes are you a ****ing idiot?
|
Roemy Schneider
Vanishing Point.
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 07:20:00 -
[2272]
we could just ditch sov altogether, hand all stations over to NPC and seed them with agents - putting the gist back into logistics |
Gnulpie
Minmatar Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 07:21:00 -
[2273]
Let us assume that Dominion will indeed lure a lot more people into 0.0 (which not only I doubt pretty much). And let us assume that they will do all the new profession sites.
What happens then with the new and heavily increased supply? If there won't be a new demand then prices will crash totally.
As example: already we see a lot of the t2 salvage parts around 50k per piece and only a few really expensive at 10 mil - but those will crash in price also if the supply increases drastically. So the proposed good income will turn out to be worth nothing. Or is CCP planning to add some new demand to balance the increased supply?
Same with the high end ores. Yes sure you can add a bunch of them, easy to mine, but that again will crash the market - if all the idea behind Dominion comes true and lots more people go into 0.0 doing profitable stuff.
Or are you going to throw the concept of player driven markets away and introduce just tons of isk faucets from npc's? (You already started to do that with introducing the sleeper tags in wormholes - a major part of the profits from wormholes comes from those tags which are nothing but artificial isk faucets and shouldn't have any place in a player-driven economy.)
And these questions ARE important because people need to pay the fixed and completely artificial upkeep costs in isk. And it doesn't matter for that artificial upkeep system what the player driven economy is doing and if the original numbers are still met or not.
Actually I would go forth and say that such an artificial and fixed system is pretty much incompatible with a truely player driven economy and market.
Would be nice if CCP could point out their opinion about this (and please don't come with something like 'we will watch it closely and adjust it if necessary' because we all know how that goes in the long run. If you care to answer, give some real thoughts and answers and not just some nonsense, better don't answer at all then).
|
Korodan
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 07:27:00 -
[2274]
Originally by: Roemy Schneider we could just ditch sov altogether, hand all stations over to NPC and seed them with agents
This would be better then Dominion, true fact.
|
Tesal
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 07:28:00 -
[2275]
I don't think 0.0 needs to be equal to a level 4. I wouldn't want 0.0 to even work like a level 4. It just needs to get close to cash flow without high end moons. That way a corp can stay there without running out of isk. I think CCP should probably say the minimum corp size they are figuring, and show a path to cash flow, including all the major costs. If they can't do that, that is a problem.
If a corp can gut it out, they can start getting into cap ships, and get some high ends, and crappy nerfed high ends are still pretty decent. I also remind Goons especially that of the low sec high ends, those moons are abused to support the big 0.0 powers in addition to the 0.0 moons. Moons are a great isk fountain for a corp, but they are a terribly abused mechanic. This has been paying for their fuel and cyno jammers and cap fleets and ship replacement. Without those fat high ends, you are in a similar position cash wise even if the Sov part of the patch is delayed. so delaying the Sov portion of the patch will only forstall the abandoning of space.
Part of the pain of this patch is you figuring what you will do without enough isk from moons.
The Goon tears however make me believe this patch will work to break up entrenched powers.
never stop posting...with alts. Please do not use inappropriate language in your sig. Zymurgist |
Pointfive
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 07:32:00 -
[2276]
Originally by: Tesal I don't think 0.0 needs to be equal to a level 4. I wouldn't want 0.0 to even work like a level 4. It just needs to get close to cash flow without high end moons. That way a corp can stay there without running out of isk. I think CCP should probably say the minimum corp size they are figuring, and show a path to cash flow, including all the major costs. If they can't do that, that is a problem.
If a corp can gut it out, they can start getting into cap ships, and get some high ends, and crappy nerfed high ends are still pretty decent. I also remind Goons especially that of the low sec high ends, those moons are abused to support the big 0.0 powers in addition to the 0.0 moons. Moons are a great isk fountain for a corp, but they are a terribly abused mechanic. This has been paying for their fuel and cyno jammers and cap fleets and ship replacement. Without those fat high ends, you are in a similar position cash wise even if the Sov part of the patch is delayed. so delaying the Sov portion of the patch will only forstall the abandoning of space.
Part of the pain of this patch is you figuring what you will do without enough isk from moons.
The Goon tears however make me believe this patch will work to break up entrenched powers.
Noone in this thread has been complaining about moon goo. The main complaint is that personal income in null sec is crap now. And at best if you pay your huge montly sove bill, its equal to level 4s. That is the complaint. And if you think thats fine just go back to running your level 4s and dont bother yourself with null sec discussion.
|
Ranger 1
Amarr Dynaverse Corporation Vertigo Coalition
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 07:37:00 -
[2277]
Edited by: Ranger 1 on 09/11/2009 07:39:33
Originally by: Scouty McScoutersen
Originally by: Ranger 1
Complaining that Dominion will force people to care bear, and then complaining that said care bearing isn't profitable enough is a bit much.
how is it a 'bit much', it's like the central problem with these changes are you a ****ing idiot?
Relax my friend. The people that like to care bear in null sec will continue to do so and it will be more profitable than before. If not enough people are willing to do it because it interferes with their PVP habit, then smart alliances well bring in people that DO like to do it to keep things upgraded.
How can I put this to make more sense to you? How about this. You have people that say they are PVP only, and are upset because PVE will have more impact than it currently has. And yet those same people in their very next breath whine about how profitable their care bearing will be. There is more than a little irony in that, I'm sorry if you don't get it.
Then to increase the irony levels a bit more, those same people complain that they won't be making any more than level 4 mission runners (which these same people have bitterly condemned as making too much money in the past).
These people are going to have to make up their mind what is really important to them. Your income stream is now equal to the best empire has to offer (and more diverse) but... if you want unlimited pew pew, you have to accept the risk that it is going to occasionally interfere with your money making potential. ===== If you go to Za'Ha'Dum I will gank you. |
Aralis
Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 07:42:00 -
[2278]
There is no irony at all Ranger.
They don't want to carebear. If their carebearing income sucks it means they have to do it for longer. ANd they'd need to do it a lot to support these ridiculous sov mechanics.
And cost is just the obvious part of the problem. Only a few people like Gnulpie have really latched on to what is so wrong with this sov part of the patch.
|
Sarah Norbulk
Dawn of a new Empire The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 07:43:00 -
[2279]
Originally by: Ranger 1 Edited by: Ranger 1 on 09/11/2009 07:39:33
Originally by: Scouty McScoutersen
Originally by: Ranger 1
Complaining that Dominion will force people to care bear, and then complaining that said care bearing isn't profitable enough is a bit much.
how is it a 'bit much', it's like the central problem with these changes are you a ****ing idiot?
Relax my friend. The people that like to care bear in null sec will continue to do so and it will be more profitable than before. If not enough people are willing to do it because it interferes with their PVP habit, then smart alliances well bring in people that DO like to do it to keep things upgraded.
How can I put this to make more sense to you? How about this. You have people that say they are PVP only, and are upset because PVE will have more impact than it currently has. And yet those same people in their very next breath whine about how profitable their care bearing will be. There is more than a little irony in that, I'm sorry if you don't get it.
Then to increase the irony levels a bit more, those same people complain that they won't be making any more than level 4 mission runners (which these same people have bitterly condemned as making too much money in the past).
These people are going to have to make up their mind what is really important to them. Your income stream is now equal to the best empire has to offer (and more diverse) but... if you want unlimited pew pew, you have to accept the risk that it is going to occasionally interfere with your money making potential.
Why would anyone in their right mind pay for space that generates income to a mediocre mission runner in empire when there is so much more risk. It makes no sense.
YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
|
Scouty McScoutersen
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 07:44:00 -
[2280]
Edited by: Scouty McScoutersen on 09/11/2009 07:45:12
Originally by: Ranger 1
How can I put this to make more sense to you? How about this. You have people that say they are PVP only, and are upset because PVE will have more impact than it currently has. And yet those same people in their very next breath whine about how profitable their care bearing will be. There is more than a little irony in that, I'm sorry if you don't get it.
you do not understand what irony means and lack the mental faculties to process what most people in this thread are concerned about
hint: these changes will depopulate 0.0 and reduce the amount of pvp in the game
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 119 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |