|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18798
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 11:50:00 -
[1] - Quote
Yonis Zanjoahir wrote:You must be joking. The majority of illegal isk in EvE comes from nullsec, and null is where most isk sellers are based. How do you know this?
Quote:Null sov players aren't looking for small gang PvP GǪand how do you know this?
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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18798
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 12:16:00 -
[2] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:It's very simple. Ore != Isk. To buy the ore, the isk comes from somewhere else. Isk is only introduced when an NPC pays you for something. Instead because of the basic supply & demand, mining bots generate larger supply making for lower prices. In saying that, miners are doing better than they have for a while, but relative to T1 Ship prices, Miners income will always be static unless the yield is changed on the primary mining ships. Since T1 ships prices are directly related to mineral costs. I think he's getting at the fundamental illogic and hypocrisy in saying that one type of unchecked and rampant injection of wealth is somehow less damaging to the economy than another type of unchecked and rampant injection of wealth.
Just because an activity is deflationary rather than inflationary doesn't mean it's not hideously bad. It hits every equally regardless. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18798
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 12:27:00 -
[3] - Quote
Billy Hix wrote:Majority of the players in Eve are in High. What do you base this claim on?
Quote:Majority of those players are there because they don't want to play in 0.0/low/WH. If you force them to many will quit. GǪto say nothing of this claim.
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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18798
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 12:33:00 -
[4] - Quote
Arduemont wrote:Open up the star map and select "average players in space over 30 mins" or whatever it says. See where lights up the most. That's a fair indication, if nothing else. GǪbut it's not any actual or verifiable data.
Quote:I would have thought it went without saying that most Eve players spend more time in highsec than anywhere else. Many people do, but thinking it doesn't actually prove anything, and GÇ£go without sayingGÇ¥ is just a different way of saying GÇ£I have no idea and I don't want to find out.GÇ¥ 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18799
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 13:07:00 -
[5] - Quote
Billy Hix wrote:CCP released stats on it at fanfest a few years ago. Nope. They've never produced any data on where players are (largely because they don't have any such data themselves).
Quote:If you believe that high sec carebears who don't want to PvP will suddenly start Pvping because you want them to, then there is little hope for you. What I believe is that you haven't polled a representative sample of highsec players to have even the slightest idea what motivates and guides the decisions of a majority of them.
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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18799
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 13:55:00 -
[6] - Quote
Jowen Datloran wrote:The majority of bots I have seen have been operating in null and low sec. You probably haven't been looking very closely, since last we heard, a majority of them are in highsec. Hell, 55% of them were in Caldari space alone GÇö three highsec regions in and of themselves accounted for more than half the botsGǪ 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18800
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 14:22:00 -
[7] - Quote
Arduemont wrote:It's not accurate, no. Not even slightly. It's probably not generalizable either.* But it is data, and it is verifiable. Can we pull data off the map? Yes. Highlight to get the average as a number. Alternatively we could measure the diameter of the spheres that represent the averages, or measure the density of the colors associated with the averages using an image editing tool. So data, check. Can we repeat this to verify it? Yes. As long as one person explains their method sufficiently, anyone can do the same. GǪbut it's not actually measuring what we're interested in. It has to be transposed into something completely different, which means it all hinges on random guessworks about the correlations between what we have and what we want. That makes it unverifiable and not actual data GÇö it's just random guesswork, because that's what the GÇ£dataGÇ¥ creation method consits of. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18832
|
Posted - 2014.01.10 07:29:00 -
[8] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:And said economist made comments in latest CSM minutes. Well worth reading since they disprove any kind of 'inflation' theory anyway. The fact that there isn't inflation right now does not GÇ£disproveGÇ¥ the theory. In fact, it rather highlights the reason why it is a valid and relevant way of tracking the economy. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18840
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 10:43:00 -
[9] - Quote
TharOkha wrote:Malcanis wrote:Wrecking hi-sec won't fix nullsec.
Hi-sec needs some rebalancing in areas like industry, but the aim of any change to a game should be to make it better not worse. And whats wrong with hisec industry.? i though that nullsec industry is borked and need serious buff.. Highsec industry provide far too high a benchmark for there to be any margin left where nullsec (or even lowsec) industry can be better enough to compensate for all the additional costs of null industry. This means there is not enough to simply buff your way out of the problem without completely breaking the game.
Buffing only works if it actually makes something comparatively better. It is not really possible to make it better than free, infinitely available, safe, and without any logistical or maintenance costs, which is what highsec offers. So in order to even be able to make null better, the alternative has to become worse first. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18840
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 10:55:00 -
[10] - Quote
TharOkha wrote:Although i agree that hisec manufacturing costs should be higher than manufacturing costs in player owned outposts (so nullsec industrials could compensate higher isk costs for transportation and logistics), i dont understand why do you want to reduce manufacturng slots in hisec... Its overcrowded here already. Because there are already far more slots in highsec than it needs so there is never really any reason to move outside it. You might have to wait a day or so if you absolutely positively have to do your industry a jump away from a trade hub, but there is absolutely no overcrowding.
Reducing the manufacturing slots means that people will have to start finding alternative solutions GÇö doing the work GÇ£at homeGÇ¥ being one of them GÇö and it also means that there is better parity between outposts and stations.
In fact, reduced NPC production slots could make it less crowded if everything is done right: those with access to superior production facilities in null will use those and stop crowding highsec, leaving the reduced NPC production slots near-empty to those who can't or won't move away. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18840
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 11:30:00 -
[11] - Quote
Hasikan Miallok wrote:Essentially the OP is a bit like Nixon saying back in the '70s "... if we eliminate California all those d@mn hippies will have to give up this peace and Love nonsense and will all see the error of thir ways and join the army and go fight in 'nam" . In reality they would have just all moved to Portland. GǪexcept that in this case, making them move to Portland is the whole point.
It has nothing to do with uprooting or displacing the GÇ£solo industrialist typeGÇ¥ but about making the nullsec player who's (inevitably) doing his industry in high move that production out to null as well. He has no problems living there GÇö in fact, he already does GÇö but he is mechanically and systematically forced to do his industry somewhere else because of the massive benefits it provides. If those benefits are removed, there will no longer be any reason for him to be in higshsec. This leaves the field open to those who do have a problem with living outside of highsec.
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Think about what you are saying:
CCP > Botting is against the rules. CCP > We know where the botters are. The botting continues. Botters gonna bot. And they know where the botters are because they keep finding them. They keep finding them because they keep reappearing. It's hardly rocket surgery and it definitely isn't a non sequitur.
As for the rest, just watch the presentation. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18840
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 11:49:00 -
[12] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:So hundreds of 50% time bonuses slots possible in a single Null outpost aren't considered an advantage? Not compared to what you get for free elsewhere, no.
Quote:I'm sorry, but the 'High sec has more slots' argument is now patently false. Please provide an outpost build that offers: GÇó 50 copy slots GÇó 100 ME research slots GÇó 100 PE research slots GÇó 750 manufacturing slots GÇó 100 invention slots GÇó 528 offices GÇó 100% refinery.
GǪall with no investment cost, no upkeep, no risk of loss, no transport costs, all materials available in massive quantities 5 jumps away, and no security costs. You can't. The mechanics don't allow for it. So no, any claim that null can provide more slots is nothing short of clueless.
Quote:And..... the last question. Why is it bad that high sec is the best at one thing? Because it removes all incentive to do that activity elsewhere, even though it is supposed to be a viable GÇö even desirable GÇö option. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18840
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 12:09:00 -
[13] - Quote
TharOkha wrote:Sorry Tippia, most of the time i agree with most of your posts but this is nothing less than "if you want to manufacture, join nullsec or go F.. yourself". Don't be sorry, just admit you haven't actually read my posts.
Quote:Maybe i have expressed wrong myself with that "overcrowded" slots.. Yes i meant that there are overcrowded near trade hubs.. GǪso it's pretty meaningless and is not a reason to balance out the availability of slots.
Quote:But the reduction of MS in hisec would mean significant discrimination for people playing on prime time (most of the slots would be occupied near or in trade hubs) while those playing on out time (sorry i dont know opposite English word for primetime) would have significant advantage as MS would be not so occupied. A reduction of slots in highsec wouldn't create any discrimination at all. It would just make it so that it's useful to move to where the slots are available. If you live in null, that will be in null. If you live in high, it will be in high. If you live in w-spaceGǪ well, POSes are a whole different kettle of fish.
Prime time is not a factor since you can just queue the jobs up at your leisure and since they can, will, and do at all hours of the day. Reducing the number of slots is of critical importance in order to make them less viable an option compared to other alternatives. As it is right now, they are effectively infinite GÇö that is far too many.
Yes, you also have to increase the costs, but one without the other will have no real effect. One is to make it necessary to spread out; the other is to also make it a good idea to do so. If it's necessary but a bad idea, it's just a bad idea writ large. If it's a bad idea but unnecessary, it will have no effect, as unnecessary things often do.
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Please provide me a single station which has that also Tippia. Nonni. It's not about the station, but about the system. Until you can place multiple outposts in the same system, we do it by a system-to-system basis.
SoGǪ can you please provide me with an outpost build that offers all of that? If you can't, what you say is not patently false GÇö but forcibly patently false because the mechanics simply don't allow your ignorant claim to be true. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18840
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 12:45:00 -
[14] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Then you are arguing for a specific system to be nerfed Tippia. Not high sec in general, since high sec in general does not have anything remotely close to your claims. No, I'm arguing for making all of highsec offer less GÇö that one system being able to provide more production than an entire region is just an example of how bad the imbalance is.
Trying to claim that it's GÇ£patently falseGÇ¥ that highsec has a massive slot advantage when there's no way to make a fully upgraded nullsec system come even within a fraction of what a single highsec system can provide is thoroughly disingenuous. And we haven't even begun talking about what it takes to actually create such an outpost.
Now, you realise, of course, that your argument about empty or low-equipped systems holds just as true for nullsec right? So even if we were talking about averages, it wouldn't change a thing: highsec offers for free many times more than null could ever do even at vast expense.
If you want numbers, how about this: highsec as a whole offers (for free) 2,890 copy slots, 5,780 ME slots, 5,780 PE slots, 68,050 production slots, and (curiously enough) 5,800 invention slots. Want to take a stab at guessing how many null GÇö which is three times larger GÇö providesGǪ?
Quote:Except you aren't punished any more. GǪaside from being mechanically restricted to low-number/low-efficiency/low-capacity/high-cost/high-risk slots for no good reason.
Quote:Someone else has something EQUAL and you scream. Ah, I see your point of confusion now. You think baltec represents the GÇ£highsec must not be balancedGÇ¥ cabal. No, he's just asking for equality (at leastGǪ preferably something that actually rewards risk-taking and large-scale investments). 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18841
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 12:47:00 -
[15] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Probably was true sometime back Shirley, but Null industry received HUGE buffs less than a year ago, and most of them are still talking pre buff for their arguments. By GÇ£huge buffsGÇ¥, you're talking about slightly improved local access to minerals and a small but rather meaningless increase in the slots provided by specialised outposts GÇö increases that still were an order of magnitude too small and which did not affect any of the deep-seated imbalances. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18841
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 13:01:00 -
[16] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:The average high sec system does not have 700 slots, or even close to that. While a single Null outpost can have several hundred slots now with 50% time bonuses to certain types of construction. Meaning it is very possible for Null to far exceed the overall industrial capacity if they choose to build the outposts. No, they really can't because you can only push the outpost in one direction for every outpost and since even if you do that, the total is still less than what a highsec industry system can offer, and since the combinations of upgrades required to make a NPC-station equivalent aren't even allowed on the same outpost.
But sure, let's not compare to Nonni. Could you build me the best industry outpost imaginable. It obviously needs a 50% refinery, as many manufacturing slots as possible, and preferably a whole bunch of research slots as well.
Quote:Capital investment is a one off cost which is done for more than just industrialists, making it very hard to assign an actual industry cost to it. Additionally as time approaches lots, capital investment cost = 0. GǪwhich is hellalot worse than having the cost = 0 from the very instant you start.
Quote:Shipping costs apply to high sec also since most High end minerals are imported to High sec, as is all moon goo/products and most PI products. Shipping costs only apply between the point of acquisition (a trade hub for both high and nullsec) and the point of production. Someone else has already shipped it to where you acquire it, and that cost is equal for everyone.
Quote:Additionally since the facilities have a time bonus, for a single industrialist the null facilities are better, since they produce up to twice the goods in the same time as a matching high sec industrialist. A time bonus is just a slot number multiplier, and the single industrialist is irrelevant here: we're talking about what the entire population can do. If that single industrialist bogarts the slots, his corpmate is left without so the facility is actually much worseGǪ 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18841
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 13:25:00 -
[17] - Quote
TharOkha wrote:Yes prime time would be a significant factor. No, it really isn't. Manufacturing is entirely asynchronous to your time online. You can queue up to get it started whenever everyone else would get their jobs started; yours and their jobs end whenever they end, at which point someone else can start using the slot.
If the people online at prime time find stations full of empty slots, it's because everyone else have not filled up those slots when they were online. The prime time players are subject to the exact same queues and availability as everyone else. Just because they're online at any given time does not mean the slots are automatically and magically available to them.
Quote:Yes, but while one is literally forcing to people to spread (or move to null), the other one is giving them a choice to rethink if it is viable to manufacture in tradehubs or move to more distant MS but with a lot cheaper manufacturing costs. GǪexcept I'm not talking about distance-based fees GÇö just flat ones, and letting the queues do the work.
Nevyn Auscent wrote:So, assuming you can only do 1 upgrade of each level and not both manufacturing upgrades.....
You can only have..... 170*2 = 340 slots in a single system. If that is only a tiny fraction of what is needed. GǪthen it's not particularly strange. That's 34 characters worth of slots, which is a fairly small group of manufacturers (and even smaller amount of actual people). And that's with all manufacturing GÇö you have now created a huge problem with materials and blueprint logistics and you still have something that is strictly inferior to what highsec offers (before we have even started to look at costs and labour and security).
Quote:But tweaks aren't a whole-scale slaughter nerf of highsec. GǪwhich no-one has ever suggested. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18841
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 13:41:00 -
[18] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Except everyone who has been suggesting that Tippea. Nope. Just balance. If you believe that balancing high and null would require a slaughter of high, then you have to admit that it is immensely imbalanced right nowGǪ
Quote:340 slots is also more than the high sec average per system by quite a bit. Not for the industry systems, no. It just means it is a decent industry system GÇö one that people will actually do industry stuff in. A dedicated manufacturing system in null should be able to beat that twice over and easily be on par with the best highsec system, and also offer all the other benefits that a decent highsec system offers for this profession, which it currently can't.
And, once again, that's just the massive deficit in slots GÇö the stuff that actually makes them worthwhile is still missing. The slot deficit is just a small part of the problem and could be increased to high heaven without making things much better overall. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18841
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 23:26:00 -
[19] - Quote
Kimmi Chan wrote:And what of the new player who decides they'd like to be an industrialist? They can build slowly using the fewer but less valuable NPC slots that serious industrialists will long since have abandoned.
Quote:But arbitrarily eliminating slots in HS handicaps a new player significantly does it not? If it's done in isolation, sure. But it's not meant to be done in isolation, but rather as a part of a galaxy-wide alteration ofGǪ ohGǪ pretty much everything industry-related.
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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18842
|
Posted - 2014.01.12 00:56:00 -
[20] - Quote
Kimmi Chan wrote:Abandoned for what? Null sec? Don't you kind of need to buff null sec (again) to get all the "real" industrialists to go there? GǪwhich is why it's not something that can happen in isolation, and which is why the Gǣonoz, mah highsec!!Gǥ cries of fear and outrage tend to make themselves irrelevant since they've chosen to miss a huge part of the conversation.
For instanceGǪYonis Kador wrote:You cannot force risk-averse averse players to become risk-takers by starving them. No-one is suggesting anything along those lines either. Rather, the idea is to give the risk-takers something worth-while to actually put their stuff at risk for and to stop forcing them to play in the risk-free zone. The risk-averse can keep doing what they're doing, but they'll have to compensate for that safety somehow, most likely by increased costs and/or reduced capacity. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18842
|
Posted - 2014.01.12 01:01:00 -
[21] - Quote
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:And this is why these threads cannot be taken seriously. They're full of so much political pork (hatred, disdain, self-entitlement, animosity) towards a play style they don't approve of that it's hard to distinguish "the problem" (if there really is one) from the wishful systemic purging of hi sec players/carebears/PVE'ers. You have lots of examples of the latter to show, then, since it's apparently so commonGǪ? 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19156
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 01:18:00 -
[22] - Quote
ashley Eoner wrote:Because they just spent +120 pages complaining about how highsec has it so much better because of SOE missions. No. They spend 120+ pages complaining about how highsec has it so much better in one specific, and obligatory area that they'd all prefer to avoid if it weren't unavoidable in order to do the things they would like to do.
Quote:Why not just embrace the option then because clearly null has no rewards worthy of fighting for when it's obvious 130 pages later that highsec is the bestest place. Because no-one has actually claimed that. That's just an association fallacy on your part.
Quote:So just leave null then. Since it's so terrible and worthless. That would get CCP's attention. They already have. Didn't you get that part? 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19156
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 01:23:00 -
[23] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:ashley Eoner wrote:You're telling me that with all the sources of income including the mighty goo and rentals that all of Goonswarm relies solely on anom runners and ratters to fund their war machine?
Really?
So why are you in null then? Moon goo and rental income is alliance level income not individual pilot income. Also, should we bring up the fact that moon mining is about on part with (highsec) ice mining again? 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19157
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 01:39:00 -
[24] - Quote
ashley Eoner wrote:EXCEPt the "RISK VS REWARD" chant that has appeared several times in this thread ignores all the rewards except for mission running. No, they really don't, and no, that's not an exception to what I just said.
Again, if they could, they'd live 100% in null GÇö earning and wasting money there. As it is currently set up, that's a hugely stupid idea since the effort (short-handed GÇ£riskGÇ¥) required to get to the fun part is massively increased compared to if you just did the obligatory parts in highsec.
You are making the ridiculously idiotic assumption that just because one particular reward GÇö which isn't actually a reward in and of itself by rather an intermediary mechanism for reaching the actual rewards GÇö is better in highsec, everything is better in high so they should GÇ£obviouslyGÇ¥ want to be there. You're ignoring the fact that it's just intermediary; you're ignoring the fact that the actual rewards are not worth both the risks associated with the rewards themselves and the risks associated with the intermediary; and you're ignoring the fact that the intermediary is currently obligatory.
So why on earth would they want to completely move to highsec when it doesn't offer the actual rewards, when the problem is with the intermediary they'd rather avoid altogether and the completely lopsided risk-reward relationship this mandatory part has?
Quote:So clearly since the only reward that matters is on an individual personal financial level then there's no reason to stay in null. GǪexcept that this is just some nonsensical strawman you've invented out of intellectual dishonesty because you're too lazy to figure out what the actual reward structures are that people are talking about.
Quote:That's funny I still see SOV showing something else. Actually, the funny part is that sov doesn't show that in any way, so you're obviously just making things up. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19160
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 01:56:00 -
[25] - Quote
ashley Eoner wrote:I'm glad you finally see my point So you agree that risk vs. reward is a perfectly reasonable approach to balance and that the current setup is obviously hideously broken since it doesn't adhere to that kind of progression?
Because that's the point I see.
Quote:I said why don't you leave and you claimed you did which isn't true. How do you know? After all, there's no official source of data on the topic. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19160
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 02:03:00 -
[26] - Quote
PotatoOverdose wrote:I don't think nerfing hisec will solve anything. It solves the problem of highsec providing a far too high baseline to allow other areas to offer a good progression of investment and return without resorting to near-gamebreaking reward structures.
Quote:These people won't move to null to become renters, fleet members, or targets. It won't happen. Nerfing hisec will alienate these people, nothing more. That's just it: how would it alienate them? They're not being pushed anywhere. Rather, a highsec nerf (to allow for a low/null buff) is there to make it a much more sensible option for those who do want to leave to actually do so.
As it happens, this will in many cases benefit those left in high since they will have better access to facilities and less competition over their resources and goods. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19162
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 02:12:00 -
[27] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:The Null brigade are delusional and don't believe the CCP figures that already show their gross income (Including LP contrary to what they all claim) is four times high secs per capita on a monthly basis. Source? 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19164
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 02:34:00 -
[28] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Already posted the figures ages ago with full references, you denied them despite them being the ONLY CCP FIGURES REFERENCED in this entire thread, all your argument is based on pretend figures that have been deliberately biased on the rare occasions they have actually been posted rather than 'Oh we have the figures'. And pretended that they didn't show a thing. They didn't show a thing. They were listing faucets and sinks with no distinction between areas. Ok, so 72% of the bounty faucet was came from nullsec. So what? That tells us pretty much nothing about incomes.
Quote:The gross figures are the figures that matter, not the individual, because the gross figures show what is sustainable across the whole population rather than mythical single person income figures that aren't sustainable when done large scale. GǪexcept that there are no gross figures to begin with GÇö just faucets and sinks GÇö and that they don't say anything about sustainability, just current usage. It's particularly dishonest to try to transform it into a measure of GÇ£sustainableGÇ¥ when you have a wild mix of infinitely dynamic and expandable and strictly limited and contested sources of income.
Oh, and individual figures matter a lot because those are the ones that determine and/or reflect individual behaviour. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19165
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 07:19:00 -
[29] - Quote
Also, when comparing missions to anomalies, please remember the scalability of the two.
For missions, adding 5+ù people to the system increases the wealth output by a factor of five GÇö everyone earns the same. For anomalies, adding 5+ù people to the system decreases everyone's earnings by a factor of five. Same goes for rated sites.
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:Why do you think people would want to waste their time with your data? Your credibility is exactly zero. As luck would have it, credibility is not a factor unless you're going for an ad hominem fallacy.
You're not employing fallacious arguments, are you? Oh waitGǪ
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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19165
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 07:41:00 -
[30] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:Tippia wrote:For missions, adding 5+ù people to the system increases the wealth output by a factor of five GÇö everyone earns the same. For anomalies, adding 5+ù people to the system decreases everyone's earnings by a factor of five. Same goes for rated sites Only if the number of people in system was already equal to the number of anomalies spawning. Fair enough. Now add another 5+ù people to the mission system and another 5+ù to the anomaly system. Then do it agan.
You're smart enough to know that I'm getting at the fact that availability and scalability varies between the two mechanisms and will matter a fair bit for how much the individual can get out of any given system. I'm sure you can get a lot out of a single nullsec systemGǪ but that's just you, and your 50 buddies have to stay away. Or they could just all fit into a single mission system since it is infinitely scaleable (wellGǪ GêP - TiDi). 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19165
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 08:16:00 -
[31] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:No one cares how the various pilots feel about the payout. They should, since that's what drives behaviour.
GǪnot to mention the fact that the feeling is correct. The problem is that the GÇ£oh but you can earn more from [null activity x]GÇ¥ crowd has a tendency to ignorantly apply a mission-request logic to the availability of that earning potential and thus feel (incorrectly this time) that it must mean that those who are saying it's not enough are somehow wrong. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19165
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 08:43:00 -
[32] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Work, Family, Sleep, Eve. Pick three. Three? Weakling. Just pick EVE.
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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19178
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 00:37:00 -
[33] - Quote
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:As luck would have it No, E-2C, your inability to post anything that doesn't hinge on ad hominems is not lucky at all.
Here's an ide: try reading my posts and responding to them, and you'll notice that I'm saying things. I understand that you are terminally unable to actually provide anything that would even remotely resemble a counter-argument since you can't actually argue for the life of you, but at least stop lying. It's dishonest and ugly.
Basil Pupkin wrote:Can you nerf hisec any further? GÇ£FurtherGÇ¥? How has it been nerfed so far?
Quote:I think no - it is a lot less safe than null as it is You realise, of course, that more stuff is lost in null than in highsec, per your own sourceGǪ right? 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19178
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 00:45:00 -
[34] - Quote
Basil Pupkin wrote:I don't like repeating myself on obvious things, but:
a) Autopilot or not does not matter for freighters: they get bumped off trying to warp away from the gate, which is the same for both autopiloted and manual piloted freighters. Because gankers, unless they're as bright as you are, assume the best haul won't be autopiloted.
b) The main goal of gankers were not freighters, but T1 industrials - they can be ganked solo and pay 50:1 to 100:1 rates on gank gain-loss ratio. Freighters, even hauling 10b worth of stuff, are about 10:1 to the cost and require effort to bring down, not to mention risk, which is something a ganker would never take, being the most risk-averse player of eve.
c) Mission hub ganking also happen mostly when target is bumped from station upon undocking. Last time I checked, dscan doesn't help much against that. The other form of the gank were a loophole with drone aggro and tractor units, in which case dscan weren't much help either. So what you're saying that it's even worse than what Benny is suggesting? After all, the deaths you describe are even easier to avoid than what he's suggesting, and yet (apparently) people are dying in droves from themGǪ
So yeah. The GÇ£idiotsGÇ¥ part still stands and is hardly a new revelation, nor is it a revelation that popular ganking systems generate more kills over a year than a single fight. I suppose it's a revelation to some that their nonsense about null being safer than highsec is soundly disproven by the statistics, though.
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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19178
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 01:00:00 -
[35] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:the chart is measured in isk! Poteito potahto. It a not really a revelation that popular ganking systems generate more lost ISK over a year than a single fight. However, if you want to measure risk in ISK, I suppose it's a revelation to some that their nonsense about null being safer than highsec is soundly disproven by the statistics.
Better? 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19178
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 01:05:00 -
[36] - Quote
Basil Pupkin wrote:Those deaths are NOT easy to avoid. Yes they are.
Don't fill up your freighter with valuables, use web-slinging. Don't use T1 industrials for anything with a high value density. If they're waiting for you on the undock, dock back up.
Quote:People die not because they trip and break their neck True enough. That would suggest mere accident or clumsiness. What you're suggesting is that they died of pure idiocy, which is actually much worse than the mere laziness that Benny was suggesting.
Quote:This is why it is obvious and now statistically proven that: a) While considerable part of hisec is safe, so is considerable part of nullsec. b) Money-making in nullsec is safe. Money-making in hisec is 20% less safe than a warzone in nullsec. How is this in any way statistically proven? 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19178
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 01:32:00 -
[37] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Someone(tm) could create a googledoc spreadsheet, make it editable by anyone with the link, and let trust people to update the pros/cons in a constructive manner that everyone can reference? Aren't you being very na+»ve now? 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19178
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 01:49:00 -
[38] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Tippia wrote:stoicfaux wrote:Someone(tm) could create a googledoc spreadsheet, make it editable by anyone with the link, and let trust people to update the pros/cons in a constructive manner that everyone can reference? Aren't you being very na+»ve now? Last I checked, some of the better strategies for iterative Prisoner's Dilemma include forgiveness (i.e. trust) once in a while. Yes, but iterative Prisoner's Dilemma is perhaps not the best model for people who seem to want to murder the other guy for [reasons]. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19178
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 02:12:00 -
[39] - Quote
Basil Pupkin wrote:1. Hauling in nullsec is uber-safe and doesn't suffer from ship travel speed limitations, because it doesn't require hauler to use gates. At worst, it would be cyno alt. Normally, something super lame like jump bridges. Freighters and Orcas can't mwd cloack. Others can't haul and/or tank half as much. Using jump bridges to transport goods is a good way of losing those goods. Orcas can use MWD-cloak just fine GÇö any Orca that doesn't warp in 10s is improperly fitted. Freighters can be made to insta-warp if you baby-sit them.
Quote:2. Agreement taken, however, proposed counter-gank measures have very limited efficiency. People using them have something approaching a 0% loss rate. How is that GÇ£limited efficiencyGÇ¥?
Quote:npc null is basically a lowsec from my point of view. So you're wilfully ignoring the significant differences in how easy it is to catch and kill something in null compared to lowGǪ and you want people to take your claims seriously after this?
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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19178
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 02:31:00 -
[40] - Quote
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:Here is where I will need to tinfoil for a few lines. Its just not blind hate or envy that motivates you to keep generating bogus non-credible or regulated data in a poor attempt to spin your not so hidden agenda as master of propaganda.
The goonies are on a crusade to get Hi-sec nerfedGǪ.WHY? No, the question is not GǣwhyGǥ, it's Gǣare they?Gǥ
Quote:The obvious thing they hope you wont see (besides the bogus data of the so called scientific testing) is the that the most recent nerf from CCP to null wasnGÇÖt random. CCP doesnGÇÖt need to pretend to run bogus test they just look at the numbers generated as a whole from null sec, not what one individual can or cant do with xyz ship using abc modules with xxxx skill points. What's bogus about the data and testing? Also, everyone knows why CCP nerfed null. The thing is that their stated reasons for the nerf did not match their own data, and that the changes they then implemented made the nerf pointless even for the stated reasons.
Quote:I hope you guys donGÇÖt really think you have the skill or knowledge required to produce viable data by running different sites and think this will show where more isk can be made? Why wouldn't that be possible? 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19178
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 03:05:00 -
[41] - Quote
Basil Pupkin wrote:You know it is only because there are easier targets not using them. GǪthe difference between an GǣeasyGǣ and a GǣhardGǥ target being the use itself. So how is that Gǣlimited efficiencyGǥ? And no, I don't know that. How do you know that?
Do you have an actual counter-argument to offer? Or do you want to concede that I'm right? 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19178
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 03:32:00 -
[42] - Quote
Basil Pupkin wrote:Both targets are easy, one super easy and one simply easy. How is a target that will not present itself GÇ£easyGÇ¥? How is making it impossible to kill you (because the opportunity never arises) GÇ£limited efficiencyGÇ¥?
Quote:I don't have to offer a counter-argument Not if you agree with me, no, since I don't expect you to argue against your own belief. So I can safely assume that you agree with me then, since you not only can't, but outright refuse to offer a counter-argument, and I can't see any other reason for that approach.
GǪor, ok, GÇ£agreeGÇ¥ might be a bit strong GÇö you know I'm right, whether you agree with the state of affairs or not. That would be the only other conceivable reason. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19178
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 04:27:00 -
[43] - Quote
Basil Pupkin wrote:because it's not impossible Right. You are not in the same system as me. How do you propose to kill me? We are in the same system. I cannot be found. How do you propose to kill me? We are in the same system. I am not in space. How do you propose to kill me? We are in the same systen. I cannot be targeted or hurt by any attacks. How do you propose to kill me?
Quote:You know you're wrong About what?
Ok. So you're wilfully ignoring the significant differences in how easy it is to catch and kill something in null compared to lowGǪ and you want people to take your claims seriously after this? Also, you are aware that appealing to the non-existent Gǣblue donutGǥ just makes them seem even less informed, I hope.
Care to respond? Do you or do you not understand the differences between null and lowsec? Do you or do you not believe in the GÇ£blue donutGÇ¥ myth? Do you think that being ignorant of the first and fooled by the other will strengthen or weaken the believability of your claims?
You were completely defeated by these simple questions the first time and couldn't respond because you agree with me or at least know that I'm right and don't want to admit it. Instead, you tried and failed to inject a red herring. This time, try an actual counter-argument if you disagree or just admit that you don't. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19178
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 04:45:00 -
[44] - Quote
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:No since I wrote the statement I ame sure it says they are and then it ask WHY. The question of why is predicated on the assumption that they are. So the question is GÇ£are they?GÇ¥
Do you have anything to support the claim that they are, or are you just making baseless assumptions?
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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19178
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 04:48:00 -
[45] - Quote
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:Are you asking whats bogus about the data and testing besides the hidden agenda of the tester? or whats bogus about the testing and data besides the testers lack of credibility? or the lack of measurable control testing parameters? or besides the lack of (insert any testing standard name here) methods? or one of the many other specific lack of that was mentioned in previous post? or was it something less specific you were looking for as to why the testing and data from an obvious biased individual may be considered erroneous? No, I'm asking you what's bogus about the data and testing.
You're enumerating a bunch of unproven or irrelevant guff that does not demonstrate any bogosity withe either of them. If the data and method is as incorrect as you claim, you should have absolutely no problem whatsoever to disprove and falsify them, without ever needing to resort to any mention whatsoever of who's providing or performing them. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19178
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 04:55:00 -
[46] - Quote
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:The proof is in their posting that they provided, it removes any and all assumptions. It also removes any association with the goons since all there is is a couple of individuals GÇö in and outside of that group GÇö that are saying this and since most goons seem to not be involved at all.
SoGǪ are they?
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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19178
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 05:01:00 -
[47] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:The only testing that matters was done by CCP. Substitute GÇ£was doneGÇ¥ with GÇ£can be doneGÇ¥ since there's very little to suggest that they've done any testing at all.
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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19178
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 05:12:00 -
[48] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:Tippia wrote:Substitute GÇ£was doneGÇ¥ with GÇ£can be doneGÇ¥ since there's very little to suggest that they've done any testing at all. The ego. If they tested anything as opposed to just run a simple SUM() SQL query, they'd be able to provide far more detailed data on the matter, which they've never really done.
Actually, they did provide some normalised values once back when Diagoras did his daily tweets, but that's about as close as it gets. It's not a matter of ego, but of history. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19178
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 05:20:00 -
[49] - Quote
Basil Pupkin wrote:Not giving an argument, but calling yourself "generically right" based on no arguments provided is just a way of saying "sorry, i know you're right, but I just want attention". GǪand that's how I conclude that you actually agree with me: because you can't provide an argument and because you make baseless claims about what's true and what isn't.
SoGǪ would you like to actually prove that you're not just out for the attention? Here are some questions that you could answer to that end:
You are not in the same system as me. How do you propose to kill me? We are in the same system. I cannot be found. How do you propose to kill me? We are in the same system. I am not in space. How do you propose to kill me? We are in the same systen. I cannot be targeted or hurt by any attacks. How do you propose to kill me? What am I wrong about (and how)? Do you or do you not understand the differences between null and lowsec? Do you or do you not believe in the GÇ£blue donutGÇ¥ myth? Do you think that an argument from ignorance strengthens or weakens the believability of your claims? 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19179
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 05:35:00 -
[50] - Quote
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:And I answered....and here comes the usual tipia reply of I dont like the answers so I will pretend they didn't answer my question routine and I will keep doing it over and over again till it gets the thread locked...just like you have done in all the other threads you get locked. All zero of them?
I'm being very specific in my question, and no, you're not answering them. You're just going off on a standard fallacy parade that doesn't disprove or falsify any of the data you claim is bogus. You keep accusing people of all kinds of bias, without showing a) that the bias actually exists, or b) that what bias there might be in any way affects the data and methodology. You just claim that it does and get angry when I ask you how.
Quote:The answer is there its very specific....LMAO at the bold text...A PRIME example of you using text books words to say absolutely nothing like the majority of you post. Do you want me to explain what I'm saying in that part? Because it's not nothingGǪ
Quote:To dumb it down...consider the source. No. Consider the data and methodology instead. How is the data and testing bogus? 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19179
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 05:38:00 -
[51] - Quote
Basil Pupkin wrote:I already provided mine. No, you called them GÇ£nonsenseGÇ¥, a claim you couldn't provide any support for. That is not an argument GÇö it's an evasion and an attempt to shift the burden of proof.
Prove it.
You are not in the same system as me. How do you propose to kill me? We are in the same system. I cannot be found. How do you propose to kill me? We are in the same system. I am not in space. How do you propose to kill me? We are in the same systen. I cannot be targeted or hurt by any attacks. How do you propose to kill me? What am I wrong about (and how)?
Quote:There are no differences between low and null, except you can't plant your pesky cyno jammers and bridges Incorrect on both counts. There are difference and those are not the only exceptions. So your answer to the question is GÇ£no, you don't understand the differencesGÇ¥. Do you think that this ignorance strengthens and weakens the believability of your claims?
Also, do you or do you not believe in the GÇ£blue donutGÇ¥ myth? 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19179
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 06:04:00 -
[52] - Quote
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:I can say the words and provide the answers to your questions but I cant make you comprehend them. This rouse is not a new one for you tipia...it predictable and old hat.
You walk this same path ever time you put yourself in the position of being wrong but as luck would have it your Narcissistic personality cant allow you to acknowledge or even admit it.
I dont feel there is anything else I could clarify as to why the so called testing is meaningless or as to why testing procedures would be biased or flawed.
Continuing to argue with you special Olympic Olympians will only make you more special. So it's back to the ad hominems then, when pressed to actually prove the baseless claims you make. Some day, you need to understand that the whole point of fallacies is that they're not actual arguments.
Again, you keep accusing people of all kinds of bias, without showing a) that the bias actually exists, or b) that what bias there might be in any way affects the data and methodology. You just claim that it does and get angry when I ask you how.
How is the data and testing bogus? 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19179
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 06:27:00 -
[53] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:As for Tippia, stop talking rubbish. You know people are biased, and it's been explained dozens of times in this thread why various peoples testing methodologies have been biased, misleading or flat out terrible. Including in response to you several times. GǪwhich should make it easy for him to answer the question, and yet he can't without taking the all-fallacy route.
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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19202
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 20:24:00 -
[54] - Quote
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:To answer the question of the OP...what would happen if CCP nerfed hi-sec. Goonies would get precisely what they are campaining for. What makes you think that GÇ£GooniesGÇ¥ are campaigning for it, especially considering how few goons are expressing any opinion at all?
And even if they do, so what?
Pinky Hops wrote:Most people I know would much rather see the sov system become fixed, rather than some lame/pathetic attempt to "balance" highsec with nullsec. Categorical thinking is bad for you. Most people you know would much rather see the sov system being fixed and an almost equally important attempt at balancing highsec with nullsec. After all, just like some idiots keep crowing about how nullseccers want to force everyone into null, the reality of the situation is that the current system forces everyone into highsec and what the nullseccers actually want is simply to not be forced that wayGǪ
So La Nariz is actually wrong about one thing: there are people who are telling you how to play the game and what play styles are valid. They're pretty much exclusively highseccers who can't separate GÇ£nullseccers don't want to be mechanically forced into highGÇ¥ with GÇ£nullseccers want to mecahnically force everyone out of highGÇ¥. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19204
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 20:54:00 -
[55] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:Quote:Only that an imbalance is impacting nullsec play styles and that we want it fixed. There is no support here. GǪother than the history of player activity patterns from dominion and onwards, where anomalies became hugely popular but broke the game because you can't Gǣjust buff nullGǥ; where people moved back into high when they were nerfed back to working levels; where even more people migrated out to do incursions; where the devs came up with the farms-and-fields concept to solve this problem; where the devs agreed that null industry is nowhere near where it's supposed to be; where there are tons of data showing how the highsec baseline creates unworkable margins that leaves no room for profit elsewhere; where the mechanics themselves inherently prohibit large populations in null and thus mechanically force people to not be there.
Quote:But honestly, theres about 130 pages of support pointing to the fact that you're wrong. Not really, no. There are about 130 pages of people making unsupported claims about how much a single individual can earn if not contested.
Quote:Missions and LP rewards are a tiny minuscule inconsequential edge case in the economy of EVE. Where on earth are you getting your information?! That is probably the most ridiculous thing stated so far in this thread.
Missions represents roughly Gàò of the injected ISK on a daily basis; LP is the second highest sink in the game, again representing about Gàò of the daily sunk ISK. The ISK-sunk-to-ISK-earned ratio is about 2:1, which means the LP rewards represent earnings that are on about the same scale as the purely injected ISK.
Is this how wrong you are about everything? 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19205
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 21:23:00 -
[56] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:The only thing that prohibits me from doing what I do in nullsec is the incredibly large coalitions. Then you're not doing anything that is relevant to the discussion at hand. You're also showing that the large populations are inherently prohibitive in null and thus mechanically force people to not be there
Quote:Not true. This thread has been about many differnet things besides inconsequential ratting and anom running. If it's inconsequential, then that's your imbalance right there. And it's still just people making unsupported claims about how much a single individual can earn if not contested.
Quote:I got my information directly from the minutes, which state quite clearly that over 80% of all value in the game comes from the manufacturing step. [citation needed] And how do you go from there to missions? Either way, calling something that injects 20% of the ISK in the game GÇ£irrelevantGÇ¥ remains ridiculous and shows such a complete ignorance about the economy that it almost disqualifies you from discussing the topic altogether.
Quote:And the reason nobody manufactures in null was resolved about 80 pages ago: because nobody trades in high volumes in null. GǪexcept that it wasn't resolved. It just further reinforced that there is an imbalance. If all the trade happens in high, it means high-volume transports is not a problem. If high-volume transports is not a problem, then you should be able to manufacture anywhere and everywhere. This does not happen.
The reason it doesn't happen is because there are no advantages and a huge amount of disadvantages to doing it outside of highsec. This is because highsec offers far too high a baseline in terms of availability (functionally infinite), cost (essentially free), security (free and mechanically ensured), and logistical ease to afford other areas with some kind of competitive advantage. Had it just been one of those GÇö say, the logistical ease that is connected with the proximity to trade hubs GÇö then we'd have balance and people could engage in it competitively across the entire galaxy by trading one benefit for another. But since we unquestionably have an imbalance, it is not the case. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19205
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 21:41:00 -
[57] - Quote
Kimmi Chan wrote:Tippia, can you cite a source for these numbers please, specifically the bolded part? We have the faucet-sink breakdowns I and Two Step did two years ago; we have the very rough 2013 breakdown from fanfest, showing that aside from incursions, it's pretty much the same; we have the quotes from Phantasm linked earlier in the thread about which bounties come from where.
In rough numbers: ~2tn ISK enter the game on a daily basis. ~1tn ISK enter in the form of bounties. ~150bn ISK comes in the form of mission rewards.
72% of bounties, or ~720bn ISK daily, come from null (anomalies, complexes, belt rats). 28% of bounties, ot ~280bn ISK don't come from null (empire-space anomalies, complexes, belt rats, and the millions of missions run every month).
Let's call it an even 250bn from missions alone, for a very conservative 5:3 ratio on average between agent rewards and bounty rewards for missions. That's 4GÇô500bn/day from rewards and bounties, which I again conservatively rounded down to 20% of the daily ISK influx. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19206
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 22:22:00 -
[58] - Quote
Kimmi Chan wrote:So are we assuming that 89.29% of non-null bounties are coming from missions in highsec, leaving only 10.71% for bounties paid in Low-sec, Incursions, or highsec belt rats killed by miners with drones and other non-mission PVE activities or is this broken down somewhere that I'm not seeing? There is no break-down for bounties. However, they only come from three sources: missions (run in the millions), belt rats (not a huge draw except in veeeery remote lowsec pockets and of minute value everywhere else), and combat sites (rare and not really run for the bounties). Incursions are their own category in the breakdowns and don't pay out bounties.
I wouldn't be surprised if the mission portion is even larger, tbh. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19206
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 22:37:00 -
[59] - Quote
Kimmi Chan wrote:In Stoicfaux's most recent blitz with the Ishtar in L3s he notes that 10% of his ISK/hr comes from Bounties, 22% from rewards and bonus, and 69% from ISK value of LP. So is it safe to say that the mission runners blitzing (and thereby maximizing their ISK/hr) are not increasing ISK so much as those of us who do full clears of missions (and handicapping their ISK/hr by not blitzing)? Yes. If you're really blitzing, chances are that you sink more ISK than you create since you're relying on LP to be your main form of income, and other rewards are more a kind of unavoidable incidentals. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19206
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 22:46:00 -
[60] - Quote
Kimmi Chan wrote:Earlier in this thread some suggested the elimination of blitzing to force people to clear all mission rats to flag the mission completed. If that idea were implemented, would it not inject more ISK in through bounties and reduce ISK out through the LP store? EhGǪ
Chances are that the mission blitzers would just move on to some other activity that allowed for the same ISK/h. But yes, if everyone just kept doing what they were doing, you'd have a double-whammy of increased ISK injection through bounties and reduced ISK sinking through LP.
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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19211
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 22:56:00 -
[61] - Quote
Kimmi Chan wrote:By other activity you mean Incursions or maybe FW (where I guess there are people making 600m ISK/hr )? GǪor some such. For all their kvetching whenever their current activity gets adjusted, high-end PvEers are a surprisingly malleable crowd when it comes to figuring out equally (or better) high-paying income streams.
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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19225
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 13:18:00 -
[62] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:Amusing, you've been doing this for the last couple of pages. Show me where I edited somebody else's argument
Pinky Hops wrote:Woohoo, I got La Nariz to admit defeat!! I take it you lost since you ran out of arguments and your final stand was to just twist La Nariz' words into something different. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19226
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 13:40:00 -
[63] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:There was nothing to read from him. Blatantly false.
Quote:That's the equivalent of flipping the chess board during a game. Once you do that, it's over. You lost. So why are you doing it if not because you lost? 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19226
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 13:49:00 -
[64] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:Be more specific. What did I do, where? Start here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4208523#post4208523
Notice how you keep going off-topic and onto some completely tangential (and horribly misinformed) rant about coalitions. Note how he on multiple occasions tries to get you back on topic. Note how you keep blatantly ignoring the points being made and refuse to offer anything that even remotely resembles an actual counter-argument, instead replacing it with more irrelevancies.
By your own standard, you lost. Multiple times. All he did was shorten your extraneous rant to it's essential core: GÇ£grr goonsGÇ¥. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19226
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 13:54:00 -
[65] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:If we're talking about nullsec You weren't. Just read his posts and this time, don't mentally edit them. Just read. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19227
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 14:08:00 -
[66] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:This entire thread is about comparing nullsec to hisec. Specifically, the discussion you two were having was about something he repeated over and over again, and which you consistently ignored. You read his posts and spotted it this time, I hope?
So yes, going off on a tangential (and misinformed) rant that has nothing to do with the comparison in question is thoroughly irrelevant; inventing your own interpretation because you ran out of arguments against what he was actually saying means you lost. Multiple times. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19227
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 14:15:00 -
[67] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:So basically, you have nothing left to say or point out. Not until you actually take the time to read the posts, no. Have you read them?
GǪconsists of many separate topics. The two of you were having a discussion about one of them before you (very quickly) defected from it and went on an irrelevant tangent. Presumably, you rant out of arguments to respond to what he was saying. I.e. you lost. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19227
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 14:19:00 -
[68] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:Coalitions have a part in this discussion. So you didn't read it? Because no, coalitions are not in any way relevant to the discussion the two of you had before you bailed out and replaced what he was saying with something completely different (that you are not particularly well-informed about to boot).
By your own standard, you lost. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19227
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 14:26:00 -
[69] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:You'd have to cite specific examples of me "bailing out" or doing "replacements." I already did. You didn't read it, just like the first time.
Quote:You can't handle coalitions being discussed in a topic about comparing hisec vs nullsec. It's not that I can't handle it, it's that it has no relevance to the discussion you were having. Did you read it? Did you spot the reoccurring theme that you consistently skipped and couldn't respond to? That's where you bailed out and started editing his argument because you ran out and lost. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19227
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 14:39:00 -
[70] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:No, it became an evaluation of income. "Personal income" is a twist and doesn't really mean anything. GǪaside from being a deciding factor in where players choose to make their money, which is the behavioural pattern that is out of balance.
Quote:Of course coalitions play a part in it. Coalitions hold nearly all the sov in the entire game. And how do you draw a line from them to the balance of personal income?
Quote:What else would be an option? NPC Null is awful. Start my own corp and just go take sov? You need thousands of players to do that these days. NPC null is where many of the major alliances today got started. They made it, so why can't you? Also, do you know why you need thousands of players to do so these days? 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19227
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 14:56:00 -
[71] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:He said that what I said was wrong So why did you edit his argument?
Quote:So, by saying it was "horseshit" -- he's saying that the only way to make ISK in this game is to shoot squares and run missions. No, that's just you inventing things. By saying it was GÇ£horeshitGÇ¥, he's saying that missions and LP can be considered standards of income balance. Since, by the last official count, more than one third of the characters in game ran missions, that's not a particularly odd or unreasonable stance to have.
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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19227
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 15:00:00 -
[72] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:"Can be considered standards"
By who? Anyone. If you don't think that an activity that more than one third of the characters engage in can be considered a standard, then you are insane.
Why did you edit his argument? 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19227
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 15:03:00 -
[73] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Tippia wrote:By saying it was GÇ£horeshitGÇ¥, he's saying that missions and LP can be considered standards of income balance i was actually describing the post Fair enough. His strawman remains regardless, which is what matters. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19228
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 15:08:00 -
[74] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:Plenty of people flip burgers for a living as well, but I don't think anybody considers it to be a standard of income. It is a standard of income. It's such a standard that it even has something akin to an official and universally known name: GÇ£minimum wageGÇ¥.
By the way, why did you edit his argument? 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19228
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 15:14:00 -
[75] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:The game is designed to not allow this to happen GǪand that is the problem, since the stated goal is that the game is supposed to allow it. The fact that it doesn't right now is the imbalance that is in dire need of a fix. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19243
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 15:21:00 -
[76] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:Actually, it proves my point, not yours. Actually, it proves the point Kimmi was making before you edited it.
The design goal is that for industry, nullsec should be 99% self-sufficient. But we're not talking about industry. We're talking about individual income from PvE. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19248
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 15:27:00 -
[77] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:That's because you are relying on others who make it part of their sandbox experience to deliver resources and goods collected from nullsec to highsec for profits. GǪand for null, that would be the 1% of industry that isn't covered by the self-sufficienty the region has to offer. As long as that 1% in for that one activity is covered by people doing cross-border trading, the rest are supposed to be able to never leave their home (much like how people are able to live in highsec and never leave their home). 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19250
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 15:36:00 -
[78] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:So, what's the problem? Oh for fucks sake. The problem is that null isn't nearly that self-sufficient for industry and that it does not offer the ability to live there and stay there to everyone else.
Quote:As far as I know, 99% of resources ARE available in null. No, and that's not what it's 99% of anyway. People don't provide the volume because the mechanics straight up prohibit it. Also, it's not what we're discussing sinceGǪ you knowGǪ it's industry, not personal PvE income. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19250
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 15:41:00 -
[79] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:There's no special distinction here. GǪaside from individual income going to the individual to meet his individual needs, and corp/alliance income going to the corp/alliance to meet corp/alliance needs.
No to mention the distinction between industry and PvE. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19250
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 15:47:00 -
[80] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:I personally would never join a group where I don't get individually paid for my industrial work. Good for you. The distinction is still there and it's still industry and thus not relevant.
Quote:You could just as easily design a corp with a 100% tax, so that ratting is now "alliance level income." Roll I wonder how well that would go over? Fairly well, aside from the obvious ignorance of mechanics, as long as the stated goal is clear and generally accepted. It's not particularly rare either, but not really for the reason of generating income. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19250
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 15:51:00 -
[81] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:The thread is GǪabout highsec, which spawned various related sub-discussions. The one we're having now is about PvE income.
Quote:You don't get to decide the exact context. Yes I do, and any time you edit and argument and go off on an pointless tangent, I get to point out that your reply is irrelevant to what we're discussing at the moment. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19253
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 16:03:00 -
[82] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:You can't leave industry out of a discussion on highsec vs nullsec income. GǪbut you can leave it out of a discussion of individual PvE income, which is what we're* discussing.
* GÇ£weGÇ¥ as in the rest of us. You are desperately trying to avoid the topic while still making it look like you have anything relevant or cogent to say.
By the way, learn to reference properly.
Quote:So you're the kind of person who joins a 100% tax corp and then loudly proclaims that ratting is "alliance level income?" You understand that this will depend on what the corp does with it, right? 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19255
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 16:12:00 -
[83] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:baltec1 wrote:Name what null sov has in place of missions. Titans. Not an individual PvE income stream, so no. Try again.
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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19257
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 16:18:00 -
[84] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:Cooperate to build So not an individual PvE income stream. Try again.
What you're doing there is kind of like comparing two different jobs based on whether the local lunch restaurant has good chicken or not. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19257
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 16:25:00 -
[85] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:The fact that highsec and nullsec are in no way symmetrical (you can do things in one area that you can't do in another) is exactly why you can't just casually compare stupid crap like missions and call it good. GǪbut we're not Gǣcomparing missionsGǥ. We're comparing individual PvE income streams.
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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19257
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 16:34:00 -
[86] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:Industry is PvE. The environment offers exactly zero opposition, so no. It's PvP through and through. Also, what baltec said.
Quote:So anything that involves cooperation is not an individual income stream? I have no idea where you got that idea. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19260
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 16:47:00 -
[87] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:I don't understand We know.
Quote:how splitting profits does not result in individual profit. No-one has claimed that it doesn't. That's just some nonsensical strawman you've created.
What does sov null have in place of highsec L4 missions? 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19260
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 16:51:00 -
[88] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:Why is that mandatory? Because otherwise there is no GÇ£versusGÇ¥.
The thing that provides an opposition GÇö an obstacle to overcome GÇö is other players. This is commonly called PvP. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19260
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 16:55:00 -
[89] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:let's discuss philosophically the difference between the computer rock and the computer pirate and how one counts as environment and one does not. Let's not and instead call things what they are. Stop playing dumb and just accept the very simple and blatantly obvious fact that industry is not PvE.
[qutoe]the obstacle is quite obviously to destroy the rock and collect the resources.[/quote] How is it an obstacle? What's keeping you from collecting the resources? It certainly isn't the rockGǪ 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19261
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 17:11:00 -
[90] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:You could make the same argument of loyalty points, or even of collecting ISK versus resources that might hold value better than the ISK. GǪexcept that ISK and loyalty points don't just hang around waiting to be collected by whomever gets to them first. They are rewards for doing what an NPC have told you to do (commonly win over another NPC), as opposed to ore which is a reward for beating other players.
Quote:Interacting with the economy at all is a form of PvP. No, but interacting with the market is.
Quote:So if this is the direction we are going with it, then all forms of income within EVE are PvP. No, just the ones that require you to overcome some kind of NPC.
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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19261
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 17:14:00 -
[91] - Quote
1. Because they tried the oft-suggested strategy of GÇ£just buff nullGÇ¥, which turned out to be disastrous to the economy.
2. Because it fits their intended role.
3. Because they wanted to start dabbling in a GÇ£farms and fieldsGÇ¥ approach to null income. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19261
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 17:23:00 -
[92] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:1) Your distinctions are arbitrary. "Combat PvE" for instance, is a completely arbitrary label - especially since you just concluded that it's a form of PvP. If by GÇ£arbitraryGÇ¥ you mean GÇ£mechanically and functionally distinct and descriptiveGÇ¥. The label GÇ£Combat PvEGÇ¥ neatly encapsulates a very clear category of activities and explains in full what it does and how it differs from other methods of making money.
Quote:2) You arbitrarily dictate something about "alliance level income"[/qutoe]It's not arbitrary to make a distinction between individual income that is generated to benefit the individual and corp- or alliance-level income that is generated to benefit the corp or alliance.
[quote]I invoked W-space to provide an easy example of how people can work together for individual income GǪwhich no-one has ever disputed but rather is some nonsensical strawman you've invented for yourself.
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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19261
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 17:25:00 -
[93] - Quote
Hell Ball wrote:But would you agree those are indirect or direct nerfs to null sec? Not the interceptor change, and not the ESS itself but rather the bounty nerf that was rendered pointless by the updated reward design. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19261
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 17:35:00 -
[94] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:It stops being descriptive and starts being arbitrary when you magically distinguish shooting rocks or industry in general as "PvE" GǪwhich is why we don't consider them combat PvE: because they don't fit any of the categories. It's not based on combat and the opposition does not come from the environment.
Keep such obvious non-conforming activities out and it is as descriptive and non-arbitrary as can be. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19272
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 02:22:00 -
[95] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:Until you realize that the comparison doesn't even make sense, because nullsec provides tons of goods that can't otherwise even be obtained. How does it not make sense to compare one category of income streams with the same category of income streams?
Quote:So you're admitting that you don't participate in the sandbox? GǪwhich, of course, he didn't say in any way. Why do you keep inventing this nonsensical strawmen every time you lose?
Quote:You would just claim it's fake. Pointless No, it's not pointless to provide evidence to support your claims. So far, you haven't been able to. You just keep twisting peoples words and injecting irrelevant tangents when pressed to prove that you have any clue what you're talking about.
Show us the data.
Oh, and could you answer a very simple question, by the way: what does sov null have in place of highsec L4 missions?
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:This would be another example...Do your own work Yes, that's a good example of trying to shift the burden of proof. You made the claim; you do the work. By refusing to do so, you only prove that your initial claim was baseless trolling. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19273
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 02:30:00 -
[96] - Quote
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:Not surprising as always you only read what you want out of whats said. Its not the Bible you cant just quote one line of scripture. GǪand yet, that is exactly what you were doing.
The fact remains: the bounty reduction was not there to minimise inflation. They completely retracted that early statement. It was very blatantly there to incentivise the use of ESS, as the discussion in the feedback threads clearly show.
Quote:And you call me a liar? Considering how often you lie, it's a pretty good thing to call you. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19275
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 02:47:00 -
[97] - Quote
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:Tipia its like proving there is a moon or a sun or air, or wind. So it should be easy, and yet you can't.
So we can trivially conclude that what you said was false. You lied.
Quote:Calling you and others like you forum trolls is truth as given by your own hand and by your own posting. GǪand yet you can't prove it. And yet, you posts, not ours, keep getting deleted. And yet you keep lying; keep relying on fallacies; keep stacking up the abuse; and keep avoiding having to present any kind of actual argument or proof as if it were a plague. 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¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
|
|
|