Actually hulks are very efficient in null even on normal ores provided u in a fleet and got some boost you could reach 60/hour maybe 70.Then say you rock a decently bling fit it can cost you 700-800mil per hulk So 10-12 Hours To Cover one
Im disinterested in mining ship tanks vs dps of ships brought against them.
Reason for that being, they are arbitrary as seen from the perspective that any mining ship can be blown up, if sufficient dps is brought to bear on it.
What concerns me more, are systemic security mechanics, such as Immediate Local in player NS, which hampers hunting them by telegraphing that the hunter has entered the forest.
Returning to original topic, the fact Immediate Local exists in Player NS is an instance of CCP favoring players farming there.
That is not something I have looked at, but my comparison is more to do with the risk reward put back into ISK / hour in terms of ship replacement for the prime mining ships in each area.
Without splitting hairs since CCP adjusted the tank of the mining ships I think it is fine now in my opinion, but that is because I sat there in a Skiff, someone using a Hulk in hisec is likely less blase about it, but then again I would say it is their fault.
It is fine now in any case.
That one has been flogged to death already, as I said to you before there is a major difference between someone cloaky camping a Goon system under that awesome response capability and someone cloaky camping a lessor alliance. The Goons continue to rat with certain limitations, while in the other one they don’t rat.
Your proposed change would mean smaller alliances would be even more screwed, and would be as bad as removing asset security in its effect. Which reminds me, I really do need to start moving stuff back to hisec which I moved to my alliance area from Stain, because I am sure that CCP will remove asset security at some point in nullsec…
Perhaps, as Player NS has organically grown in an Immediate Local mechanic all these years. There will be trauma post-change as players adjust.
Nonetheless, it is an example of CCP favoring Player NS unduly, as per OP. It is not rational that Player NS has the same intel mechanic as HS.
It both devalues HS, and overvalues Player NS, in security.
I meant hulk in nullsec I wouldnt mine in highsec
Lol. I want my high sec rorqual fleet! And all ore types too. Lol. 
1 Like
Yup, local is an issue and IMO the even bigger issue are hotdrops. Even if you catch a ratting super, a ton of other ships will appear. There is a risk to it offensively, so this part is fine enough … but doing it defensively is just broken.
1 Like
I know you were talking about nullsec, my comparison was nullsec / hisec related in terms of the subject matter, I have mined in hisec in the past before Rorquals really got going, It is still something that you can do if you are not bothered about ISK/hour and paying for a plex to fund your accounts…
I hope so. Asset Safety in NS is another example of CCP favoring NS, and it de-incentivizes aggression, making NS safer than it should be.
PS: Its called Asset Safety, not Asset Security. The added safety is literally in the name of the mechanic, which says a lot as to its purpose.
Asset Security, ironically, would be defending your Citadels so you dont lose whats in it 
1 Like
I suspect this is more of a language issue than a comprehending issue. The use of ‘and/or’ in this context means ‘either or both’. For example, nerfing mission drops had a more significant effect on the location that derived more income from them (highsec), this can also be seen as a buff to null, since this wasn’t a large source of income there. So yes, both can be true. If you don’t use it in those terms, I can see how it would be confusing.
When I make isk trading, I do it by taking isk from other players. If you really don’t understand the risk involved with trading, you shouldn’t talk about it. Maybe a multi-billion loss doesn’t appear on zkill, but it is a loss none the less.
Look I understand all you nullsec players don’t want to lose your cash cow, you don’t want to be forced to change. But EvE needs to get back to increasing it’s population every year, as it did before all the rubicon changes. CCP never impressed me as a company pleased with losing (or stagnation as has happened over the last couple years). And here’s another news flash you should realize, CCP just watched what happened on Serenity as one group dominated all others, do you really think they will let that happen again on Tranquility? Do you believe CCP can’t create conflict simply by changing their rules? EvE is their baby.
2 Likes
As appallingly low as explosion rate is in HS, the rate is even worse, proportionally, especially given the difference in sector mechanics/environment, in Player NS.
CCP needs to stop coddling Player NS.
There are too many systemic security/safety mechanics in place in Player NS, in an environment that should be the pinnacle of player self-determination/responsibility in EVE.
The risk/reward quotient is much worse out of whack in Player NS, than HS.
The whole “HS is too safe” shtick, pales completely compared to how many safety/security mechanics are also in place in Player NS, identically to HS.
Doesnt make sense, except as a convenient excuse for nullbears to farm without interruption.
Eve is a 15 year old game, expecting it to attract and retain new players at the same rate it did when it hit its peak (which was also right about the time that the mmo genre on the whole hit its peak) is just wishful thinking. yes wow recently had a resurgence in popularity with their last expansion, but time will only tell how long that resurgence lasts. facts are, the mmo genre has been in a steady decline since around 2014, yes numbers have dropped. but they have dropped across the board.
it actually says a hell of a lot more about the longevity and dedication of the eve playerbase that a niche game with an already low population (compared to many others) hasn’t completely died out, when other, much larger games have bit the dust.
success can’t always be measured in continual growth, and in a declining market, success often means holding out longer than anyone else. and in that eve is doing just fine.
wow, runescape, eve, everquest, FFXII, LOTRO, star wars online, star wars the old republic, guild wars, city of heroes, ultima online. those are some of the best selling mmos of all time… out of that list how many are still around and aren’t just pale shadows of their former selves? meanwhile eve is currently sitting just barely below the all time average player count. which, given the market is pretty damn good.
4 Likes
You are right of course, CCP should not neglect it. Should not give it to some goon, so he can do what he wants with it.
The best caregivers for it:
1 Like
CCPs angle/niche has always been a continuous, ubiquitous PVP environment.
Ironically, Player NS is safer than HS, with greater rewards.
Its time to return to roots/strengths and what defines EVE as unique on the market.
That will “Make EVE great again”.
Nerf Player NS safety/security mechanics:
- Institute Delayed Local in Player NS.
- Re-instate limited Watchlist.
- Remove Asset Safety from Player NS.
- Decouple Insurance from Player NS losses.
NS is safer than HS because the players made it that way, not because of mechanics. yes an open pvp environment has always been its niche, but player agency has also been one of its biggest selling points (remember the butterfly effect)
punishing players because they used that agency to create safety for themselves flies in the face of everything that makes eve what it is.
please, name one systemic mechanic that null has that doesn’t also exist elsewhere. cynos? those exist in low-sec as well. bubbles? those are a tool used by attackers just as often if not more than by defenders. local? exists everywhere except wormholes (and wormholes have unpredictable access routes, protection from cynos, and the ability to completely close off systems for hours at a time granting near 100% safety to counter balance the lack of local)
nulls safety is the result of player action. and players being able to do what they want is the heart of eve. just because you are not able to effectively fight against what the other players have done, does not mean the system is broken. just like you loosing your ship when you take on a fight that you can’t handle doesn’t mean the system is broken.
2 Likes
That is blatantly not true.
Player NS has Immediate Local, Asset Safety, Insurance etc, all identical to HS, despite Player NS being the supposed pinnacle of risk/reward as determined by PLAYERS, not systemic security/safety.
Its no secret Watchlist was removed universally, to increase safety of caps.
Players didnt extend Immediate Local, Asset Safety, or Insurance to Player NS, CCP did.
okay, so if HS has access to all those same safety featuers, AND concord AND crimewatch AND facpolice AND standings restricitons. why is null sec safer? sure HS doesn’t have cynos, but that also means the attackers don’t have cynos either so thats a bit of a wash.
so please explain then why HS is more dangerous despite having the exact same safety features as null-sec and then a whole bunch of extras if it isn’t the direct result of player action.
because if its not because of the players, and its entirely systemic, then it sounds to me like we should just get rid of HS entirely.
2 Likes
Why does Player NS, the pinnacle of player autonomy/responsibility/reward have Immediate Local, Asset Safety and Insurance identical to its polar opposite, HS?
Why was Watchlist removed universally, if not to increase safety for Player NS caps+?
Player NS systemic security/safety mechanics should be removed.
If you dont like it, you can move back to HS and grind like mad to get anywhere near what you can earn in Player NS casually.
THAT is the proper risk/reward quotient.
What is the driver behind your view on asset safety, is it based on people having too much stuff and ISK, in which case I can see why you want this. As I said to you in another thread on this I had a lot os ships set up to deal with different attackers coming into our area. When PL moved their supers and stuff south, I moved a lot of stuff into a very difficult to take Keepstar and at this point I am not bothering to move it back and because I think Asset Safety will be removed I am contemplating moving it all to hisec.
What has it done, well, I am a lot more picky on the fights I take now, I find myself often not bothering to go fight certain gangs as I do not have the right tools for the job. The issue you have is you develop one style of fighting structure bashing for loot at the cost of another, such as rapid response fleet on incoming gangs. For me I will just drop carriers on them now. And this is the issue with Eve, people take the easy option.
I can understand why you want this, but…, so take it a bit in the future, and there is no asset safety, and you have such a dominant player such as the Goons who can headshot anything, you will just reinforce their over arching superiority.
On a purist POV I get you, but the impact can be rather different to what you expect.
The delayed local is not needed as people hunt successfully with it there, it is the same for everyone, in the previous thread a hunter said he did not want it as he would waste time warping to sites with no one in system. It will make it too easy to catch people and down value the difficulty of hunting now, hell we get one hell of a sense of achievement catching and killing something.
The watch list is one I have issues with because you are asking for a free intel tool which is worse than local in that sense. What do you mean by a limited watch list, I would say one that was not possible to automate a tool from and one that you had to do something to get the information.
Insurance, I only insure dreads, not much of an issue to me.
because literally the entire rest of the game except for wormholes has it. and wormholes have their own funky mechanics that make it a false equivilancy to the rest of the game (remember, CCP never intended players to even live there in the first place, but they rolled with it) maybe a better question should be, why DONT wormholes have local when everywhere else does? and why can wormholes lock themselves off for hours at a time when everywhere else has to deal with 24/7 gate access? despite WH’s being 0.0 with unique resources that you can’t get anywhere else, and was, for a very long time FAR more profitable than null ever was.
as for watchlist, it was HS carebears, and HS pirates who where complaining about it just as loudly as null was. don’t know if you actually remember back then, but I sure as hell remember plenty of pirates complaining about it because all the miners and haulers in their area had them watchlisted and would dock up the second they logged in. as well as plenty of HS miners complaining about it because pirates where using it to specifically target them.
do I entirely agree with its removal, no, I made extensive use of it myself. but I at least understand why it was doing more harm than good.
2 Likes