Monthly Economic Report - August 2019

[DeMichael_Crimson]

Yeah, probably seeded those ships in there over time, like how The Initiative did to destroy Fort Knocks.

[Xuixien]

@Zhalyd_Lyehin

You can bubble in holes just like gates, you can place scouts on them that stream the hole activity.

Have you thought about why people don’t do these things in WHs? I’ll give you some hints:

• No cynos.
• No jump bridges.
• Connections constantly changing.

Thx.

@Zhalyd_Lyehin

How would I know what exactly happened 4.5 years ago?

Exactly, you have no idea what you’re rambling about, you’re just another whiny NullBear.

First you said WH’s are “safer” because “you can only jump in a couple of caps”, and now you’re eating your words. Bravo.

@Zhalyd_Lyehin

And you do not want that in W-space. You want fights. Or so I read all the time from “wormhole” people.

Completely irrelevant nattering. Facts are facts: there is no supercap umbrella to protect you in a WH, regardless of what anyone wants.

@Zhalyd_Lyehin

I wonder about that. Rattlesnake alts are big thing last I heard, and so are small dread/carrier groups in higher class holes. You are exaggerating.

So now you’re comparing a guy with multiple Rattlesnake/cap alts to someone running anoms with 1 character in NullSec? You are being dishonest. People in NullSec can multibox too.

Anything else you got for me to knock down?

[Zhalyd_Lyehin]

@Xuixien

First you said WH’s are “safer” because “you can only jump in a couple of caps”, and now you’re eating your words. Bravo.

Both things have nothing to do with one another. Wormholes are safer because you can only bring in a limited number of ships at a time and you can close off any entrance to your system. This is not possible in null sec. The fact that you can stage numerous ships over time in a system is not different from null sec. There are also lots of of logged off supers from HKI, Lazerhawks and others in target rich environments. And you cannot prevent those from attacking you either unless you keep your system jammed all the time, in which case they can just cyno to a system next door and take gates. In wormhole space you can prevent that from happening.

@Xuixien

So now you’re comparing a guy with multiple Rattlesnake/cap alts to someone running anoms with 1 character in NullSec? You are being dishonest. People in NullSec can multibox too.

What I did here is telling you that rewards are not by default reduced significantly. Multiboxing does not reduce your rewards and it is a major thing in wormholes. This is comparable to smartbomb multiboxing in null sec.

Anything else you got for me to knock down?

[Xuixien]

@Zhalyd_Lyehin

Both things have nothing to do with one another.

Yeah they actually do. Sorry bro.

@Zhalyd_Lyehin

Wormholes are safer because you can only bring in a limited number of ships at a time

Already refuted, repeating it won’t de-refute it. This doesn’t make it “safer”, it just changes time tables.

@Zhalyd_Lyehin

and you can close off any entrance to your system

False. Closing connections requires hole control which you don’t always have.

@Zhalyd_Lyehin

The fact that you can stage numerous ships over time in a system is not different from null sec.

So not safer? Ok.

@Zhalyd_Lyehin

keep your system jammed all the time

So you’re saying NullSec is safer than WH’s?

@Zhalyd_Lyehin

What I did here is telling you that rewards are not by default reduced significantly. Multiboxing does not reduce your rewards and it is a major thing in wormholes. This is comparable to smartbomb multiboxing in null sec.

They are when you run the sites in a group - which almost all sites above a C3 require. You tried to counter with “alts” but this applies to NullSec as well thus rendering your argument moot. So you don’t actually have an argument here, unfortunately. Also I forgot to mention - unlike NullSec, WH’s don’t have near-permanent and endless anoms. When systems have been farmed they’re done for weeks, so you have to constantly roll and scout to find systems that have more than a few sites.

[Zhalyd_Lyehin]

@Xuixien

False. Closing connections requires hole control which you don’t always have.

You have it most of the time. And when you don’t, it’s just like null sec with the cloaky afk campers. A little risk always remains. In contrast to null sec, you can at the very least remove most of the risk most of the time and you can still undock and make money.

@Xuixien

So you’re saying NullSec is safer than WH’s?

Selective quoting to support your narrative? This is not what I said and you know it. But it’s good to know that you are at the end of your argumentation.

But I see that you won’t come down from your hight and misguided horse. You want to portrait W-space as a lot more dangerous than null sec. I argue that this is not the case. You do not accept my arguments and I do not see valid points in your points either because they are just as easily refuted as you claim to refute my points.
Facts, however, remain:
W-space is incredibly safe for farming if you take some precautions. This is supported by the low destruction values in W-space.
W-space provides ridiculously good income, which is supported by the MER data over the years.
This income furthermore is comparable to null sec but goes to a whole lot fewer characters than in null sec, which means that the income potential is higher as I said.

Since you do not want to accept this, I will leave it with that.

[Xuixien]

Do you actually have any argument, or are you just going to posture and sling mud?

@Zhalyd_Lyehin

This is supported by the low destruction values in W-space.

Um, wormholes see more destruction per capita than K-Space…

@Zhalyd_Lyehin

W-space provides ridiculously good income, which is supported by the MER data over the years.

It’s not “ridiculous”, it’s balanced - it needs to be good because it’s the most dangerous place in EVE.

Take care bro and remember to take your salt supplements.

[Forum_Posting_Alt]

@Xuixien

W-space provides ridiculously good income, which is supported by the MER data over the years.

It’s not “ridiculous”, it’s balanced - it needs to be good because it’s the most dangerous place in EVE.

No, no it’s not… CCP needs to take a long hard look at W-Space

[Xuixien]

Make an argument then, and I’ll consider it

[Sgt_Ocker]

How much isk did you make last week in your wormhole?
How many times did you have to stop what you were doing because some small gang cyno’d in on you?
How much did you lose earning that isk?

[Xuixien]

About 250 mil.

[Sgt_Ocker]

and?

I thought wormholes were so dangerous, much worse than nulsec - How many ships did you lose for that 250 mil? How many players did you have to fight off to make it?
HOW MUCH RISK WAS INVOLVED?

[Xuixien]

If WHs are so much safer and more lucrative, why don’t you join a WH corp? How come so few live in WHs?

[Sgt_Ocker]

With the coming cyno changes and the added shite of logistics now matching that of WH, I might just go back to a WH.

Not for the isk, I don’t need that but for a bit of peace and quiet, where I can mine and build in relative safety.,.

[Xuixien]

Okay so no answer as to why more people don’t live in the safest and most lucrative part of EVE?

[Sgt_Ocker]

You really have a problem with reading huh…

Ok, most people don’t want to deal with shite logistics, the risk [even thought small] of losing everything to a much larger group, among other things.

Can you answer my original questions or would that be too hard?
Maybe your answers would shed light on why less people live in worm holes - But i’d doubt it

Damn, this thread got so derailed it will never find its way back.,.

[Xuixien]

So WHs logistics are harder than NullSec logistics? Okay so living in WHs is harder and more work. Gotcha. I can agree with you on that.

Are you saying there’s more of a risk in WH space then? After all people don’t want to deal with that risk (your words) so they opt to live in the safety of NullSec instead huh? I agree, WHs are more risky.

I mean they WHs have never had Local. They removed Local from NullSec and activity dropped off a cliff as people left.

[Mark_Marconi]

Yes no asset safety really makes WHs so relaxing.

[Orca_Platypus]

@Nevyn_Auscent

It’s not irrelevant because it means that your figures aren’t actually relatable.
To get the figures properly you have to pull the data for the same time period, aka a week at a time across the whole thing.
I’m not claiming there isn’t a drop mind you, but using different time periods creates an automatically bad looking picture even when player base is actually stable.

Do you know if it’s actually dropping points not only for display?
I mean, it could calculate averages on full data, and only drop points for graphs.

[Nevyn_Auscent]

Yes.
The averages of individual weeks inside a larger timeframe don’t match the average listed on a larger timeframe graph.
This is why EVE offline always looks bad for player trends when you go last week, last 3 months, last year.

[Orca_Platypus]

Averages of individual weeks are absolutely fine when you put them on a part that had growth - shorter periods properly have higher averages.

Not to mention I still have the script that can dump each and every data point, which I used to dump sunday peaks to make an argument that we basically didn’t have sunday peaks that bad since 2006, and I can easily calculate weekly averages, weekly peak averages, and so on - it’s just it’ll show what is blatantly obvious - blackout has tossed out the baby with the bathwater, and killed all non-umbrella nullsec pve completely.