Be sure to grant her all roles.
2 Likes
I donât steal.
I can get pretty violent, though.
1 Like
Now, feel free to accuse me of cherry picking if you will but an awful lot was said between my and Wadâs responses.
Indeed but we arent talking hypothetics, we are talking this specific situation. And the situation has been that people who regular make excess of PLEXing their accounts and have by their own admission multiple capital ships already feel the need to aquire more.
Their leverage is to walk and they believe that they are the majority in the game. Now that it looks like CCP believes this too, it should be apparent to everyone else who has the power and that the rest of us dont get an opinion because we arent allowed in the club.
Its not hard to prove that the biggest of these are Null owned and funded operations. One bloc in particular is on a hard campaign to dominate Pochven now.
Editted just down for conciseness. I get the drift but does this mean that its harder for a single Sov Null line member to raise the isk for an Alliance built ship for line duty than a High Sec player without leaving High to aquire a battleship and replace it? I cant believe thats the case, economically. Not given the values of income regularly displayed both by CCP and individual players.
Yes, but thats an IF that isnt the case. People use hyperbole constantly here. This ship is âuselessâ, that ship is âpointlessâ I cant âaffordâ to fly my ship.
No, these people just got comforltable with instant replacements and ease of life, so when a slight difficulty gets in their way they fold. And even IF thats the case, dont fly what you cant afford is supposed to be the rule, not cry to CCP to have it changed.
Why does that rule apply differently to Null players than High Sec carebears? Are all animals not equal? Or are there in fact different classes of request after all?
Then I dont understand what it is about, I dont see any other outcome. Before these devices to multiply bounties were invented and all the good ore went to Null, why did people go there?
If thats the case, which it isnt at least for some (Id say the majority outside of the clubs), then why does Sov matter if you can just drop corp and join the winning side?
3 Likes
more like
3 Likes
3 Likes
Only if itâs a BLACKFLAG. member.
Thanks for replying in the way you did. There is a certain âriskâ involved by coming on these forums as a âconfessedâ nullsec dweller, regardless of prior history of ardent support of any other play style in this game.
Your paragraph
The possibility to plex accounts and to get plex with isk is not a player invention. Itâs a ccp invention. It has been part of the game for ? a decade and a half ? Players are not at fault for using what was made available to them. Someone else is responsible for having it in the gameâŚ
In nullsec we pretty much consider ships ammo, especially in broad conflicts and wars. It is not a single loss in a single encounter that matters, itâs the long term outcome of a conflict (and meta-gaming). The roles of the ships are different, some are âswordsâ, some are âshieldsâ, etc. The investment into flying them is rather high (I know, Iâve recently been asked to prepare to fly caps, I wasnât planning to, ever, but there we are, so we comply if we want to continue to be a responsible and supportive member, within oneâs abilities etc), so you broaden your scope of ships in those cap classes. The biggest ships, which I assume you keep referring to, do get lost during those massive battles. And, unless they are replaced pronto, their loss directly affects the outcome of a conflict. No more ammo, no more pewpew, throw down your weapons and start walking. In certain cases, disband your alliance and get out of the gameâŚ
Thatâs the leverage any customer has. In this case a very sizable part of the player base was affected, and they did start to walk out, thoroughly unhappy with the changes and how they were personally and as a group affected. Thatâs normal, it was predictable and it was predicted.
The game setting in EvE, more than in any other game I know of, stimulates organization. In that sense it was designed to be a kind of social behavior simulator - or by chance, who knows but ccp⌠People found out that unity brings strength, that working for a common goal made the many risks better manageable, emergent game play became a thing. Sure, some of the best known, organized groups are found in nullsec. They have it relatively easy to put forward candidates for the CSM. And of course the voters will communicate with their representatives. Those are simple consequences of how the game turned out.
You mean the wallet vote that many of the affected made after drastic changes ? Since many were affected, that would be a force multiplier, yes. If the number of affected would have been small (like with older changes) ccp would not have budged. Not to give CCP extra credit than they deserve, but I do think that they had a long, hard look at their data, regardless of what the CSM says. Had they listened to the CSM in the first place, this thread would not have existed.
First off, if you mean by âclubâ a nullsec corp then you should apply (I sent you the info). Unless your (anyoneâs) reputation in the game is seriously tainted it will be a search and match process, nothing else. Corps/alliances are always looking for members.
If you mean by âclubâ the alleged (Iâm sure many current and former members grind their teeth now) âinfluencersâ like the CSM then you may have a point. But that is a consequence of a choice - not to be organized, not to identify motivated future representatives in case @Mike_Azariah is on a mandatory break etc. That is not the fault of nullsec either, merely a consequence. If genuine complaints for e.g., highsec space exist, they can be brought to ccp via several ways. One of those ways is via existing (non-hisec in this case) CSM reps. If someone does not âtrustâ the CSM reps, again, that is not nullsecâs fault, and neither is it the fault if a CSM rep dutifully transmits the genuine complaint/request to CCP and CCP does not respond in a positive way. In fact it backfires to the CSM rep if this happens, judging from the mud flinging that goes on occasionally.
It depends on the ship. The fact is that, afaik, in most nullsec blocs there is a need to have a whole personal fleet of doctrine fitted ships, for various roles, tactics, local situations etc. From experience, the upkeep of that fleet is not easy, even if you have the skills, especially working from one or two acounts. We routinely have several pings per hour to get in fleets on busy days, more when in specialized groups as well. Sometimes itâs chosing which to do. But you can be sure that the risk to lose the ship is there with every undock and every call. The âammoâ does get spent. So overall, Iâd say itâs harder to keep up, at least I find it harder (I admit I still donât have all the expected doctrine fitted ships in my hangar). If you get confronted with a dbs that gives you the finger with a less than 100% payout (not even counting the fact that part of the payout is delayed and depending on burglars present or not) it makes it even more of a grind. Should nullsec groups therefore reduce the number of doctrines ? Even if they do, the necessity for flexible responses is still there. You donât know what will be brought to the grid, and you have to be prepared. So, they canât reduce the number of doctrines. The need for them is a consequence of the ship tree, and the inventiveness of the opponent of course.
Clearly it IS the case. It wasnât a matter of ships becoming useless, but a matter of ship replacement. Unless ccp literally took away all the cap ships, from everyone, there was no solution. Taking them away would have been worse of course, the PCU would have crashed in an instant. So we ended up with a situation where people invested time, money, isk to fly those ships, and then became confronted with a situation where they actually could no longer afford to fly those same ships. That was an uninspired approach (it still is).
Instant replacements are a necessity for that type of game play. There were battles during WWB2 where - literally - ships rolling off the factories were immediately thrown into the bonfire. What was at stake was the survival of a very sizable portion of the nullsec community - something that still makes me more than irritated for the way this was instigated and presented, even though I was not a member of that group at that time.
Well, maybe we can come to an agreement with FRT, PH, and all the others to voluntarily eliminate all existing caps/supers/titans at the same time⌠Yeah, sure, and then have individual talks with all the former owners of those ships who invested isk, time, cash to fly them ? You see the problem.
Multiply by a fraction means they go down, not up. In the case of a pristine system that is at 150% max payout, it takes mere days to bring it down to 100% (nominal) payout. I think most of nullsec would be glad to see them gone altogether and stay at nominal payout, like it used to be. But CCP wants a version of dashboard management, where they (and not the players) can control the economy by pulling levers and pressing buttons. The DBS didnât work as intended (the official reason for âguudfightsâ is just laughable). Spreading sov holding blocs simply doesnât work with the current (sov and upwell) mechanics. And as to the overall effect of the implemented changes on the eve economy, I yet have to read the first post or blog that demonstrates everything is better now than before the changes.
Sorry for the long reply, but I enjoyed your post.
2 Likes
âI love grinding and making moneys, if the game nerfs the excessive ways of making moneys I quit playing, so Iâm rightâ.
And the rest is all hubris.
1 Like
counterbalanced by excessive ways of spending moneys
All is well.
I have no wish to stop our friendly interactions. Youve always seemed an honest and open person and I intend to continue treating you as such. Any perceived hostility is never directed to you as a person but the situation, and I dont intend to disrespect the exchange we have here by sugar coating my feelings on the matter either.
As you have taken the time to write a long reply, I will consider it in full before responding, as I am in work atm.
2 Likes
I guess I never saw the ways in which lowering made the game objectively better. I donât think I eve saw a post where someone said, âMy gameplay is better now with that lowered because of X reasonsâ. I saw lots of â good, screw those guysâ posts, but thatâs not the same thing. Iâm not trying to pick a fight, I honestly donât know. Did it make the game actually measurably better for anyone? Like moving the ores around I get, that make sense. Iâm not sure what this did other than annoy one group and allow another group to go âgood, you were too rich anywayâ But did it actually improve anything?
If you choose to fly/do something super overpowered then you have several options:
- realize itâs overpowered and hate using it but you kinda have to because âeveryone else does itâ
- realize itâs overpowered and refuse to use it because of that
- realize itâs overpowered and go âlolâ and (ab)use the crap out of it
When it then, inevitably, gets nerfed you have more options:
- âyeah well thatâs expected, should have happened sooner tbh because this is just unhealthy for the balance as a wholeâ
- âwtf u doin CCP. U cramping mi gaem, CCP always nerf things I use! I quit!â
One of those is a sensible adult reaction, the other is a 12 year old.
1 Like
You make them sound like children. This is the group that controls the CSM and threatens CCP with mass walkouts whenever something inconvenient is in the works. I do not agree that the attitude is childish and impetuous - these people actively lobby for game design that gives them a leveraged advantage in the game.
They are, just older ones.
I think people call older children âprivileged white malesâ now, or âboomersâ for short.
Millennial man children.
Iâm in this post and donât like it.
5 Likes
Ok so from the topâŚ
My bringing PLEX into the conversation wasnt to be critical about the mechanism but to highlight the sheer difference in scale that (ccp created, true) exists in Null. This scale certainly gave rise to the perception shown by many Null Sec posters that its their right to have this much resource personally available. If a person has all the Isk they need to PLEX their account and replace their ships the surely any demands for more MUST stem from greed. Their needs are already fulfilled, and have always been, but there is a perception that removing 5% say of a Billionaire or Trillionaireâs resource value suddenly makes them poor. But it doesnt.
To say that so-called scarcity reduced their ability to do things ignores the fact that wars and such were financed well before the Rorqual boom, and long before there were additional streams of income like Abyssals. In my view scarcity was an utter misnimer as before it hit, many new things to boost Null income were already added.
But how many ships exist? Plenty of people owned many, at one point I owned two carriers, three freighters and a jump freighter. And Id already got rid of them before scarcity as Provi had fallen before I could make much out of it.
Again, the sheer numbers are easy to extrapolate from deployed numbers, because unless Null Sov Alliances are crazy they must be deploying under 30% of their stock piles to prevent one large battle deciding anything.
Except it is something that can be exploited by a selective club. Its why in politics lobbying works but protests achieve nothing. As you say yourself;
Which means that a smaller number of well organised people can make decisions affecting the larger number. Are there more accounts in Null or High? Does it really matter though if the group that is organised more because they remove paranoia within their group by exclusion controls the valuable resources or treasure?
Yes they are, and when a person is standing on the good side of the line its easy to judge the hoi palloi on the other as misanthropes who are envious of them for no reason because âjust get richâ or âarent you in the club?â
We can agree on that but the reasoning why the CSM had a particular opinion is not something we agree on.
I applied, I sent my API equivalents as requested to corp and alliance, I waited two weeks for any communication and heard nothing so I assume I was rejected.
I havent seen this, except on the ingame video boards. The only corps and Alliances that seem to regularly advertise are junior HS ones which all do the same thing, talk a talk they never manage to walk. I have a pilot who can fly basic carriers and jumpships, but I gave up long ago of them ever using them, esp. once I discovered how inherently boring it was to try to use them to rat.
The Club I refer to, to clear this up, is the general reluctance of Null organisations to admit anyone who isnt a friend of a friend, as the old saying goes âIts not what you know, its who you knowâ.
So again, its CCP making individuals âneedâ a personal yacht club of ships that can only be afforded by the being in Null in the first place? See, again we, I feel are coming back to this perception that in order to play the game, one must do X and only X. If Null offers nothing but grind and do as one is told, then apart from the cash Im beginning to fail to see the attraction, other than the satisfaction in knowing that most folk outside NS are finding it harder to PLEX than before.
But it isnt. There stems to be this opinion that to fly you must have constant access to replacements of the most expensive ships in the game, and multiples of them. Is 5 enough? Is 10? What is even the point in warring if there will be no outcome because everyone has 20bl replacement caps on stand by? And because Null is âorganisedâ thry have that right and others dont? Dont fly what you cant etc then applies to everyone but Null because their tastes are for the most expensive because Hilmar wants precious PLEX money.
For what outcome?
I have no idea what this means. Can you expand?
I see the problem being people not being able to accept losing battles against superior foes and so begging CCP for the resources to return to the fight as if the war meant nothing. How this is different from a miner getting ganked and not accepting it and demanding the rules change to suit them is only a matter of scale.
The only ones Ive seen are in the 100 to 150% scale (couldve sworn it went higher but Ill biw to your knowledge on it) I have not seen a multiplier below 100%. And even at that, its factors more than anywhere else in terms of raw payout. Yes, because you are better organisrd you are at less risk, and so it can be done even longer without interruption.
I hate these and the previous mechanics so much I cant begin to describe it and its a whole other discussion. Ive no clue why they scaled everything so highly to end up here, where downscaling it seems would physically hurt some people, but here we are.
Things arent better now, but they arent worse either.
2 Likes
Ok, but literally none of that is âThis change made the game objectively better for this play style because Xâ. Itâs still just, hey quit whining. But in what ways was that change good for something?
The recruitment section of this very forum is full of dozens of null sec corps specializing in lots of different playstyles right now. At various points in my travels I joined a small gang corp in Pandemic Horde and then a small gang corp in Goonswarm before moving to lowsec. In neither corp did I know anyone in the entire alliance before I just popped into their discord and chatted for a bit. Both groups turned out to be full of decent, chill humans who enjoyed the game, as were the WH corps I was in, and the Pochven corp, and the lowsec corp, and the original hi sec corp. I donât think there are nearly as many differences in player types in the various corps as some people like to think there are. We have already self selected as a pretty small niche of fake internet spaceship nerds.
2 Likes