These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Fix Null > Nerf Hi

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#661 - 2013-03-01 23:18:20 UTC
Captain Tardbar wrote:
[quote=Natsett Amuinn]Before you ever have an item you can trade it must be built.

If the bulk of an item is built by a group of individuals that can not be wardecced, because they don't play in player run corps, you can't identify them.

If the bulk of T2 production was done in player run corporation, through necessity, you would be able to identify who is building what, and where, then take action against them.

Players need to be in player run corps if they're going to have such a large impact on other players, and industrialist by there very nature are impacting every person in EVE; more so other industrrialists.


[edit] Nevermind I found some. I'm going to go be doing something.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#662 - 2013-03-01 23:25:44 UTC
Captain Tardbar wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
HS is, in nearly all respects, a better place to make ISK than nullsec. Is it any wonder that people are going to choose HS for their ISK making when there's no advantage to making it in Null?


The problem about giving more of an advantage to nullsec to balance things out means putting more power into the hands of small groups of individuals in charge of the alliances who dictate who may or who may not use the resources in null.

This is a clear cut advantage that Null has over hi-sec which I believe balances it out.

People in hi-sec do not get to control who produces what or who gathers what resources.

Null sec alliances usually do not allow people who they do not approve of to mine their belts and use their manufacturing resources.

In that regard, Null sec industry is controlled by the alliance systems in place. This is power enough. You do not want to punish people that are in small corps for not being in a major alliance.

Industry is not controlled by a "small group of individuals".

Having an industrial advantage in null does not benefit the corp holders, it benefits the industrialists.

This depiction of resource control is wrong.

Kinis Deren
Mosquito Squadron
D0GS OF WAR
#663 - 2013-03-01 23:29:30 UTC
Since we are quoting dev blogs from 2011, I was quite struck by the following relevant quote from this particular dev blog;

Quote:
People like to do one-stop shopping, and will "go to Jita" for everything unless doing so is comparatively very inconvenient

See: moon mineral distribution, high-strength booster resource distribution, neither of which achieved much in the way of the nullsec-to-nullsec trade that they hoped to encourage


Since CCP Greyscale has already stated existing local resources have not encouraged null sec trade, if null sec industry recieves a buff, won't all the manufactured goods / harvested minerals be shipped to Jita too?

It does make me wonder if all this "nerf hi sec" talk isn't just Macanis' Law in action?
Primary Me
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#664 - 2013-03-01 23:31:51 UTC
Captain Tardbar wrote:
The problem about giving more of an advantage to nullsec to balance things out means putting more power into the hands of small groups of individuals in charge of the alliances who dictate who may or who may not use the resources in null.

This is why any buff to nullsec industry must go hand-in-hand with game mechanics to allow other people to disrupt this industry, forcing the small groups of individuals in charge of the alliances to protect them, thus starting the whole PvP food chain.
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#665 - 2013-03-01 23:41:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Captain Tardbar
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Industry is not controlled by a "small group of individuals".

Having an industrial advantage in null does not benefit the corp holders, it benefits the industrialists.

This depiction of resource control is wrong.



So if I wanted to come to null without joining your alliance, you'd let me mine your asteroids and setup a POS to make stuff?

This might be a stealth "Invite me to goons" post.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#666 - 2013-03-01 23:52:20 UTC
Kinis Deren wrote:
Since we are quoting dev blogs from 2011, I was quite struck by the following relevant quote from this particular dev blog;

Quote:
People like to do one-stop shopping, and will "go to Jita" for everything unless doing so is comparatively very inconvenient

See: moon mineral distribution, high-strength booster resource distribution, neither of which achieved much in the way of the nullsec-to-nullsec trade that they hoped to encourage


Since CCP Greyscale has already stated existing local resources have not encouraged null sec trade, if null sec industry recieves a buff, won't all the manufactured goods / harvested minerals be shipped to Jita too?

It does make me wonder if all this "nerf hi sec" talk isn't just Macanis' Law in action?

That seems a little nonsensicle.

None of those things can be made in high sec, in order to have them you HAVE to export to high sec.

The only way moon minerals would ever boost null trade is if you couldn't build T2 items in high sec, and moon minerals weren't region based.


That CCP quote doesn't imply that a nerf woudln't work.
Note the "very inconvenient" part, and the part where he mentions how moon and booster materials distribution didn't help null trade due people going to Jita.

That sounds very much like an indication that just buffing null won't help, there needs to be nerfs in high as well.
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#667 - 2013-03-02 00:01:35 UTC
Captain Tardbar wrote:
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Industry is not controlled by a "small group of individuals".

Having an industrial advantage in null does not benefit the corp holders, it benefits the industrialists.

This depiction of resource control is wrong.



So if I wanted to come to null without joining your alliance, you'd let me mine your asteroids and setup a POS to make stuff?

This might be a stealth "Invite me to goons" post.

You're using an invalid arguement.

Null doesn't work that way. EVERYONE being able to come to null and mine has no bearing on balance.

And PoS's do not serve the same role in null as they do in high sec.



You should join a null corp, then go to null and do industry for a few months.
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#668 - 2013-03-02 00:15:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Captain Tardbar
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
You're using an invalid arguement.

Null doesn't work that way. EVERYONE being able to come to null and mine has no bearing on balance.

And PoS's do not serve the same role in null as they do in high sec.



You should join a null corp, then go to null and do industry for a few months.


Will a null-sec corp let me join without giving an API key? Will they let me do my own thing without ever having to get involved with alliance politics?

I think there might be a few reasons why I am not in a nullsec corp. Can you respect that gamestyle choice? Or am I a bad person for not participating?

Yeah I don't know the true logistics that Null Sec goes through. But I don't think they should get a free pass to simply modify the game in order to make it easier for them at the expense of other players.

If Null threw open their arms to my style of gameplay, then sure. Maybe it would be reasonable.

I'd be willing to join Goons if they didn't ask me to play their way and let me do whatever I pleased.

Seeing that is probaly not the case, I'm not upset or anything because they have the right to demand that of their members.

One thing though....

I would be able to accept your buff to null only if CCP created a large expansion to worm hole space (in WH system numbers) and gave the same industrial buff to WH that they did to null.

That way, you wouldn't have to belong to a null sec alliance to see the benefit.

[edit]

Also these new WH systems would not have exits to null but only low and hi to prevent alliances from having such a large influence on them.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#669 - 2013-03-02 00:26:31 UTC
Captain Tardbar wrote:

If Null threw open their arms to my style of gameplay, then sure. Maybe it would be reasonable.
There's little reason to have industrialists in a nullsec alliance because all industry is better off done in highsec. Unless you're building supers or run a JF service.

It's not because nullseccers don't like industrialists, it's that they're completely worthless to have around.
Tesal
#670 - 2013-03-02 00:57:55 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Tesal wrote:
To say this another way, you don't really know and are making up numbers.
No.
To say it without putting words in my mouth, I can make a fair estimate based on the numbers we have and it does not yield the result that the “highsec über alles” militia wishes it were…

…which is far better than wilfully mislabelling numbers as something they explicitly are not — a tactic said militia usually favours.


I read the thread where null people argued vehemently for greater null representation in the population numbers. Many nullseccers yell really loudly on this point, no doubt because it would give them greater representation in the court of public opinion. They hope to persuade CCP to do stuff they want.

I sent 2 alt characters to null but I am a hi-seccer on my main (true story), and there must be people like me, therefore we should be be accounted for as being a larger hi-sec group. I lay claim to a portion of the null population. I then make up a number that sounds good on paper and publish it on the forums. Then I scream, listen to me, I speak for this bigger group, do what we want!!! I could make up an argument for my alts being in low sec (they were there) and also being in wormholes (they were there).

Abusing numbers like that does not create a factual representation. I do not speak for that imaginary larger group of people, and neither do you.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#671 - 2013-03-02 01:01:58 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Lots of words...



Well, to sum up Tippia, I'M not. I'm not trying to push for something that obviously goes against CCP's agenda (See Ruby's link if need clarification!).

If I want to endeavor to make money in a specific career, I'm going to the area that can support it the best. If trading or mining, then highsec. If I want to rat/anom, then null. I'm not going to try to insinuate that CCP should make things governed by player markets or logistics be a step stool for talking about how "broken" something is. It's the players' fault that things are expensive to freight, as explained to me multiple times in multiple threads concerning null.


The problem is that, for any given career besides Supercap manufacturer, HS is better.

Shooting red crosses: HS is better.
Industry: HS is better.
Mining: HS is better.
Trade: HS is better.

This is true because HS is Safe and earns equivalent income to comparable activities in Nullsec.

Quote:
Since I do not have complaints as to how I do things, and can be successful at it... I guess I'll be happy being "wrong".

Better to be poor and ship rich and have fun than to be rich and lazy and pissed off.


Of course you don't have any complaints. You're using the overpowered part of EVE. By the same argument, Tech was entirely balanced because owners of Tech moons were happy with it.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#672 - 2013-03-02 01:08:15 UTC
Kinis Deren wrote:
Since we are quoting dev blogs from 2011, I was quite struck by the following relevant quote from this particular dev blog;

Quote:
People like to do one-stop shopping, and will "go to Jita" for everything unless doing so is comparatively very inconvenient

See: moon mineral distribution, high-strength booster resource distribution, neither of which achieved much in the way of the nullsec-to-nullsec trade that they hoped to encourage


Since CCP Greyscale has already stated existing local resources have not encouraged null sec trade, if null sec industry recieves a buff, won't all the manufactured goods / harvested minerals be shipped to Jita too?


I don't see a problem with that. The goal is to make Nullsec industry competitive with HS, as in "able to compete with." Right now, it quite literally cannot, because HS industry is free, risk-free, convenient, and unlimited.

Quote:
It does make me wonder if all this "nerf hi sec" talk isn't just Macanis' Law in action?


Since nobody's claiming that fixing nullsec industry is claiming that we're doing it "for the newbies," it literally can't be an example of Malcanis' Law.

The people crying "don't nerf HS, think of the newbies," on the other hand....

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Buzzy Warstl
Quantum Flux Foundry
#673 - 2013-03-02 02:02:15 UTC
I still say it's impossible to accomplish what the nullsec people want out of the game by nerfing highsec, and that anybody who thinks it is needs to take a couple actual courses in economics and sociology so they understand what's going on better than they seem to.

Let's start with the most obvious and trivial point:
CCP didn't create trade hubs. CCP didn't decide that Jita was going to be the main trade hub and set things up so that it would happen. If I recall correctly the main trade hub used to be in a system that's now a lowsec system (before my time, I can look it up if people think it's important that I know the details).

Anybody who thinks that there is any way short of making the game unplayable by anyone to break the pattern of having a main trade hub somewhere in the safest space available and starts making suggestions that involve that not being the case really doesn't have a good grasp of the problem space.

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#674 - 2013-03-02 02:09:58 UTC
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
Anybody who thinks that there is any way short of making the game unplayable by anyone to break the pattern of having a main trade hub somewhere in the safest space available and starts making suggestions that involve that not being the case really doesn't have a good grasp of the problem space.


Good thing nobody suggested that. Perhaps while we're taking econ and sociology, you can take a basic reading course?

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#675 - 2013-03-02 02:14:42 UTC
Varius Xeral wrote:
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
Anybody who thinks that there is any way short of making the game unplayable by anyone to break the pattern of having a main trade hub somewhere in the safest space available and starts making suggestions that involve that not being the case really doesn't have a good grasp of the problem space.


Good thing nobody suggested that. Perhaps while we're taking econ and sociology, you can take a basic reading course?


I'm pretty sure it was implied. There were a few posts complaining of the cost of moving things to Jita.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#676 - 2013-03-02 02:16:42 UTC
Varius Xeral wrote:
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
Anybody who thinks that there is any way short of making the game unplayable by anyone to break the pattern of having a main trade hub somewhere in the safest space available and starts making suggestions that involve that not being the case really doesn't have a good grasp of the problem space.


Good thing nobody suggested that. Perhaps while we're taking econ and sociology, you can take a basic reading course?


Again, wouldn't ever say nobody with these things because some people do suggest stuff like that and have in this topic, as silly as it is. Now granted he'd be wrong if he assumed it was most or something along those lines, but no... these silly ideas pop up a lot, and then cause reactions like yours from people who didn't notice it, and I'm noticing that's where half the arguing comes from on these forums.. hell, sometimes its on purpose because a person wants to troll and see this happen.
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#677 - 2013-03-02 02:17:38 UTC
Captain Tardbar wrote:
I'm pretty sure it was implied. There were a few posts complaining of the cost of moving things to Jita.


Terrible post, but par for the course for you.

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#678 - 2013-03-02 02:19:18 UTC
Aren Madigan wrote:
Again, wouldn't ever say nobody with these things because some people do suggest stuff like that and have in this topic, as silly as it is. Now granted he'd be wrong if he assumed it was most or something along those lines, but no... these silly ideas pop up a lot, and then cause reactions like yours from people who didn't notice it, and I'm noticing that's where half the arguing comes from on these forums.. hell, sometimes its on purpose because a person wants to troll and see this happen.


You have a valid point about the lack of completely unified perspectives, but I challenge you to find a quote where someone argues that trade hubs should no longer be in hisec.

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#679 - 2013-03-02 02:21:30 UTC
Varius Xeral wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:
I'm pretty sure it was implied. There were a few posts complaining of the cost of moving things to Jita.


Terrible post, but par for the course for you.


Who trolls the troller?

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#680 - 2013-03-02 02:34:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Captain Tardbar
Varius Xeral wrote:
You have a valid point about the lack of completely unified perspectives, but I challenge you to find a quote where someone argues that trade hubs should no longer be in hisec.


"I put forth the argument that trade hubs should be removed from hi-sec."
-Captain Tardbar

Q.E.D.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server