These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

If null-sec industrialism is broken, it might not be CCP's fault.

First post First post
Author
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#221 - 2013-04-30 12:50:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Liz Laser wrote:
If we're changing the argument to complete wealth generation, you should also include ratting and plexing on null's balance sheet and missioning on high-sec's.
…in which case highsec wins hands-down. Again: the point is that your notion that mongoo “fixes” things hinges on it being more than just an industrial product, in which case it's trivially outdone by other more-than-industrial-products that are available in highsec, so it fails to counterbalance anything.

In fact, let's go back to that old question you never answered: what is the nature of this “balance” you seem to think exists?

Highsec has: far better means of production in every way imaginable and access to some of the (economically) best resources in the game. This is balanced out by nullsec's having… what?

Quote:
we should never make it so Null Sov has so much wealth it can't be challenged by newcomers who have put in the time and effort *somewhere* to unleash the dogs of war upon null sov.
This problem is already solved through social and political means, not economical or military, and is not a good reason to maintain a massive industrial imbalance. It certainly isn't a reason to keep a system where player-controlled space offers less freedom to players over NPC-controlled space.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#222 - 2013-04-30 13:11:02 UTC
Liz Laser wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Liz Laser wrote:
But if your argument is that high-sec currently is on the winning side of an industrial imbalance, that's when I start chuckling (because moon-goo is an industrial product and can solve all problems).
…and is easily matched by almost anything highsec has to offer. So at best, we have parity there, combined with immense imbalance everywhere else, resulting in a total imbalance in favour of highsec (the fact that moons aren't just matched, but trivially out-earned by numerous highsec activities, and that moons are not universally available means that we don't even have parity… but let's go with your delusion for the time being).

Mongoo does not solve any problems — it's just an income source, like every other income source, that lets you buy things you can't/won't make for yourself. The reliance on moongoo shows that there is a problem; it does not make the problem go away.

Quote:
Not everything I want is due to being on the weaker side of industrial imbalance
…which is nice and all but not relevant to the case at hand. The reason people want nullsec industry buffs is because nullsec is on the weaker side of an imbalance — something that is blatantly obvious to anyone who has actually studied the mechanics involved. You're essentially making the “Ancient Aliens” argument: there is a (infinitesimally small) possibility that it is like this; therefore it is. Just because there are things that are not due to the obvious imbalance doesn't mean that nothing is due to it, or that the imbalance doesn't exist.


If we're changing the argument to complete wealth generation, you should also include ratting and plexing on null's balance sheet and missioning on high-sec's.

But always remember that the wealth/power to step out and shake up null sov has to come from SOMEWHERE. Maybe it should come from low-sec or NPC null, but we should never make it so Null Sov has so much wealth it can't be challenged by newcomers who have put in the time and effort *somewhere* to unleash the dogs of war upon null sov.


Hi-sec produces more wealth than null.

Power in nullsec comes from organisation, experience and commitment, not wealth.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#223 - 2013-04-30 13:12:49 UTC
Varius Xeral wrote:
Liz Laser wrote:
I'm rambling, but my point is, that in my opinion the way to weigh the balance is by the overall value of industrial goods extracted PER INDUSTRIALIST.


Great, then you fully support a much greater industrial capacity for null as this will be the most efficient way of balancing the value extracted per "industrialist" by drastically increasing their number. I'm glad we agree.

(I am, of course, mocking your ridiculous backpedaling, and am more than satisfied that your complete lack of knowledge and coherence has been demonstrated to anyone with a shred of sense)



I think what the OP means, atleast if I were to say it.... is that per LIVE PLAYER CONTROLLING THE PILOT but meh, I just know it's just way easier to plex 20 accounts and run industrial fleets as opposed to sitting at your keyboard and doing your own clicking in null.

It's a matter of involvement, not access.

Sure lack of access IS there, not going to try to say it isn't. But you gotta admit, highsec allows for alot of bot aspirant-cy(sp?) that actually ENCOURAGES the imbalance.

As much as we can argue the semantics of the OP, the idea is still correct, just the delivery is wrong methinks.

It does come down to the individual player as the cause, but it also comes down to the mechanics. Noone is forced to maximize the use of the mechanics to their full benefit, but utilizing it and then saying it's broken simply makes that person a hypocrite unfortunately =(.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.

Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#224 - 2013-04-30 13:36:38 UTC
Tippia wrote:
This is balanced out by nullsec's having… what?


I thought we agreed that last night Moon goo was a valuable and important resource worth fighting for that isn't present in hi-sec.

I remember you saying that the output of man hours of moon goo for 5 billion was roughly the same as 5 billion worht of hi sec ice. Seems like an equivalent exchange of a balanced system.

I suppose you can always say "But we have to fight and lose ships over moon goo!"

But isn't that half the fun? Think about actually enjoying combat instead of sitting and watching your ice ming laser cycles. Seems like you've got something more than ice miners do.

Unless of course you don't want to pvp, which is also an acceptable answer.

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

Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#225 - 2013-04-30 13:39:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:

Yah, calling up a 200 player fleet to go deal with timers for a few hours each month is pretty standard as far as nullsec warfare goes.

Even something like OTEC only applies to OTEC members not taking each other moons. It has no real effect on upstarts sniping at OTEC or other moons. This stuff happen all the time. The Asakai incident was over a moon mining POS.

So aside from the basic POS maintainance that goes on, we do deploy (and reimburse) fleets that deal with moon taking and defending fairly often.


I'm confused. If moon goo is worthless why lose billions worth of ships just to defend them.

I have never seen an ice miner war on the same proportion.

Although that would be interesting to see.


Like others pointed out, moon goo isn't worthless.

Some moons are worth more than other though. Some are worth sending out huge fleets to take or defend.


And you don't see this with ice because ice belts in their current form are effectively limitless and the vast majority of the harvesting is done in highsec where warring over it is complicated. But is does happen (see; Gallente Ice Interdiction)



Or because you can afk defend the pos and also mine on a diff account therefore tossing out all those "500 man hours" out the window bringing in more than 10b a month.

Using the given math and mechanics of active versus passive income.

We went over this before in that other thread. They aren't comparable. It was proven then and proven now.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.

Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#226 - 2013-04-30 13:45:29 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Power in nullsec comes from organisation, experience and commitment, not wealth.


Didn't someone brandish a chart around showing that null sec lost more hull wealth than any other sec?

Certainly, if they are loosing that much, it must mean they have wealth to throw away.

Of course, it could be that it was all gathered by null players with hi-sec alts. If that is true, then why break the cycle?

Would all these null-sec alts move their money makers to null where they have to worry about awoxers, roams, and cloakers even if income was increased in null?

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

Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#227 - 2013-04-30 13:46:21 UTC
Liz Laser wrote:
Bolow Santosi wrote:
Liz Laser wrote:

Does null-sec want to trade half their moons with high-sec for half of high-secs slots?


Take a wild guess who would have control over those moons. Because it wouldn't be high sec industrialists.


LOL. Yeah, I didn't think that one out all the way.

Still, even THAT would be more "balance" than just null getting more null-sec slots.

It might also be a bit more INTERESTING. Evil



But think of the highsec wars. Think of the activity you would bring out of highsec!

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.

Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#228 - 2013-04-30 14:33:09 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Liz Laser wrote:


Yet null DOES meet those ammo demands. I'll posit for the moment that it manages to because it spends some of it's surplus riches.

By importing it all.

Quote:
Wanting stuff so that you experience less inconvenience doesn't always mean you are on the losing side of an unbalanced system.




We literally cannot build and maintain a single fleet of battleships with our entire outpost infrastructure.



I think a huge problem is that people are wanting 500 man battles at a much higher frequency than was originally designed. On any given day you have 5,000 people looking for a huge battle and the influx of ammo can only support 1/4 of that.

The supply doesn't meet the demand sure. But lower the frequency and maybe it would.

If the income levels were not so high and people were not able to trivialize such an expensive fleet at a drop of the hat, the industrial infrastructure of battle would be better suited.

I'd refer to the stories of people ratting throughout the month, then staging up for a sov fight and those month long grinds happening that people don't like anymore with everyone stockpiling munitions.

Now that we have large fights at a drop of a hat for no other reason than arbitrarily throwing isk out the door, of course you cannot keep up on ammo!

Learn to use godamn lasers if you need lol.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#229 - 2013-04-30 14:45:46 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Liz Laser wrote:


Yet null DOES meet those ammo demands. I'll posit for the moment that it manages to because it spends some of it's surplus riches.

By importing it all.

Quote:
Wanting stuff so that you experience less inconvenience doesn't always mean you are on the losing side of an unbalanced system.




We literally cannot build and maintain a single fleet of battleships with our entire outpost infrastructure.



I think a huge problem is that people are wanting 500 man battles at a much higher frequency than was originally designed. On any given day you have 5,000 people looking for a huge battle and the influx of ammo can only support 1/4 of that.

The supply doesn't meet the demand sure. But lower the frequency and maybe it would.

If the income levels were not so high and people were not able to trivialize such an expensive fleet at a drop of the hat, the industrial infrastructure of battle would be better suited.

I'd refer to the stories of people ratting throughout the month, then staging up for a sov fight and those month long grinds happening that people don't like anymore with everyone stockpiling munitions.

Now that we have large fights at a drop of a hat for no other reason than arbitrarily throwing isk out the door, of course you cannot keep up on ammo!

Learn to use godamn lasers if you need lol.


So you're literally saying that the problem isn't that nullsec has only 3% of the production facilities, it's that we fight too much?

I just want to be clear on this one. Too many fights?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#230 - 2013-04-30 14:55:51 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
It's evident that people still have wildly inflated ideas about how much the best moons are worth.

A top tier hi-sec mission running system probably produces as much wealth as the whole CFC derives from its Tech resources. Let's actually do the maths, shall we?

1 tech moon = 5B/month. Pretty nice! But that's actually only 7M an hour!

1 mission runner = 30M/hr (including LP rewards). Some will get quite a bit more, some will get somewhat less, but I think 30M/hr for the best agents (and those will be by definition the busiest ones) is a reasonable average figure.

If we assume that a top tier mission system has an average of 100 people running missions at any one time, then that system will produce as much wealth as 400+ Tech moons. And 100 is a very low-ball average for those systems, by the way; it's more like the minimum.

In terms of pure wealth creation, any 0.0 coalition could trade all the tech moons it owns in return for a single cash cow hi-sec system like Osmon (which also has 3 Ice belts, and of course 150 manufacturing slots as well Roll, to sweeten the deal) being transported into the middle of their space, and come out well ahead on the deal.

"Oh but Malc," I hear you say "If that was true, then those mission systems would be riddled with 0.0 players!"

They are.



You mean "in addition to" since tech moon is passive and mission running is active. Therefore, can be done at same time making that income cumulative.

Not to mention the wrecks gained from those defended fights you need 200 man fleets putting forward those 250k man hours that are needed to defend the moon, or the belts that might have been ratted int he mean time, or even the anoms in that system/neighboring system.

Don't forget those. Or the taxes associated with those bounties that also go to the coffers.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.

Liz Laser
Blood Tribe Inc
#231 - 2013-04-30 15:19:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Liz Laser
One last post before I hunker down for 10 hours of delivering deliverables in real life.

I don't find an argument in differences in wealth laughable.

I'm not the only one who finds the industrial imbalance argument laughable; I'm just the one who used the most obnoxious phraseology. (If you're still arguing it when I've been away 8 hours, (or if you just look back in this thread) you'll have your proof of the previous sentence).

Yes, there are problems with null sec industry. Fixing problems can be good.

But I can just as easily state that there are CHALLENGES in null-sec industry. If I put it that way, we will be removing challenges from null-sec. Doesn't sound nearly as elite, though, does it?

And regardless, the shake-up is happening whether anyone agrees on justifications or not. I elected null-sec CSMs and I feel that I'm seeing results from that. I don't care if we got our way from your brilliant maths, or because someone is holding a dev's daughter in a russian gulag. We're getting more yummy yummy slots. Although corp/alliance leaders can STILL tell me I can't use them because there are more important uses for them.

The best argument for the resource shake-up I've heard is EvilWeasel's argument for a vibrant local economy. Sounds wonderful, and we can probably do more to make it happen.

There are still more posts above I haven't addressed yet but you'll be wrestling other posters on your industrial imbalance justification for the next 10 hours. Have fun.
Camios
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#232 - 2013-04-30 15:24:01 UTC
Danni stark wrote:
Camios wrote:
Danni stark wrote:
if mining veld was afk levels of safe in null sec, it would completely defeat the purpose of null sec.


No, because Nullsec would be the only place where to mine arkonor and other stuff and that would not be safe.


so if i put 1 mining laser on veldspar, and 2 on arkonor. would i be afk levels of safe, or not?


You completely misunderstood the point. Of course mining arkonor, or even jaspet, should be risky. But there should be the possiblity to mine lowends AFK in 0.0.

I think there should be zones in 0.0 where you have only low end available, and you can mine almost safely or have a warning long before. This should also be the case for ****-level rats and complexes in my opinion.

High level rewards should even be riskier: to go over the top, I would let all the constellation know if someone is running a 10/10 complex or if he's ratting in a Sanctum in a carrier. I repeat: safety should depend more on what are you doing and less on where part of the cluster you are in.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#233 - 2013-04-30 15:32:04 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Malcanis wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Liz Laser wrote:


Yet null DOES meet those ammo demands. I'll posit for the moment that it manages to because it spends some of it's surplus riches.

By importing it all.

Quote:
Wanting stuff so that you experience less inconvenience doesn't always mean you are on the losing side of an unbalanced system.




We literally cannot build and maintain a single fleet of battleships with our entire outpost infrastructure.



I think a huge problem is that people are wanting 500 man battles at a much higher frequency than was originally designed. On any given day you have 5,000 people looking for a huge battle and the influx of ammo can only support 1/4 of that.

The supply doesn't meet the demand sure. But lower the frequency and maybe it would.

If the income levels were not so high and people were not able to trivialize such an expensive fleet at a drop of the hat, the industrial infrastructure of battle would be better suited.

I'd refer to the stories of people ratting throughout the month, then staging up for a sov fight and those month long grinds happening that people don't like anymore with everyone stockpiling munitions.

Now that we have large fights at a drop of a hat for no other reason than arbitrarily throwing isk out the door, of course you cannot keep up on ammo!

Learn to use godamn lasers if you need lol.


So you're literally saying that the problem isn't that nullsec has only 3% of the production facilities, it's that we fight too much?

I just want to be clear on this one. Too many fights?



No, that people think you should provide the ammo needed for all those fights. The idea is flawed. Null industrialists are saying they should be able to to supply their constant fights with self made (in null ammo).

*Snip* Please refrain from RL analogies. ISD Ezwal

Null is richer as a by product to afford to import. Highsec doe snot have the caliber to have the same kind of fights null has.

Therefore it's not a "balance" to be even. But a checks and balances system. One that null tends to forget.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.

Mathrin
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#234 - 2013-04-30 15:39:56 UTC
What kind of an empire can rule that cannot build an army?
Cass Lie
State War Academy
Caldari State
#235 - 2013-04-30 15:52:50 UTC
Not bringing anything new, but this lovely piece of infographic, courtesy of CCP Quant, demonstrates several points made in this discussion quite well.
Xercodo
Cruor Angelicus
#236 - 2013-04-30 15:57:29 UTC
Yup it's all cause of moon goo.

It makes the combat heavy alliances very rich.

With all the money they can afford to buy w/e they want and have it shipped to null sec.

No industry required other than the production of supers.

The Drake is a Lie

Danni stark
#237 - 2013-04-30 16:00:32 UTC
Xercodo wrote:
Yup it's all cause of moon goo.

It makes the combat heavy alliances very rich.

With all the money they can afford to buy w/e they want and have it shipped to null sec.

No industry required other than the production of supers.


producing locally doesn't change the price of a ship.
Xercodo
Cruor Angelicus
#238 - 2013-04-30 16:09:17 UTC
Danni stark wrote:
Xercodo wrote:
Yup it's all cause of moon goo.

It makes the combat heavy alliances very rich.

With all the money they can afford to buy w/e they want and have it shipped to null sec.

No industry required other than the production of supers.


producing locally doesn't change the price of a ship.


No, but it changes the "effective price".

Most likely these mass amounts of ships they buy from highsec are gonna get brought up by JFs or freighters using JBs. The cost of maintaining hauler alts, cyno alts, fueling the POSes that run those JBs, having the jump fuel, etc etc all contributes to the effective cost of getting a ship from highsec.

This is why the blob is running rampant and why smaller alliances have a hard time getting any ground. If you aren't already insanely rich enough to shrug off all the logistic costs of getting large volumes of ships to the front line you'd have to build them yourself.

But in order to do that you have to spend half the time mining. You'll never catch up when the larger alliances have the potential output of all of highsec to fuel their ship needs.

The Drake is a Lie

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#239 - 2013-04-30 16:09:51 UTC
Xercodo wrote:
Yup it's all cause of moon goo.

It makes the combat heavy alliances very rich.

With all the money they can afford to buy w/e they want and have it shipped to null sec.

No industry required other than the production of supers.


Buy orders for technetium are 14k in Jita atm.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Danni stark
#240 - 2013-04-30 16:12:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Danni stark
Xercodo wrote:
No, but it changes the "effective price".

Most likely these mass amounts of ships they buy from highsec are gonna get brought up by JFs or freighters using JBs. The cost of maintaining hauler alts, cyno alts, fueling the POSes that run those JBs, having the jump fuel, etc etc all contributes to the effective cost of getting a ship from highsec.

This is why the blob is running rampant and why smaller alliances have a hard time getting any ground. If you aren't already insanely rich enough to shrug off all the logistic costs of getting large volumes of ships to the front line you'd have to build them yourself.

But in order to do that you have to spend half the time mining. You'll never catch up when the larger alliances have the potential output of all of highsec to fuel their ship needs.


that still doesn't change the price of a ship.
also you either import the ships, or you import the materials for the ships. that's not going to change.