These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Building better Worlds

First post First post First post
Author
Castles
Sovereign Power Company
#1461 - 2014-04-22 09:47:22 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Anders Madeveda wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Sven Viko VIkolander wrote:


3. Null becoming more profitable is great...


Agree generally with most of your post except this. Null is already the most profitable by a large margin...making it more so is unnecessary and more unbalancing in my opinion.

Profit from resources and combat should increase moving from hi to nullsec. Profit from business should decrease from hi to nullsec. Resources should be more readily available in null but harder to process as this takes complex factories. Hisec should have better facilities as stability allows for them to be optimized.

This would lead to greater travel between sectors and a richer game.


This incessant drive by CCP to make Null even more profitable belies the real issue with Null and its lack of inhabitants...Null Sucks, Sov mechanics suck, they should just rename Null to Dyson it sucks so bad. As a result most players call High Sec home because there is a chance to play the game without being "called up to defend" or forced to fly specific ships/fits or basically kissing the a** of whomever you have to rent from for the privilege of living there. Fix the Sov mechanics and then possibly Null will become more enticing. Making it more profitable will not have the migratory effect that CCP intends. Rather these changes will drive another nail in the coffin of disenfranchisement that High Sec players currently reside in.


Are you going to dispute that, at present, S&I is massively and overwhlemingly more profitable in hi-sec?


Why waste everyone's time with a rhetorical question, Malcanis? State your point if you have one.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Singularity Expedition Services
Singularity Syndicate
#1462 - 2014-04-22 09:53:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Corraidhin Farsaidh
Malcanis wrote:


Are you going to dispute that, at present, S&I is massively and overwhelmingly more profitable in hi-sec?


Can't comment on 'massively and overwhelmingly' without statistics to quantify it (i'd be interested to see them) but even if it is why is that bad? Null is definitely 'massively and overwhelmingly' more profitable in income from resources, moon mining (Where is that in hisec?), ratting opportunities (AFK missioning in carriers is a common theme in threads it seems) and any of the other income streams I may have forgotten. Why is it bad for it to be necessary to trade between the 'safe' (yeah right) hisec areas that provide stability for S&I to flourish, and the outlands where resources are greatest (by far)?

It must be better for the game to have areas where different careers have better opportunites. Exploration, resource extraction and combat already have much better value in null. Having it be advantageous to move those goods to hisec creates player movement and interaction which can only be good.

People will reply with risk vs reward about hisec income, but what happened to effort vs reward (which after all is what risk management boils down to).. To make these vast sums of profit in hisec (again I'd love to see the stats on this compared to lo/nullsec) requires a great deal of effort. S&I has a large time and isk investment to become profitable and provides the markets for the moon goo, high end minerals, goods for t3 production etc. If everything is pushed to losec for maximum profit why would anyone ever leave their own safe little sov enclave for anything but blob warfare or interceptor roams?

For the economy to remain healthy there needs to be movement of both players and goods, import and export from each area must remain strong. One of the biggest draws of Eve for me is the ability to have hisec industrial areas where I make steady isk. losec riskier areas where I get materials for industry, and nullsec providing me with stuff I can't get yet. I interact with players in each of these areas in different ways and the game to me is all the better for that. If I am forced to move to null to have any hope of making reasonable isk where is the player choice now?
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1463 - 2014-04-22 10:55:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Malcanis wrote:

Are you going to dispute that, at present, S&I is massively and overwhlemingly more profitable in hi-sec?


Are you going to dispute that only a very small minority cares about S&I in 00 sec? For those, a buff without this ridiculous stuff happening around High sec S&I would have been enough. Blink

I also point back to this question in expectation of a satisfying answer.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Zappity
Kurved Trading
#1464 - 2014-04-22 11:00:25 UTC
Time for the next dev blog. This is pointless without the figures.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.

Corraidhin Farsaidh
Singularity Expedition Services
Singularity Syndicate
#1465 - 2014-04-22 11:00:49 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:


Are you going to dispute that only a very small minority cares about S&I in 00 sec? For those, a buff without this ridiculous stuff happening around High sec S&I would have been enough. Blink


I don't even think industry in null should be buffed...why should it? I am happy that S&I is being addressed but in my opinion it should be for the betterment of the game features not the betterment of profit in any one area. I think I've already made clear my view that hisec *should* be better for S&I anyway...waiting for reasoned arguments as to why this shouldn't be the case and I'm surprised I haven't received any yet...
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#1466 - 2014-04-22 11:28:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Schmata Bastanold
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
I think I've already made clear my view that hisec *should* be better for S&I anyway...waiting for reasoned arguments as to why this shouldn't be the case and I'm surprised I haven't received any yet...


Oh, probably because science is so much better when done in the middle of frakking nowhere deep in mountain caves or other wild areas. You know, all that infrastructure cities provide is overrated anyway.

CCP, Y U no new blog yet? I wanna know more about changes in parts I have no idea about and I want it NAOW!

Invalid signature format

Banko Mato
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#1467 - 2014-04-22 12:48:56 UTC
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
CCP, Y U no new blog yet? I wanna know more about changes in parts I have no idea about and I want it NAOW!


/sign

I would really appreciate early information about all the number stuff and most importantly on the actual planned date for the patch. Changes of that magnitude require a not so tiny amount of preparation on the side of us industrialists, i.e. I'd like to prepare all my upcoming ME/PE stuff to be timed so that it finishes right before the changes hit.

Ah, and CCP, please clarify the issue regarding queuing of jobs under the new system (saving costs by queuing vs. being forced to swallow scaling taxes).
Urziel99
Multiplex Gaming
The Bastion
#1468 - 2014-04-22 13:16:44 UTC
Malcanis wrote:

Are you going to dispute that, at present, S&I is massively and overwhlemingly more profitable in hi-sec?


Are you going to dispute that moon mining, gas harvesting, drug manufacturing, ore mining (when it happens), exploration, ratting, plexing, salvaging and npc missions are massively and overwhelmingly more profitable in nullsec?

Are you also going to dispute that in order to be "massively and overwhelmingly profitable" in S&I that I have to put orders of magnitude more isk on the table than any of those activities in nullsec?

I await your meager defense with baited breath.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Singularity Expedition Services
Singularity Syndicate
#1469 - 2014-04-22 13:28:38 UTC
Urziel99 wrote:
Malcanis wrote:

Are you going to dispute that, at present, S&I is massively and overwhlemingly more profitable in hi-sec?


Are you going to dispute that moon mining, gas harvesting, drug manufacturing, ore mining (when it happens), exploration, ratting, plexing, salvaging and npc missions are massively and overwhelmingly more profitable in nullsec?

Are you also going to dispute that in order to be "massively and overwhelmingly profitable" in S&I that I have to put orders of magnitude more isk on the table than any of those activities in nullsec?

I await your meager defense with baited breath.


Would be interesting to see the stats on capital investment compared to return on that too for nullsec activities compared to losec and hisec...
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1470 - 2014-04-22 13:37:14 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Urziel99 wrote:
Malcanis wrote:

Are you going to dispute that, at present, S&I is massively and overwhlemingly more profitable in hi-sec?


Are you going to dispute that moon mining, gas harvesting, drug manufacturing, ore mining (when it happens), exploration, ratting, plexing, salvaging and npc missions are massively and overwhelmingly more profitable in nullsec?

Are you also going to dispute that in order to be "massively and overwhelmingly profitable" in S&I that I have to put orders of magnitude more isk on the table than any of those activities in nullsec?

I await your meager defense with baited breath.


Would be interesting to see the stats on capital investment compared to return on that too for nullsec activities compared to losec and hisec...


That's a simple answer: not high enough. Roll

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#1471 - 2014-04-22 13:47:00 UTC
Zappity wrote:
Time for the next dev blog. This is pointless without the figures.


Well, if they do go chronologically, the blogs that really matter are at the end.
Assuming the new release is in early June, what, 6 weeks away, the Greyscale blogs, the ones that really matter, will be out a few days before the release, since it has been almost a week since the last one.

Or, they could end up releasing all of them at Fanfest.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1472 - 2014-04-22 14:35:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Weaselior
Urziel99 wrote:

Are you going to dispute that moon mining, gas harvesting, drug manufacturing, ore mining (when it happens), exploration, ratting, plexing, salvaging and npc missions are massively and overwhelmingly more profitable in nullsec?

yes, no (no market), no (no market), no (highends are insanely depressed due to the way grav anoms are set up so mining in null is not significantly more profitable), somewhat, yes, yes, no, no (sov null has no npc missions)

this is of course ignoring the risk, the ease of disrupting these activities, and the costs of conquering and maintaining the space

Urziel99 wrote:

Are you also going to dispute that in order to be "massively and overwhelmingly profitable" in S&I that I have to put orders of magnitude more isk on the table than any of those activities in nullsec?


you have to put orders of magnitude more isk on the table, but get virtually zero risk and incredibly low requirement to log in

industry is a high-capital low-effort activity and so naturally it requires much more capital than low-capital high-effort activities

any good industrialist would know that effort is a resource so i'm guessing you're not one

edit: oh for moon mining and reactions you have to put way more isk on the table (and it is actually at risk) than some highsec industrialist

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#1473 - 2014-04-22 14:38:51 UTC
Urziel99 wrote:
Malcanis wrote:

Are you going to dispute that, at present, S&I is massively and overwhlemingly more profitable in hi-sec?


Are you going to dispute that moon mining, gas harvesting, drug manufacturing, ore mining (when it happens), exploration, ratting, plexing, salvaging and npc missions are massively and overwhelmingly more profitable in nullsec?

Are you also going to dispute that in order to be "massively and overwhelmingly profitable" in S&I that I have to put orders of magnitude more isk on the table than any of those activities in nullsec?

I await your meager defense with baited breath.


I won't wait for Malcanis to answer. I can do it.

First we need to separate out what is actually S&I and what is not. Ratting, exploration, plexing, salvaging, and missions are not S&I. They are PvE. There is no science or industry in any of those. Why you included those in your post is unknown to me other than to possibly provide a false sense of correctness that does not exist. I think they call that a Straw-Man argument. I could be wrong.

Exploration is a bit fuzzy because it involves the gathering of science-related materials. But at no point do you have to engage in any science or industry to do that. You do not need an industrial ship. In fact, the best ships for data and relic sites are covops (combat) frigates, the SoE faction frigate and cruiser, and exploration-fit strategic cruisers. So that leaves moons, gases, mining, and manufacturing.

https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/reactions/

Moon mining, moon goo reactions, gas harvesting, and drug mfg, can only be done in 0.3 space or lower. Fullerenes (precursors to hybrid polymers) can only be gathered in w-space. So they cannot be compared to hisec except in strictly by profitability or lack thereof.

The best reaction is Fermionic Condensates, a moon goo reaction. The listed net for that reaction is apx. 1.3B isk per month, before POS fuel, transportation costs, and market fees are considered. It can only be produced in 0.3 sec or lower. The preferred tower type is Gallente and it will run you 40 blocks per hour. 40 blocks per hour * 24 hours * 30 days * 15,000 isk/block = 432,000,000 isk per month. So the tower will eat up a huge chunk of your net. It leaves just about enough to PLEX 1 account and afford a T2 cruiser once a month. It can be done with 1 character, though 2 or more is typical.

Any complex reaction requires a large tower. So any complex reaction that shows a profit of less than the fuel cost is a loss if you bought the materials off the market.

For the nulsec dwellers that own the moons, they operate vast numbers of towers to run all the reactions required to get to that level of profitability. Every tower used to operate an unprofitable reaction eats of profits. Fuel costs eat up the lion's share of the potential profits and greatly increases the amount of effort required.

Hisec industry requires... all of 4 steps.


  1. Buy mins remotely.
  2. Courier contract to factory remotely.
  3. Build stuff remotely.
  4. Courier contract back to market remotely.
  5. Profit?


Mining can be done anywhere. The profitability (or lack thereof) is entirely dependent on the mineral value of the ores and how much volume of ore a miner can pull per a given amount of time. Since the Jita value of the mineral content of ice and ore is the same in nulsec as in hisec, we have a solid basis for comparison.

https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/ore/
https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/ore/ice.html

In almost all categories, ice is better isk/hr than any ore. The most profitable ice is Dark Glitter. This is available only in 0.1 or lower sec space. So in that way, yes, you are right. But other ices are available in hisec, and they are almost all worth more than any nulsec ore. So, no, mining is not strictly better in nulsec than in hisec. An ice miner in hisec can make just as much as if he were in nulsec with much less risk.

Manufacturing is in no way more profitable in nulsec if you are importing raw materials and exporting finished product. The markets there are much smaller due to the obviously lower population density. If you can source enough raw materials for your products and there is enough demand, you can make a decent living.

The primary industry in nulsec is supercapital/titan production. For years this has depended on mineral compression to function. But this summer mineral compression is getting the big ol' nerf bat.

In sovereign space, all your stuff can be lost within the space of a few days. In hisec, you can function without undocking and have no threat of losing anything ever.

Only the edge case, exploration, is clearly more profitable in nulsec than in hisec.

Doing any of these requires far more investment in nulsec than in hisec. You need jump freighters, POSes, stations, sov, and cyno alts to name a few things above and beyond the simple cost of materials and couriers that you have in hisec.

We won't even talk about the risks and effort require in w-space.

Now tell me again how much better nulsec industry is compared to hisec.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY

Corraidhin Farsaidh
Singularity Expedition Services
Singularity Syndicate
#1474 - 2014-04-22 14:52:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Corraidhin Farsaidh
Weaselior wrote:
... snippety snip ...
you have to put orders of magnitude more isk on the table, but get virtually zero risk and incredibly low requirement to log in

industry is a high-capital low-effort activity and so naturally it requires much more capital than low-capital high-effort activities

any good industrialist would know that effort is a resource so i'm guessing you're not one


Interesting to see the different views on this but I stand by my point which your view somewhat backs up. Hisec should (in my opinion) be where the bulk of S&I takes place due to that stability (I won't say safety because I disagree there), nullsec should be the major resource areas, but S&I should suffer due to the inherent instability of the area. You state that there is no market in null for many of the resources, that simply means it is a logistical exercise to get the raw goods to the market that requires them. The flow of people, materials and finished goods back and forth is the key to a healthy economy.

An industrialist knows that the best materials almost always come from the most dangerous areas...they would also never dream of putting a fragile hitech S&I centre in such a location. The real trick is to balance the extraction, transport and production elements for maximum profit. I very much doubt that the % profit on manufacturing in hisec is higher than the % profit on running combat anoms etc in null when comparing the amount of isk in play in the transaction (goods for the S&I player, ship for the anom runner).

As you say effort is a resource, and profit is the result of selling something at a higher value than the effort required to produce it. If nullsec folks want more of the S&I profit that is sooo vast in hisec then why don't they train an alt to run the S&I side of things there and turn their own raw materials into huge profits without any middle men?

Edit: Note that I am comparing isk per hour here for areas, not hisec S&I and losec S&I. my argument is that each area should have something it is ideal for ranging from S&I in hisec to resource gathering in losec to promote the movement of people and goods between the security areas.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1475 - 2014-04-22 14:52:21 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:

Are you going to dispute that only a very small minority cares about S&I in 00 sec? For those, a buff without this ridiculous stuff happening around High sec S&I would have been enough. Blink

a very small minority of people in 0.0 care about industry because industry is impractical in 0.0 so those people get bored and leave

are you going to dispute that people receiving cancer treatment often die, cancer treatment kills people stop doing it

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1476 - 2014-04-22 14:59:13 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

Interesting to see the different views on this but I stand by my point which your view somewhat backs up. Hisec should (in my opinion) be where the bulk of S&I takes place due to that stability (I won't say safety because I disagree there), nullsec should be the major resource areas, but S&I should suffer due to the inherent instability of the area.

i don't care about ~reality~ arguments in a video game when they're not grounded in good game design and every argument that is made that is about "well reality says..." with no discussion of why that is good game design and balance is junk.

highsec will continue to have a large quantity of industry because it's stable and many industrialists are risk-averse. however those willing to move to null will reap increased rewards for their massively increased risk and increased expenses.

Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

I very much doubt that the % profit on manufacturing in hisec is higher than the % profit on running combat anoms etc in null when comparing the amount of isk in play in the transaction (goods for the S&I player, ship for the anom runner).


i very much doubt that this lump of titanium has as much citrus as this lemon

you keep trying to compare radically different methods of making isk: industry is a high-capital low-effort way to make isk through small returns on large sums that scales up. anoming is a low-capital high-effort way to make isk through large returns on small initial sums that does not scale up

you keep trying to compare things that are not at all alike and ignoring why they're different. industry is how you become rich because of compound interest. mining and anoming are how you build up initial sums of money because the return, while capped in absolute terms, is much higher in percentage terms when you're poor

Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

As you say effort is a resource, and profit is the result of selling something at a higher value than the effort required to produce it. If nullsec folks want more of the S&I profit that is sooo vast in hisec then why don't they train an alt to run the S&I side of things there and turn their own raw materials into huge profits without any middle men?


they do. because industry is so broken in 0.0 with the current model, they put that alt in highsec even if they'd rather do industry in null.

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Corraidhin Farsaidh
Singularity Expedition Services
Singularity Syndicate
#1477 - 2014-04-22 15:26:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Corraidhin Farsaidh
Weaselior wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

Interesting to see the different views ...blurb....

i don't care about ~reality~ arguments in a video game when they're not grounded in good game design and every argument that is made that is about "well reality says..." with no discussion of why that is good game design and balance is junk.

highsec will continue to have a large quantity of industry because it's stable and many industrialists are risk-averse. however those willing to move to null will reap increased rewards for their massively increased risk and increased expenses.


In no place here did I mention reality, I was talking in game terms. As stated I believe that each area should have it's own niche to promote travel between them in one way or another. Don't like the people who live in hisec who make moey from industry? Do it better than them then, beat them in market PvP rather than just buff nullsec for an advantage for no reason other than because it is nullsec.

Weaselior wrote:


i very much doubt that this lump of titanium has as much citrus as this lemon

you keep trying to compare radically different methods of making isk: industry is a high-capital low-effort way to make isk through small returns on large sums that scales up. anoming is a low-capital high-effort way to make isk through large returns on small initial sums that does not scale up

you keep trying to compare things that are not at all alike and ignoring why they're different. industry is how you become rich because of compound interest. mining and anoming are how you build up initial sums of money because the return, while capped in absolute terms, is much higher in percentage terms when you're poor


Indeed I was comparing different means of generating isk, again with my point being that each region should in fact have a unique way of making isk that is better than the other regions. If it is so hard to make isk in nullsec compared to hisec how do the large alliances produce enough to afford so many titans? Let alone throw so many away in one battle...

Weaselior wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

As you say effort is a resource, and profit is the result of selling something at a higher value than the effort required to produce it. If nullsec folks want more of the S&I profit that is sooo vast in hisec then why don't they train an alt to run the S&I side of things there and turn their own raw materials into huge profits without any middle men?


they do. because industry is so broken in 0.0 with the current model, they put that alt in highsec even if they'd rather do industry in null.


So most would rather do S&I in null with their S&I alt? Why? Convenience? This would then be giving a higher return on less effort.

I will clarify my point in case I drifted over the last few posts. I am happy that S&I is better in hisec and that resource generation and reward is higher in null (with losec lay somewhere between). I do not see and still am to be convinced that S&I *needs* to be better in null for the improvement of the game. This would lead to less movement of people and materials, stagnating trade and homogenizing the player base into a few nullsec alliances. Hisec would effectively become an oversized training ground and those who do not have the time required to dedicate to a nullsec lifestyle would be excluded from the game to all intents and purposes.
Anders Madeveda
Usque Ad Mortem
#1478 - 2014-04-22 15:40:18 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Anders Madeveda wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Sven Viko VIkolander wrote:


3. Null becoming more profitable is great...


Agree generally with most of your post except this. Null is already the most profitable by a large margin...making it more so is unnecessary and more unbalancing in my opinion.

Profit from resources and combat should increase moving from hi to nullsec. Profit from business should decrease from hi to nullsec. Resources should be more readily available in null but harder to process as this takes complex factories. Hisec should have better facilities as stability allows for them to be optimized.

This would lead to greater travel between sectors and a richer game.


This incessant drive by CCP to make Null even more profitable belies the real issue with Null and its lack of inhabitants...Null Sucks, Sov mechanics suck, they should just rename Null to Dyson it sucks so bad. As a result most players call High Sec home because there is a chance to play the game without being "called up to defend" or forced to fly specific ships/fits or basically kissing the a** of whomever you have to rent from for the privilege of living there. Fix the Sov mechanics and then possibly Null will become more enticing. Making it more profitable will not have the migratory effect that CCP intends. Rather these changes will drive another nail in the coffin of disenfranchisement that High Sec players currently reside in.


Are you going to dispute that, at present, S&I is massively and overwhlemingly more profitable in hi-sec?


What is there to dispute? Looking at raw numbers tells us that manufacturing is concentrated in High-Sec...as it should be. What rational civilization would place the heart of its production capabilities in a high risk, unstable area like Null? My point is not that High Sec manufacturing is not more profitable than Null, but rather that Null is broken(even the precious Mittani says so). Throat punching High Sec Industrialists and then pointing to the Null door will not have the intended effect, at least in the way CCP/CSM believes it will. I would rather unsub my 4 Industry accounts, mothball my well researched BPO library and wait for the accountants at CCP to force the Dev team to see the light.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1479 - 2014-04-22 15:49:25 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:

Are you going to dispute that only a very small minority cares about S&I in 00 sec? For those, a buff without this ridiculous stuff happening around High sec S&I would have been enough. Blink

a very small minority of people in 0.0 care about industry because industry is impractical in 0.0 so those people get bored and leave

are you going to dispute that people receiving cancer treatment often die, cancer treatment kills people stop doing it


No, and that's not what I implied at all. Read and try to understand again. Roll

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1480 - 2014-04-22 16:06:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Weaselior
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

Indeed I was comparing different means of generating isk, again with my point being that each region should in fact have a unique way of making isk that is better than the other regions. If it is so hard to make isk in nullsec compared to hisec how do the large alliances produce enough to afford so many titans? Let alone throw so many away in one battle...

i am buying my own titan with money i've made in jita, or elsewhere in highsec, mostly. most people who can afford their own titan likewise made their money in highsec somehow. it's a rare, rare person who rats or mines up a titan.

there is no comparison between job-like things like ratting and mining where you basically get a wage and return-on-capital things where you earn a percent on your existing money, and if null has only the former it is massively, massively underpowered compared to highsec because the return on capital is the only way to get rich

that is a problem, and one that is rightly being fixed. highsec will have its risk-free production, nullsec will have its riskier but more profitable production.

Rivr Luzade wrote:

No, and that's not what I implied at all. Read and try to understand again. Roll

nope, i'm explaining to you that you don't understand cause and effect and i am using a metaphor to mock you that makes my point abundantly clear.

your point was bad, wrong, and was turbodunked into oblivion much like every other point you've tried to make. when you get turbodunked everyone knows: it does not help to claim 'i was misunderstood it is actually your fault'. trying to infer things about how much null people want to do industry if it is balanced from the number doing it when it is unmitigated garbage is useless.

Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

I will clarify my point in case I drifted over the last few posts. I am happy that S&I is better in hisec and that resource generation and reward is higher in null (with losec lay somewhere between). I do not see and still am to be convinced that S&I *needs* to be better in null for the improvement of the game.


I'm not, because I like to do industry and would like to be able to do it in nullsec, build up industrial zones, and create much better gameplay than the current "make courier contracts from jita to factory, install bazillion jobs, make courier contract back, list on market, repeat"

industry should be profitable and doable in null. large amounts of it will continue to be in highsec because that's where jita and the risk-free industry is. but at last nullsec will not be hobbled by having entire regions with less factory slots than a single highsec station and other indefensible crippling disadvantages. that will create much more vibrant gameplay in nullsec as there becomes more to do than rat and kill ratters, and take ratting and moon mining space.

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.