These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Inferno And Datacores

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Francisco Bizzaro
#401 - 2012-05-15 09:05:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Francisco Bizzaro
Mr Epeen wrote:
Francisco Bizzaro wrote:
Mr Epeen wrote:
That's a pretty lame thing to argue.

If I can be bothered to reset some of my PO2 characters to show time in game, you'd see a total of a couple of hours after 5 months. Do you really want to use that as an argument? I'd say less than a day in game over the course of a year for 10B is about as good as it gets for passive income. About equal with the time in game to collect and market the datacores for under a billion.

Try something a little less contrary next time you post.

Not at all. I'm just noting that I haven't been able to log in to the game for a couple of weeks due to travel. My PI is dead. My skill-queue is dead. But my R&D agents are still working. They will continue to work even if I don't log in for the rest of the year. That is not true of those other income sources. It is truly passive income.


Sorry I didn't realize this whole thing was all about you and your inability to plan ahead with a skill queue. Your little scenario affects less than one tenth of one percent of the current players. Most of whom have a clue.

The 300,000 players not affected by Minmatar brain block are managing just fine.

Again, you fail to understand the point. (And for a man who belongs to the "It's all about me" corp, I assume you will forgive me for the personal example which I used to illustrate the point. Thanks.)

I'm just pointing out that all other income generation in Eve requires you to tend to it periodically or they stop producing results. This includes your character farming business, which was your example, because this discussion really is apparently all about you.

Datacore farming is different. The pile of datacores keeps getting bigger, perpetually, with no intervention. It is passive.

Is that clear by now? I hope so, because I tend to believe that a person who hasn't understood something after it's repeated three times is unlikely to benefit from me repeating it a fourth.
Francisco Bizzaro
#402 - 2012-05-15 09:26:37 UTC
Double post.
Zora'e
#403 - 2012-05-15 23:14:00 UTC
Killer Gandry wrote:
Zora'e wrote:

At the same time I also know that (at least) null/wh's are very profitable if someone bothers to take the time to make them that way and people are missing out on a lot of potential fun by not going there and experiencing it for themselves. However, you can't make a chihuahua turn into a mountain lion just by demanding that it do so. It will just make the chihuahua shake and shiver and have a heart attack. Then you have a dead chihuahua (cancelled account) on your hands.


I think you miss a very large point there.

There are also those who have limited gametime. So they aren't really seeing any point in logging in and then being called to fight most of the time without having the chance to build up any assets for themselves.
For casual players it's a lot harder to maintain a PvP life style then for the almost no-lifers who practicly live in EVE or have people with even less life making the Isk for them.

Should they log in then to get aggravated by those who have loads more time to hop into (often) pointless or useless CTA's etc?

I have seen it in various alliances where people with a socalled FC tag keep calling CTA's or HD's for 2 or 3 neuts somehwhere.
They then expect that everyone drops what they are doing and form up all over the place.
God knows howmany hours later the CTA or HD drops and most of the time it was just another pointless exercise.

The no-lifer can easy continue then with his stuff whereas the casual player most often has to log off during the fleet or right after. No making Isk to support the pvp life the alliance cries about.

Now the uproar comes alive that there are many ways to make Isk.
True enough, but let's just not factor in that those too need time plus you often need another character to do it.
This then requires another account or you need to train / purchase another character for it.

So let's invest even more money / Isk. But not all can do the money making on the alt while the main is huddling around after some e-peen FC who just loves the attention of the group straddling after him.

The few Isk someone can make from Datacores is hardly worth while to mention. Simply because they invested time and Isk into getting the standings and the skills up to par to make some Isk on datacore sales.

If CCP in their infinite wisdom is gonna do yet another nerf in favour of certain play styles then please cast away the word Sandbox.



I've lived in High, Low, Null and WH's. I know the profitability of all 4 areas. I also know what is needed to live in all 4 areas successfully. Been there. Done that, and *gasp* I had a life while doing so with limited play time. I also fairly clearly stated that you can't force people to play a play style they have no desire to play, and attempting to do so will end with account cancellations. So really.. not sure why you are arguing your point with me and what I said. Maybe take the totality of my post into consideration FIRST.. before you pick out one small part (taken out of context) to make your 'point' when in fact... you have no point to make in consideration of my post.

It seems to me more than anything else, you jumped on a small portion of my post to beat your drum. However take that small portion of my post in context, and you have no drum to beat.

Have a nice day. Cupcake.

I won't say you are stupid, but you're not exactly on the Zombie menu either.
Imryn Xaran
Coherent Light Enterprises
#404 - 2012-05-16 11:07:52 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Jastra wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
CCP Soundwave wrote:
(...)

Mining with guns was bad because it detracted from real mining. This is bad because it detracts from......what exactly?

We want to move T2 production more towards low and zero-sec. This gives us a very cool venue for FW to influence the rest of the universe instead of being a closed-loop system.


Shocked

And just when you thought CCP couldn't out-fuk themselves, they manage to successfully shatter a new boundary of stupidity.


What's wrong with moving T2 production to 0.0?


hell why not move the whole game out there right, I mean no one actually plays in highsec or has any right at all to use the sandbox they way they want....


So it sounds like what you're saying is that hi-sec is entitled to have the overwhelming advantage for all forms of construction? And that making anything preferrable to build in 0.0 is breaking the "sandbox", but gimping 0.0 for building everything isn't?


Null sec already has total exclusive control over the primary resources for all T2 construction – what more advantage do they need? The reason that more construction does not take place in 0.0 is down to the nature of the people who play the game there.

Basically there are too many Visigoths and not enough Romans. Nobody tries to build an empire in null, they just build the bare minimum to exploit the resources and move on to the next thing they can shoot. If you could build caps in hi-sec there would be no industry at all in null.

This is why there are no market hubs down there.

What is needed is a re-vamp of the way sov is held. The current mechanism for capturing sov is fine (ish) but once it is taken it is yours forever. They need a mechanism where sov degrades over time, and it can only be improved through industrial activity. Break the sov level up into distinct levels and tie certain activities to those levels, being sure to link cap construction and moon goo harvesting to the highest level and you have a system that encourages null sec alliances to actually build empires, not just control territory.

Unfortunately I don’t think many null sec alliances would want this change. As I said, too many Visigoths and not enough Romans.
Imryn Xaran
Coherent Light Enterprises
#405 - 2012-05-16 12:35:06 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Cys Root wrote:
Research Project Management V is a rank 8 skill, and a memory/charisma skill at that, no one has mem/char mapped...it takes forever to train, and has absolutely no other use than R&D agents.
…and it can still be used.

Quote:
With most of the science skills level V unlocks absolutely nothing in terms of items or ships, level V is only needed for mat research on a few BPOs...but a bunch more skills are needed for that as well, skills which i don't have, and no I won't be training amarr starship engineering to V just so i can research some paladin BPOs and not have mechanical engineering V stand forever useless on my skillsheet.
That's your choice — you choose to waste your SP, and you can't really blame anyone else for that. You also chose to train those skills to those levels, and if they haven't paid themselves back handsomely by now, you've done something wrong. Now, they've given you a great platform for branching out into other money-making schemes, so what are kvetching about?

If anything your example shows why the change is needed: because the whole thing was so valuable that people did what you did, to the extent you did, and that kind of passive income generation is something that EVE is quite clearly moving away from.


If CCP was at all serious about eliminating passive income they would eliminate tech moons first - a huge never ending ISK fountain with no SP requirements. Either I missed the dev blog or CCP are only trying to eliminate passive income where their own corps / alliances are not affected.
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#406 - 2012-05-16 13:04:18 UTC
So much time and human effort to nerf average player passive income when all these resources would be far more useful on passive moon mining income.

Because of course everyone knows you can buy 1 Titan per month with 5 or even 15 R&D agents passive income and how bad this is for the game Roll ho wait you can barely buy a battleship and fit it wit 15 agents at best rp rate and sell price ...

Malcanis law once again, from now on those older players with their armada of alts farming lvl4's and incursions in high sec claiming how high sec is a gold mine, will now move their armada of alts farm faction lp's.

Awesome moving from average regular individual player (mister every one playing one or two accounts and 2 or 3 char) to some claiming in a few months they're making 5bil month of data cores (with their armada of alts witch doesn't make that much per character).

I'd like to know the exact amount of isk per month is generated with data cores PER CHARACTER. I'm sure it's not that impressive.

This is the only number that should interest everyone, not how much dude "NobrainerLotsOfSpareTime" does with his armada of 20 alts.

brb
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#407 - 2012-05-16 13:21:49 UTC
I'm not sure Malcanis' Law applies in this case, since as far as I am aware, Soundwave never claimed that this would benefit new players. Nor has anyone else that I've seen seriously advanced that argument, come to that.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#408 - 2012-05-16 13:35:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Indahmawar Fazmarai
Malcanis wrote:
I'm not sure Malcanis' Law applies in this case, since as far as I am aware, Soundwave never claimed that this would benefit new players. Nor has anyone else that I've seen seriously advanced that argument, come to that.



Yay, it's more a double standards issue than a one-sidedness issue.


PS, offtopic; I am seriously thinking about getting a new sig. A Fazmarai's Law would be fine. P
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#409 - 2012-05-16 19:47:46 UTC
Imryn Xaran wrote:

So it sounds like what you're saying is that hi-sec is entitled to have the overwhelming advantage for all forms of construction? And that making anything preferrable to build in 0.0 is breaking the "sandbox", but gimping 0.0 for building everything isn't?


Null sec already has total exclusive control over the primary resources for all T2 construction – what more advantage do they need? The reason that more construction does not take place in 0.0 is down to the nature of the people who play the game there.

Basically there are too many Visigoths and not enough Romans. Nobody tries to build an empire in null, they just build the bare minimum to exploit the resources and move on to the next thing they can shoot. If you could build caps in hi-sec there would be no industry at all in null.

This is why there are no market hubs down there.

What is needed is a re-vamp of the way sov is held. The current mechanism for capturing sov is fine (ish) but once it is taken it is yours forever. They need a mechanism where sov degrades over time, and it can only be improved through industrial activity. Break the sov level up into distinct levels and tie certain activities to those levels, being sure to link cap construction and moon goo harvesting to the highest level and you have a system that encourages null sec alliances to actually build empires, not just control territory.

Unfortunately I don’t think many null sec alliances would want this change. As I said, too many Visigoths and not enough Romans.
[/quote]


Seriously? You think Nullsec doesn't do major industrial activity because the players are too foaming-at-the-mouth-crazy to build things? First, let me show you Mr. Supercap builder. Then in this corner, there's Mr. POS farmer. The reason you don't do other industry in Null is because it is in no way better than doing it in Hisec. In fact, it's worse. Here's why:
1) Limited Slots: There's at most 1 Station per system, and it probably doesn't have many Manufacturing slots.
2) POS Arrays are expensive: Compared to Station slots, POS costs are enormous (do you ever manufacture at your HS POS?)
3) Logistics: Components are gonna be bought from Jita, because nowhere in Null has all the goo to build everything, and Hidden Belts don't really have low ends.
4) Logistics: The lower population density of Null means that you will almost instantly over saturate the local market with what you build, so you'll be shipping it to Jita.
5) Competition: You'll be competing with JF pilots who will seed the market at a small markup over Jita+Fuel, and Fuel isn't very expensive for modules.
6) Risk: Bringing a BPO to nullsec leaves you with the risk that it will end up locked in a station that you can't access.

Basically, nobody builds things in Nullsec because it offers no advantages, and several disadvantages over building the same things in HS and shipping them down. (Bulky items, like T1 ships are often manufactured from imported, compressed minerals).

Anyway, what is an Empire but territory that you control for the purpose of economic or military exploitation? If that territory is only good at producing raw materials, and sucks at converting them into finished goods, why not move the raw materials somewhere that's better at finishing them?

"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
Mortimer Civeri
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#410 - 2012-05-16 20:29:52 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Seriously? You think Nullsec doesn't do major industrial activity because the players are too foaming-at-the-mouth-crazy to build things? First, let me show you Mr. Supercap builder. Then in this corner, there's Mr. POS farmer. The reason you don't do other industry in Null is because it is in no way better than doing it in Hisec. In fact, it's worse. Here's why:
1) Limited Slots: There's at most 1 Station per system, and it probably doesn't have many Manufacturing slots.
2) POS Arrays are expensive: Compared to Station slots, POS costs are enormous (do you ever manufacture at your HS POS?)
3) Logistics: Components are gonna be bought from Jita, because nowhere in Null has all the goo to build everything, and Hidden Belts don't really have low ends.
4) Logistics: The lower population density of Null means that you will almost instantly over saturate the local market with what you build, so you'll be shipping it to Jita.
5) Competition: You'll be competing with JF pilots who will seed the market at a small markup over Jita+Fuel, and Fuel isn't very expensive for modules.
6) Risk: Bringing a BPO to nullsec leaves you with the risk that it will end up locked in a station that you can't access.

Basically, nobody builds things in Nullsec because it offers no advantages, and several disadvantages over building the same things in HS and shipping them down. (Bulky items, like T1 ships are often manufactured from imported, compressed minerals).

Anyway, what is an Empire but territory that you control for the purpose of economic or military exploitation? If that territory is only good at producing raw materials, and sucks at converting them into finished goods, why not move the raw materials somewhere that's better at finishing them?
This^^^

I've looked at the numbers, and unless things are drastically changed by CCP, producing locally out in 0.0 would be a pipe dream.

According to the bloodtear report, a large grav site (the most profitable site to cycle) contains 2M units of trit. So assuming you could cycle the large grav site once per day, that's 2M units of trit per day per level 3 indy system. The moderate grav site has 10M units of trit. By comparison, a single drake takes 2.6M units of trit. So if you're cycling grav sites, you could produce enough trit for 1-4 battlecruisers a day per system. A large alliance may burn through 14 Drakes a day - not to mention battleships, capital production, other ships, etc.

There's not going to be a significant amount of trit production in 0.0, so the only way to build locally is to import lowends. However, ships and modules usually take up less volume, so it's better to just produce those in empire and ship them out. With mineral compression, you can get away with producing ships locally at slightly less cost and significantly more effort than importing them, but that doesn't work when it comes to producing modules locally (since the modules are what you use for compression, anyway).

Compounding the lack of trit, is the problem of 0.0 outposts. The amount of manufacturing slots in a single empire constellation is staggering, when compared to even an entire 0.0 region. Not only is lack of trit heavy ores crippling 0.0 production, but a lack of manufacturing slots also limits local production. Another factor in this, is that only one outpost can be built per system, so your refinery isn't even in the same system as your manufacturing center, making moving uncompressed minerals even more effort. This further makes producing in empire, and shipping everything out even more attractive.

With the Drone poo gone, people will mine more and export minerals to empire, which is good for pvp. However, this won't bring manufacturing out of empire. The only thing that would work is if the material to make something took up less volume than the finished product, it became feasible somehow to mine 10-20x more trit, dropping the one outpost per system rule, or significantly boosting the outpost upgrades to have 50 slots each.

"I don't know which is worse, ...that everyone has his price, or that the price is always so low." Calvin
Omnituens
Merry Band of Entropy
#411 - 2012-05-16 21:03:50 UTC
They might as well scrap the R&D system and redesign it from the ground up.

Release skill points in science.
Refund books.
Let people decide if they still want to be scientists in the "new system". I got into R&D back when it was the lottery. Since then, the skills are just sat there being wasted.
Aron Croup
Incompatible Protocol
#412 - 2012-05-16 21:17:34 UTC
Mortimer Civeri wrote:

According to the bloodtear report, a large grav site (the most profitable site to cycle) contains 2M units of trit. So assuming you could cycle the large grav site once per day, that's 2M units of trit per day per level 3 indy system. The moderate grav site has 10M units of trit. By comparison, a single drake takes 2.6M units of trit. So if you're cycling grav sites, you could produce enough trit for 1-4 battlecruisers a day per system. A large alliance may burn through 14 Drakes a day - not to mention battleships, capital production, other ships, etc.

There's not going to be a significant amount of trit production in 0.0, so the only way to build locally is to import lowends. However, ships and modules usually take up less volume, so it's better to just produce those in empire and ship them out. With mineral compression, you can get away with producing ships locally at slightly less cost and significantly more effort than importing them, but that doesn't work when it comes to producing modules locally (since the modules are what you use for compression, anyway).


Grav sites are mostly for high-end ores. Null-sec has plenty of asteroid belts with giant veldspar asteroids, ready to be mined by the industrious null-sec miner. There is no reason a null-sec production corp in need of tritanium couldn't mine the veldspar from regular asteroid belts.

I do agree that null-sec production is less feasible, but that is not a problem with the production mechanic. Rather, it is a problem with the ease of transporting goods into null-sec. If you couldn't just bridge and cyno-jump all the minerals and modules you ever wanted with nearly no risk of being ambushed or attacked, it would be more feasible to have local production in null-sec.

Over the years, CCP has made travel in null-sec too easy and safe, to the point where any need is supplied from the Jita market instead of being built locally.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#413 - 2012-05-16 21:27:38 UTC
Aron Croup wrote:


Grav sites are mostly for high-end ores. Null-sec has plenty of asteroid belts with giant veldspar asteroids, ready to be mined by the industrious null-sec miner. There is no reason a null-sec production corp in need of tritanium couldn't mine the veldspar from regular asteroid belts.

I do agree that null-sec production is less feasible, but that is not a problem with the production mechanic. Rather, it is a problem with the ease of transporting goods into null-sec. If you couldn't just bridge and cyno-jump all the minerals and modules you ever wanted with nearly no risk of being ambushed or attacked, it would be more feasible to have local production in null-sec.

Over the years, CCP has made travel in null-sec too easy and safe, to the point where any need is supplied from the Jita market instead of being built locally.



Wrong way around. Making travel in nullsec harder makes manufacturing (especially T2) even less enticing than it is now. When travel into and through Null was very hard (before Carriers), people still exported materials to be produced in Hisec. Nullsec has always exported raw materials and imported finished goods. That's not going to change.

Building things in a relatively lawless area is usually stupid. Why do you think the Wild West had mines and ranches but no factories or meat processing plants?

"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
Imryn Xaran
Coherent Light Enterprises
#414 - 2012-05-17 10:37:31 UTC
How about imposing export tariffs?

If hi-sec empires were to impose export tariffs on "finished goods" but not on raw materials then it might be more profitable to buy raw materials in empire but do the actual manufacturing in null.

You wouldn't need to move priceless BPO's down to null - just BPC's so the risk there is negligible.

The low population density in null is at least partially the result of the play style down there. The fact is that many players who like to make their ISK through T1 / 2 manufacturing, industry, mining, exploration, etc have the impression that they will be treated as targets of opportunity by everyone they encounter in null. This impression has been given to them by the never ending succession of knuckle draggers here and in game that insist that the only correct way to play EVE is to PvP in space.

The fact remains that the main obstacle to having a trade hub in null is the null residents.

An empire is much more than an area of territory that you control. An empire is a unifying identity with its own culture, industry and laws. CCP has given us most of the tools needed to build an empire in null, but nobody so far has done it. Null remains a wasteland, with the occasional spot of civilisation, populated by roaming bands of visigoths intent on destroying everything they can.

If an alliance wanted to build a trade hub a good place to start would be to offer full funding and a guarantee of protection to industrialists, with a proven track record, via a trusted third party to set up in their territory. Then they would have to actually follow through and protect the industrialists - basically they would have to replace Concord and couldn't go haring off after a juicy target 10 systems away, and thats where it all falls apart.

The key tool that CCP haven't give us is a police force. It is pretty obvious to me that CCP don't want anything permanent or long lasting in null, they want it to be a constant battle ground with fleets of ships clashing everywhere and laying waste to everything. It is pretty stupid of them to suggest, let alone try to encourage industrialists to set up in that environment.

Basically it boils down to this - CCP wants your stuff blown up.
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#415 - 2012-05-17 11:54:53 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
I'm not sure Malcanis' Law applies in this case, since as far as I am aware, Soundwave never claimed that this would benefit new players. Nor has anyone else that I've seen seriously advanced that argument, come to that.


Indeed, and this has never applied to new players nor new players ever had/claim to get stockpiles of isk from data cores sales.
You know as well as I do a new player choosing to take the industrial road will not make huge millions of isk out of his main data cores, older players and some nerds playing dozens alts do.

Soundwave did it, stating his huge income revenue from his alts data cores sales and "omg that's too much".
What an example: "hey if you play my game and don't play like me you suck".

What's the real problem here, the amount of isk generated by a guy playing his main and probably one alt to get R&D rp's or those guys playing 2 accounts plus 10 to 30 R&P/PI alt accounts (x3 char's) doing nothing else but that?

brb
Francisco Bizzaro
#416 - 2012-05-17 12:00:55 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
I'm not sure Malcanis' Law applies in this case, since as far as I am aware, Soundwave never claimed that this would benefit new players. Nor has anyone else that I've seen seriously advanced that argument, come to that.



Yay, it's more a double standards issue than a one-sidedness issue.


PS, offtopic; I am seriously thinking about getting a new sig. A Fazmarai's Law would be fine. P

Please do. There are a number of questionable numbers in your sig. The one I'd point out as obvious (and unlikely to derail the thread as badly as the others) is "14".
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#417 - 2012-05-17 12:07:18 UTC
Omnituens wrote:
They might as well scrap the R&D system and redesign it from the ground up.

Release skill points in science.
Refund books.
Let people decide if they still want to be scientists in the "new system". I got into R&D back when it was the lottery. Since then, the skills are just sat there being wasted.



I'd actually like to recover those skill points too and actually put them in to guns, I'd for sure get out much more from those skill points in guns than R&D

brb
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#418 - 2012-05-17 18:46:43 UTC
Imryn Xaran wrote:
How about imposing export tariffs?

If hi-sec empires were to impose export tariffs on "finished goods" but not on raw materials then it might be more profitable to buy raw materials in empire but do the actual manufacturing in null.

You wouldn't need to move priceless BPO's down to null - just BPC's so the risk there is negligible.

The low population density in null is at least partially the result of the play style down there. The fact is that many players who like to make their ISK through T1 / 2 manufacturing, industry, mining, exploration, etc have the impression that they will be treated as targets of opportunity by everyone they encounter in null. This impression has been given to them by the never ending succession of knuckle draggers here and in game that insist that the only correct way to play EVE is to PvP in space.

The fact remains that the main obstacle to having a trade hub in null is the null residents.

An empire is much more than an area of territory that you control. An empire is a unifying identity with its own culture, industry and laws. CCP has given us most of the tools needed to build an empire in null, but nobody so far has done it. Null remains a wasteland, with the occasional spot of civilisation, populated by roaming bands of visigoths intent on destroying everything they can.

If an alliance wanted to build a trade hub a good place to start would be to offer full funding and a guarantee of protection to industrialists, with a proven track record, via a trusted third party to set up in their territory. Then they would have to actually follow through and protect the industrialists - basically they would have to replace Concord and couldn't go haring off after a juicy target 10 systems away, and thats where it all falls apart.

The key tool that CCP haven't give us is a police force. It is pretty obvious to me that CCP don't want anything permanent or long lasting in null, they want it to be a constant battle ground with fleets of ships clashing everywhere and laying waste to everything. It is pretty stupid of them to suggest, let alone try to encourage industrialists to set up in that environment.

Basically it boils down to this - CCP wants your stuff blown up.



1) The tariff idea is terrible. Paying an NPC tax on your ship and its contents every time you hop a gate into Low/Null is ridiculous (and that's how it would have to be done)

2) So you're saying that Null Industrialists should *Import* BPCs into null? To take advantage of the more expensive raw materials, more expensive manufacturing and research slots, and increased risk of losing jobs to hostile actions. Sounds like a great deal.

3) The low population density is a result of a few factors, one is that only about 7-8 accounts per system can make a higher income than HS missioning, while any number of people can be in a HS system making that income. Another is that living in Null takes significantly more effort than living in high.

4) If you think an Empire has to have unifying Culture, Laws, and Industry, the British, Roman, and Khanate empires would like to have a word with you. None of them had a unified Culture, none of them had the same laws throughout, and all of them had some areas that produced finished goods and some that produced raw materials. But you were only three off of your three ways to judge an Empire, so... at least you didn't go negative, I guess.

5) You're confusing a "Stocked Market" with a "Trade Hub." The HS trade hubs rely on Easy logistics to function. I can buy something in ita, stick it in a freighter and AP it to my destination with very little risk. In a hypothetical nullsec Hub, I'd have to Jump it to my destination to get equivalent safety, and that costs money, has a lower capacity, and requires a cyno (extra effor).

"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
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#419 - 2012-05-17 20:51:58 UTC
Francisco Bizzaro wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
I'm not sure Malcanis' Law applies in this case, since as far as I am aware, Soundwave never claimed that this would benefit new players. Nor has anyone else that I've seen seriously advanced that argument, come to that.



Yay, it's more a double standards issue than a one-sidedness issue.


PS, offtopic; I am seriously thinking about getting a new sig. A Fazmarai's Law would be fine. P

Please do. There are a number of questionable numbers in your sig. The one I'd point out as obvious (and unlikely to derail the thread as badly as the others) is "14".


The signature is pre-Fanfest and was updated only to reflect Issler Dainze's arrival to CSM.
EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#420 - 2012-05-17 20:53:27 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
I'm not sure Malcanis' Law applies in this case, since as far as I am aware, Soundwave never claimed that this would benefit new players. Nor has anyone else that I've seen seriously advanced that argument, come to that.



Yay, it's more a double standards issue than a one-sidedness issue.


PS, offtopic; I am seriously thinking about getting a new sig. A Fazmarai's Law would be fine. P

didn't you claim you were unsubscribing

whatever happened to that