These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

You CANT Nerf HighSec!

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#1061 - 2012-12-25 02:46:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Snow Axe
Sal Landry wrote:
And how exactly is nerfing highsec refine rates making nullsec "compelling"?


Risk is always and forever part of the equation. Even if you buff null to even equal highsec's production capabilities (which would be substantial), highsec will still win out every time due to its inherent safety. At that point, you go one of two ways - buff nullsec that much more to try and compensate and risk power creep, or nerf highsec and give industrialists an interesting choice - move to null with truly higher profit potential with associated risks, or stay in highsec and eat the taxes in exchange for safety and better market access. Get the numbers right and the decision might be - wait for it - a compelling one for a player to make!

POKER ALICE wrote:
Then what would you suggest to add industrial capability to null?


Infinitely better outposts - way more slots and better refines (and both of said things in the same station, unlike now) combined with adjusting the ore composition of several "black sheep" ores (Spodumain and Gneiss are exclusive to 0.0 and are the two worst ores in the game, Spodumain being the worst by an absolutely ludicrous margin) or creating entirely new ores with higher low-end mineral content with the goal of being sourced locally. Combine those two and you've got the potential for industry to bloom in null. Combine them with taxes/etc that make highsec less profitable by default and you get the situation that should already exist - higher profits with associated risk in null vs. lower rewards but higher safety in high.

That's just off the top of my head. Some articles that go way more in depth:
http://themittani.com/features/its-time-nerf-highsec
http://themittani.com/features/addressing-tritanium-problem
http://themittani.com/features/hard-truths-fixing-nullsec-income
http://themittani.com/features/destroying-shipyards

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1062 - 2012-12-25 02:52:38 UTC
Sal Landry wrote:
Snow Axe wrote:
The idea isn't to force anyone, the idea is to make nullsec life compelling.


And how exactly is nerfing highsec refine rates making nullsec "compelling"?

imagine the havoc i will cause with 101% refining

ccp can. so 100% is the max. as long as highsec has 100%, this is prorblem

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1063 - 2012-12-25 02:55:01 UTC
Malphilos wrote:

Sounds distinctly like a goal, which is an odd attitude for a "sandbox".



Malphilos wrote:

This is my swing set. This is my sandbox. I'm not allowed to go in the deep end

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Tesal
#1064 - 2012-12-25 03:09:15 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Sal Landry wrote:
And how exactly is nerfing highsec refine rates making nullsec "compelling"?


Risk is always and forever part of the equation. Even if you buff null to even equal highsec's production capabilities (which would be substantial), highsec will still win out every time due to its inherent safety. At that point, you go one of two ways - buff nullsec that much more to try and compensate and risk power creep, or nerf highsec and give industrialists an interesting choice - move to null with truly higher profit potential with associated risks, or stay in highsec and eat the taxes in exchange for safety and better market access. Get the numbers right and the decision might be - wait for it - a compelling one for a player to make!


Its not an interesting choice at all. The people in null would make new alt armies to do industry and the hi-sec industrialists would be out of a job. I guess you don't want to wreck the game, just wreck my game.
POKER ALICE
Moonshine Monks Gentlemans Club
#1065 - 2012-12-25 03:26:07 UTC
Quote:

Infinitely better outposts - way more slots and better refines (and both of said things in the same station, unlike now) combined with adjusting the ore composition of several "black sheep" ores (Spodumain and Gneiss are exclusive to 0.0 and are the two worst ores in the game, Spodumain being the worst by an absolutely ludicrous margin) or creating entirely new ores with higher low-end mineral content with the goal of being sourced locally. Combine those two and you've got the potential for industry to bloom in null. Combine them with taxes/etc that make highsec less profitable by default and you get the situation that should already exist - higher profits with associated risk in null vs. lower rewards but higher safety in high.



I guess the thing I just dont understand is the NEED for anything to bloom in null. Null as I understand it is the frontier of EVE. It is supposed to be an area that is untamed and in a constant state of transition. I dont think it was ever anyones intention that one group could get a stranglehold over all of it or most of it. Had the original idea of null remained true to form, there would be no need for the burgeoning industry needs it apparently now has. Thats not a failure of the game mechanics however. That is a failure of the people that dwell in null. I would say that even if CCP did everything you suggest above, nothing would change. Sure, a few folks would take advantage of the better ores and outposts but most wont. In the end, high sec industry will continue to plug along. The higher costs would just be passed along to the end user of what is produced and then your problems would be even bigger.

"If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it. And if you dont deserve what you have and we cant make you lose it, we will ask CCP to nerf it"
Malphilos
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1066 - 2012-12-25 03:30:11 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
*crickets*


Eh?
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1067 - 2012-12-25 03:34:12 UTC
Johan Civire wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
Johan Civire wrote:


You. talking about evidence try to explane that to ccp...

Decrease player base is not good for busniss. See how criple all mmorpg are with less player base.... you need to balance everything not nerf here and there hopes player A is happy and player B there is always a war agains that....

People love intel cpu other people love amd there are the same but the are not.... meh good try.


So you have no evidence to back up anything you say, thanks for letting us know that. You need to support that "if you nerf highsec people will unsub" claim for anyone take it seriously. This warranted nerf I've been talking about is to balance highsec. How do you expect any balance without power creep to occur without nerfing things?


why are people talking about nerfing. How about something that only people get in null sec. Not only moon harvest but things thats needed for high sec thats only to get from zero sec..... Its not easy to think about something. Nerfing will not help.. forcing players to get null sec is general a bad idea.

ps evidence see the lore of all mmorpg.... nuff said. Or you want to try a free eve online with some magic kids shop to unballance the **** out of this game with real money? or some farm vile game like world of wankers and diablo 3 your pick here


So the waffling continues from nerfing highsec will cause mass unsubs to nullsec should just get something of its own instead. We are talking about nerfing highsec because it's the most reasonable lowest effort change possible. This is all about industry here so all that other stuff you mentioned is a red herring. This has nothing to do about forcing other players to go to nullsec please read the thread of the arguments regarding this I'm not going to repeat them for you they are somewhere in page 30-40. The goal is to get people to do things in their own space and nerfing highsec is part of whats required to provide the incentive to do that.

The bolded part is very important here, you can't make an argument then refuse to prove it and expect any of us to take you seriously. I graciously gave you a decent response to your post but in the future if you continue to do this your posts will be ignored.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1068 - 2012-12-25 03:43:58 UTC
POKER ALICE wrote:

I guess the thing I just dont understand is the NEED for anything to bloom in null. Null as I understand it is the frontier of EVE. It is supposed to be an area that is untamed and in a constant state of transition. I dont think it was ever anyones intention that one group could get a stranglehold over all of it or most of it. Had the original idea of null remained true to form, there would be no need for the burgeoning industry needs it apparently now has. Thats not a failure of the game mechanics however. That is a failure of the people that dwell in null. I would say that even if CCP did everything you suggest above, nothing would change. Sure, a few folks would take advantage of the better ores and outposts but most wont. In the end, high sec industry will continue to plug along. The higher costs would just be passed along to the end user of what is produced and then your problems would be even bigger.


The NEED is because null is the space for empire building. We can't really build our own empire if we don't have the proper industrial capabilities. The other NEED is because risk:reward has been completely ignored which has caused low/null/WH to suffer because of it when considering industry.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1069 - 2012-12-25 03:44:29 UTC
Tesal wrote:
Its not an interesting choice at all. The people in null would make new alt armies to do industry and the hi-sec industrialists would be out of a job. I guess you don't want to wreck the game, just wreck my game.


How would we wreck your game?

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
POKER ALICE
Moonshine Monks Gentlemans Club
#1070 - 2012-12-25 03:45:31 UTC
Quote:
The goal is to get people to do things in their own space and nerfing highsec is part of whats required to provide the incentive to do that.



Well if thats the best solution anyone can come up with then lets get it rolling. If they nerf hi sec, then you will see the mass exodus from the game everyones talking about. Its not about ISK for most of these hi sec folks. Its about taking away how they like to play the game. I personally dont care.I think it would be a huge mistake followed quickly by the biggest rollback in EVE's history, but Id kinda like to see that to tell you the truth. Then perhaps they will begin to look at whats really wrong with the game. If something has to be nerfed to make something else more appealing, it will never work my friend.

"If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it. And if you dont deserve what you have and we cant make you lose it, we will ask CCP to nerf it"
Tesal
#1071 - 2012-12-25 03:50:54 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Tesal wrote:
Its not an interesting choice at all. The people in null would make new alt armies to do industry and the hi-sec industrialists would be out of a job. I guess you don't want to wreck the game, just wreck my game.


How would we wreck your game?


I think my post was pretty clear.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1072 - 2012-12-25 04:00:44 UTC
POKER ALICE wrote:
Quote:

Infinitely better outposts - way more slots and better refines (and both of said things in the same station, unlike now) combined with adjusting the ore composition of several "black sheep" ores (Spodumain and Gneiss are exclusive to 0.0 and are the two worst ores in the game, Spodumain being the worst by an absolutely ludicrous margin) or creating entirely new ores with higher low-end mineral content with the goal of being sourced locally. Combine those two and you've got the potential for industry to bloom in null. Combine them with taxes/etc that make highsec less profitable by default and you get the situation that should already exist - higher profits with associated risk in null vs. lower rewards but higher safety in high.



I guess the thing I just dont understand is the NEED for anything to bloom in null. Null as I understand it is the frontier of EVE. It is supposed to be an area that is untamed and in a constant state of transition. I dont think it was ever anyones intention that one group could get a stranglehold over all of it or most of it. Had the original idea of null remained true to form, there would be no need for the burgeoning industry needs it apparently now has. Thats not a failure of the game mechanics however. That is a failure of the people that dwell in null. I would say that even if CCP did everything you suggest above, nothing would change. Sure, a few folks would take advantage of the better ores and outposts but most wont. In the end, high sec industry will continue to plug along. The higher costs would just be passed along to the end user of what is produced and then your problems would be even bigger.

The frontier is w-space.
Why do people think nullsec is any sort of frontier?
Answer: They don't, they're just reaching for any sort of justification to make sure their precious highsec doesn't get nerfed.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
masternerdguy
Doomheim
#1073 - 2012-12-25 04:09:24 UTC
POKER ALICE wrote:
Quote:

Infinitely better outposts - way more slots and better refines (and both of said things in the same station, unlike now) combined with adjusting the ore composition of several "black sheep" ores (Spodumain and Gneiss are exclusive to 0.0 and are the two worst ores in the game, Spodumain being the worst by an absolutely ludicrous margin) or creating entirely new ores with higher low-end mineral content with the goal of being sourced locally. Combine those two and you've got the potential for industry to bloom in null. Combine them with taxes/etc that make highsec less profitable by default and you get the situation that should already exist - higher profits with associated risk in null vs. lower rewards but higher safety in high.



I guess the thing I just dont understand is the NEED for anything to bloom in null. Null as I understand it is the frontier of EVE. It is supposed to be an area that is untamed and in a constant state of transition. I dont think it was ever anyones intention that one group could get a stranglehold over all of it or most of it. Had the original idea of null remained true to form, there would be no need for the burgeoning industry needs it apparently now has. Thats not a failure of the game mechanics however. That is a failure of the people that dwell in null. I would say that even if CCP did everything you suggest above, nothing would change. Sure, a few folks would take advantage of the better ores and outposts but most wont. In the end, high sec industry will continue to plug along. The higher costs would just be passed along to the end user of what is produced and then your problems would be even bigger.


Yeah, null is the wild frontier with the most powerful organizations in the game living in it with massive supercapital fleets and jump bridge networks more reliable and better planned than the empiresRoll

Nullsec is for nation building but it is NOT a frontier. Wormholes are a frontier.

Things are only impossible until they are not.
Tesal
#1074 - 2012-12-25 04:10:39 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:

Answer: They don't, they're just reaching for any sort of justification to make sure their precious highsec doesn't get nerfed.


The HBC and the CFC have enough power already. To give them more would only make a broken situation even worse. What is being proposed is bad for the game. I hope CCP doesn't listen to you.
masternerdguy
Doomheim
#1075 - 2012-12-25 04:13:20 UTC
Tesal wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:

Answer: They don't, they're just reaching for any sort of justification to make sure their precious highsec doesn't get nerfed.


The HBC and the CFC have enough power already. To give them more would only make a broken situation even worse. What is being proposed is bad for the game. I hope CCP doesn't listen to you.


The CFHBC will not be around forever, fortunately. But out of curiosity, how exactly are the evil nullseccers oppressing you so much in hi sec?

Things are only impossible until they are not.
Tesal
#1076 - 2012-12-25 04:14:34 UTC
masternerdguy wrote:
Tesal wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:

Answer: They don't, they're just reaching for any sort of justification to make sure their precious highsec doesn't get nerfed.


The HBC and the CFC have enough power already. To give them more would only make a broken situation even worse. What is being proposed is bad for the game. I hope CCP doesn't listen to you.


The CFHBC will not be around forever, fortunately. But out of curiosity, how exactly are the evil nullseccers oppressing you so much in hi sec?


You want to take away my toys.
masternerdguy
Doomheim
#1077 - 2012-12-25 04:16:21 UTC
Tesal wrote:
masternerdguy wrote:
Tesal wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:

Answer: They don't, they're just reaching for any sort of justification to make sure their precious highsec doesn't get nerfed.


The HBC and the CFC have enough power already. To give them more would only make a broken situation even worse. What is being proposed is bad for the game. I hope CCP doesn't listen to you.


The CFHBC will not be around forever, fortunately. But out of curiosity, how exactly are the evil nullseccers oppressing you so much in hi sec?


You want to take away my toys.


Yes.... Good.... Let the entitlement flow through you.

Back in my day empire wasn't the go-to place for making a fortune, people actually wanted to live in null. Then again that was the 2008-2009 era. Hi sec has been buffed a lot since then and nullsec nerfed. You actually took away a lot of our toys.

Things are only impossible until they are not.
POKER ALICE
Moonshine Monks Gentlemans Club
#1078 - 2012-12-25 04:16:54 UTC
Quote:

Yeah, null is the wild frontier with the most powerful organizations in the game living in it with massive supercapital fleets and jump bridge networks more reliable and better planned than the empiresRoll

Nullsec is for nation building but it is NOT a frontier



Im not interested in building YOUR empire. I figure theres probably a few more like me. So nerf us already and get it over with. Bring it on.

"If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it. And if you dont deserve what you have and we cant make you lose it, we will ask CCP to nerf it"
masternerdguy
Doomheim
#1079 - 2012-12-25 04:17:54 UTC  |  Edited by: masternerdguy
POKER ALICE wrote:
Quote:

Yeah, null is the wild frontier with the most powerful organizations in the game living in it with massive supercapital fleets and jump bridge networks more reliable and better planned than the empiresRoll

Nullsec is for nation building but it is NOT a frontier



Im not interested in building YOUR empire. I figure theres probably a few more like me. So nerf us already and get it over with. Bring it on.


Oh so basically you want small holdings. Go to a wormhole or make more friends. I would say go to lo sec too, but with your anti-friendship mentality you wouldn't last long against the locals who actually do understand the value of friendship.

Things are only impossible until they are not.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#1080 - 2012-12-25 04:18:25 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
POKER ALICE wrote:

I guess the thing I just dont understand is the NEED for anything to bloom in null. Null as I understand it is the frontier of EVE. It is supposed to be an area that is untamed and in a constant state of transition. I dont think it was ever anyones intention that one group could get a stranglehold over all of it or most of it. Had the original idea of null remained true to form, there would be no need for the burgeoning industry needs it apparently now has. Thats not a failure of the game mechanics however. That is a failure of the people that dwell in null. I would say that even if CCP did everything you suggest above, nothing would change. Sure, a few folks would take advantage of the better ores and outposts but most wont. In the end, high sec industry will continue to plug along. The higher costs would just be passed along to the end user of what is produced and then your problems would be even bigger.


The NEED is because null is the space for empire building. We can't really build our own empire if we don't have the proper industrial capabilities. The other NEED is because risk:reward has been completely ignored which has caused low/null/WH to suffer because of it when considering industry.


Quite frankly. You are WRONG with your second need.

Your first need I fully support, Null should be capable of supporting a proper industrial infrastructure that makes building your own empire viable.

But Null Industry does not NEED to be 'better' than High Sec Industry. It doesn't even need to be the same cost as long as it is close. People are out there because they WANT to be. Make it capable for them to do so, and give them similar costs to high sec industry, and they will do so because it is what they WANT to be. There is no need for it to be better, just similar and those that WANT to build an empire will use the capability to do so.

There is nothing wrong with High having 100% refining, Null just should also be able to have 100% refining at the same skill level of refining. Now if this means dropping NPC stations from 50%-40% so that only pilots with the top refining skills can get to 100% in High or Null, then so be it. But lets get rid of this idea that if High is 100% Null is dead, thats just rubbish, plain and simple. All that is needed is basic similarity. Not a superior Null and a Nerfed High Sec.

N.B. I don't mind high sec industry cost going up, providing that there are similar costs for null sec. I.e. Remove the cost of 'hiring' manufacturing lines in high sec, but make all lines, Null, Low & High require fuel (in the same amounts) of some kind to run instead. This fuel can be acquired anywhere, because really, the existing Empires would have settled on sources of whatever fuel is required to run machinery. This puts the cost of manufacturing into the hands of players as to the cost of the fuel, so if a Null Sec alliance can source it at half the cost it sells for in Jita, they then have cheaper manufacturing costs via their own efforts sourcing the fuel.