These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Bump Truck
Doomheim
#1701 - 2012-12-30 22:45:48 UTC
Simetraz wrote:



And you failed to read again.





Welcome to the thread, your input is appreciated.

Though I do think it's a bit much to barge in to the eighty third page of a thread and start asking questions which have been answered twenty times over and then accusing others of a failure to read before posting.

For your convenience (and because it would be a bit mad to begin at the beginning now) let me sum up the main thrust of the thread thus far.

Basically, in the current state of affairs, it isn't wise for a Null alliance to have an industrial base in the space they own.

So they don't, they have it in HighSec instead, whether they run it or they subcontract it.

And this is a bad thing for the game as the industrial base is the thing that makes an alliance vulnerable, it's the thing you want to disrupt and destroy if you want to beat them in an ISK war.

So it would be good for the vitality and intrigue of Null life if CCP modified certain elements of the game to make it viable, or even desirable, to have an industrial base in any space you own.

That is mining, refining, manufacturing and trading.

And this is what most people in the thread are calling for.


However HighSec is a bit of an obstacle to this.

It has an abundance of ore fields, it has stations everywhere with instant, perfect, refining and it has many more manufacturing slots than are used and they are super cheap. It has CONCORD and it has the trade hubs (which will always be in the safest place).

So it is possible, that in order to make it more desirable to produce in Null rather than importing everything from HighSec, an even handed nerf may be required, as part as a larger progam of null industry redesign.

Things which have been suggested include higher taxes, refine rate reduction, increased costs in productions lines, increased costs based on usage etc etc.


So ultimately this is about fixing Null which damaging HighSec as little as possible.


Things it is not about include;

forcing people out of HighSec, destroying HighSec, removing any activites from HighSec, Goonspiracy to own everything, shooting carebears, moaning null bears being the chosen ones or anything else like that. Please see the OP for a list of things it is not about.


I hope this helps.
Frying Doom
#1702 - 2012-12-30 22:49:55 UTC
Simetraz wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

"why making it more difficult to get things to high-sec."
That is easy if you take away the largest customer Hi-sec has and then you leave Null with the ability to move huge amounts of goods at a cheap rate there is no way at all anyone within hi-sec can compete with the goods coming in from Null as I worked out earlier in this thread with the current fuel costs and usage if the difference between hi-sec and Nulls ability to manufacture differ by more than 1% on the side of Null, then Hi-sec cannot compete.

I am all for giving more dangerous space the ability to be self sufficient as well as the ability to make good isk, I am not however on the side of the complete destruction of Hi-sec.

Changing the distance is much the same as nerfing jump drives, I my self thought like this but frankly while it does protect the hi-sec markets to a degree it does not really make life easier for smaller alliances and at the end of the day this is about hi-secs ability to compete while opening up new paths (well repaving the old ones) to allow industry to be more meaningful in dangerous space and giving people a bonus within industry to not just sit in a risk free NPC corp.

In essence if you increase jump fuel consumed it means that those living in Null can create competitively priced goods for local markets while not being able to flood the Hi-sec market easily with cheaper than hi-sec can produce goods.


Because High-sec doesn't NEED T2 items.
T2 items are a luxury item for high-sec.
T2 items are needed for null and null produces there T2 items in high-sec because it makes the most sense.
That really is the heart of the problem.
Any nerf you place on high-sec will hit null as well.
The 2 economies are tied together.
You can't nerf one without hitting the other.

See that is what is so interesting about the whole nerf high-sec.
To some extent it will cut null's throat.
You crash the high-sec economy and high-sec will continue as before just at a slower rate.

Null is not in that position they depend on the economy to sell items for pay for monthly expenses.
SOV is not cheap.

Although it would be an interesting way to reset null.
Cause all the alliances would go bankrupt which means they would have to implode or leave null to just survive opening up regions for others or for those that say had a huge ISK reserve set aside.
A little tinfoil for fun LolLolLolLol

I am not really sure what you are on about with T2, yes the price will be higher with higher shipping costs but persoanlly I would also like to see moon mining die in a bloody accident, it should be an active player activity causing bottom up funding, not top down. and available in all -0.0 space with more mineral supply than at perseent, so people who take the risk get the reward.

It is not from my perspective about nerfing Hi-sec but nerfing NPC structures and boosting player structures as well as boosting dangerous space with more mineral availability

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Bump Truck
Doomheim
#1703 - 2012-12-30 22:50:07 UTC
EI Digin wrote:
Mineral supply in nullsec right now is a chicken-and-egg problem. Nobody is going to import minerals unless they have a guaranteed buyer, and no one is building anything because there are no minerals on the market. Small-time industrialists are not interested in adding more tasks for themselves, or have the free isk/characters in order to build stuff, and high-scale industrialists who already have the supply line running don't want to bother supplying relatively few minerals for smalltimers because it isn't worth their time.

The easy solution is to make mining low-ends viable to mine in nullsec, by increasing their isk/hour rate so that people strip sites clean instead of cherry picking the good stuff then moving to the next system. Mining helps to provide minerals for small scale manufacturers, miners in nullsec cannot (and should not be able to) provide enough minerals to sustain supercapital building operations or massive fleet doctrine creation schemes. That's what highsec is for.



Just to pick out one thing, I'm not sure what HighSec is for.

I don't think it's "the place for industry", nor do I think it's "the place to mine low ends".

Maybe it's more like a place for newbs and casual players.

If it is that then it should have access to most activities but the best of nothing.
Simetraz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1704 - 2012-12-30 23:11:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Simetraz
Frying Doom wrote:
Simetraz wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

"why making it more difficult to get things to high-sec."
That is easy if you take away the largest customer Hi-sec has and then you leave Null with the ability to move huge amounts of goods at a cheap rate there is no way at all anyone within hi-sec can compete with the goods coming in from Null as I worked out earlier in this thread with the current fuel costs and usage if the difference between hi-sec and Nulls ability to manufacture differ by more than 1% on the side of Null, then Hi-sec cannot compete.

I am all for giving more dangerous space the ability to be self sufficient as well as the ability to make good isk, I am not however on the side of the complete destruction of Hi-sec.

Changing the distance is much the same as nerfing jump drives, I my self thought like this but frankly while it does protect the hi-sec markets to a degree it does not really make life easier for smaller alliances and at the end of the day this is about hi-secs ability to compete while opening up new paths (well repaving the old ones) to allow industry to be more meaningful in dangerous space and giving people a bonus within industry to not just sit in a risk free NPC corp.

In essence if you increase jump fuel consumed it means that those living in Null can create competitively priced goods for local markets while not being able to flood the Hi-sec market easily with cheaper than hi-sec can produce goods.


Because High-sec doesn't NEED T2 items.
T2 items are a luxury item for high-sec.
T2 items are needed for null and null produces there T2 items in high-sec because it makes the most sense.
That really is the heart of the problem.
Any nerf you place on high-sec will hit null as well.
The 2 economies are tied together.
You can't nerf one without hitting the other.

See that is what is so interesting about the whole nerf high-sec.
To some extent it will cut null's throat.
You crash the high-sec economy and high-sec will continue as before just at a slower rate.

Null is not in that position they depend on the economy to sell items for pay for monthly expenses.
SOV is not cheap.

Although it would be an interesting way to reset null.
Cause all the alliances would go bankrupt which means they would have to implode or leave null to just survive opening up regions for others or for those that say had a huge ISK reserve set aside.
A little tinfoil for fun LolLolLolLol

I am not really sure what you are on about with T2, yes the price will be higher with higher shipping costs but persoanlly I would also like to see moon mining die in a bloody accident, it should be an active player activity causing bottom up funding, not top down. and available in all -0.0 space with more mineral supply than at perseent, so people who take the risk get the reward.

It is not from my perspective about nerfing Hi-sec but nerfing NPC structures and boosting player structures as well as boosting dangerous space with more mineral availability


I have to presume you mean moon minerals ?
Normal minerals are a endless supply in nullsec with SOV belts. (and no region is better then another)
However unlikely you could actually mine out all the belts and high-sec and have to wait for them to spawn.
In null this can't happen.
The only thing null lacks in endless (was going to supply but no) in the right proportions is Trit and Pyerite.

As far as the T2 market well I mention it because it is one of the prefered ways Null alliances get ISK. And as moon minerals (or any minerals for that part)are not a faucet they require an economy to actually get something out of them.

Alliances could get by on a straight faucet like Ratting but that takes a lot more work on the members part.

EVERYBODY KNOWS
Frying Doom
#1705 - 2012-12-31 01:19:20 UTC
Simetraz wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Simetraz wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

"why making it more difficult to get things to high-sec."
That is easy if you take away the largest customer Hi-sec has and then you leave Null with the ability to move huge amounts of goods at a cheap rate there is no way at all anyone within hi-sec can compete with the goods coming in from Null as I worked out earlier in this thread with the current fuel costs and usage if the difference between hi-sec and Nulls ability to manufacture differ by more than 1% on the side of Null, then Hi-sec cannot compete.

I am all for giving more dangerous space the ability to be self sufficient as well as the ability to make good isk, I am not however on the side of the complete destruction of Hi-sec.

Changing the distance is much the same as nerfing jump drives, I my self thought like this but frankly while it does protect the hi-sec markets to a degree it does not really make life easier for smaller alliances and at the end of the day this is about hi-secs ability to compete while opening up new paths (well repaving the old ones) to allow industry to be more meaningful in dangerous space and giving people a bonus within industry to not just sit in a risk free NPC corp.

In essence if you increase jump fuel consumed it means that those living in Null can create competitively priced goods for local markets while not being able to flood the Hi-sec market easily with cheaper than hi-sec can produce goods.


Because High-sec doesn't NEED T2 items.
T2 items are a luxury item for high-sec.
T2 items are needed for null and null produces there T2 items in high-sec because it makes the most sense.
That really is the heart of the problem.
Any nerf you place on high-sec will hit null as well.
The 2 economies are tied together.
You can't nerf one without hitting the other.

See that is what is so interesting about the whole nerf high-sec.
To some extent it will cut null's throat.
You crash the high-sec economy and high-sec will continue as before just at a slower rate.

Null is not in that position they depend on the economy to sell items for pay for monthly expenses.
SOV is not cheap.

Although it would be an interesting way to reset null.
Cause all the alliances would go bankrupt which means they would have to implode or leave null to just survive opening up regions for others or for those that say had a huge ISK reserve set aside.
A little tinfoil for fun LolLolLolLol

I am not really sure what you are on about with T2, yes the price will be higher with higher shipping costs but persoanlly I would also like to see moon mining die in a bloody accident, it should be an active player activity causing bottom up funding, not top down. and available in all -0.0 space with more mineral supply than at perseent, so people who take the risk get the reward.

It is not from my perspective about nerfing Hi-sec but nerfing NPC structures and boosting player structures as well as boosting dangerous space with more mineral availability


I have to presume you mean moon minerals ?
Normal minerals are a endless supply in nullsec with SOV belts. (and no region is better then another)
However unlikely you could actually mine out all the belts and high-sec and have to wait for them to spawn.
In null this can't happen.
The only thing null lacks in endless (was going to supply but no) in the right proportions is Trit and Pyerite.

As far as the T2 market well I mention it because it is one of the prefered ways Null alliances get ISK. And as moon minerals (or any minerals for that part)are not a faucet they require an economy to actually get something out of them.

Alliances could get by on a straight faucet like Ratting but that takes a lot more work on the members part.

Yes part of this is the increase is the increase in trit and pyerite in Null, this does need to occur to help make Null more self sufficient as does the nerf to NPC structures and he buff of player owned ones.

As to moon minerals, yes I agree they are not a faucet nor do I believe that any one material should only occur in Sov space. But top down financing should not occur, a corporation should have its life blood via its members not some super afk mining taken to extremes as moon mining is.

Moon mining is the worst idea ever in this game it actually make the current war dec system look good.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Tesal
#1706 - 2012-12-31 01:25:35 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:

Yes part of this is the increase is the increase in trit and pyerite in Null, this does need to occur to help make Null more self sufficient as does the nerf to NPC structures and he buff of player owned ones.

As to moon minerals, yes I agree they are not a faucet nor do I believe that any one material should only occur in Sov space. But top down financing should not occur, a corporation should have its life blood via its members not some super afk mining taken to extremes as moon mining is.

Moon mining is the worst idea ever in this game it actually make the current war dec system look good.


If trit and pye were in null the prices would drop in hi-sec until it is more profitable to haul to null from hi-sec. The only thing you will accomplish is crashing the price.
Frying Doom
#1707 - 2012-12-31 01:40:44 UTC
Tesal wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

Yes part of this is the increase is the increase in trit and pyerite in Null, this does need to occur to help make Null more self sufficient as does the nerf to NPC structures and he buff of player owned ones.

As to moon minerals, yes I agree they are not a faucet nor do I believe that any one material should only occur in Sov space. But top down financing should not occur, a corporation should have its life blood via its members not some super afk mining taken to extremes as moon mining is.

Moon mining is the worst idea ever in this game it actually make the current war dec system look good.


If trit and pye were in null the prices would drop in hi-sec until it is more profitable to haul to null from hi-sec. The only thing you will accomplish is crashing the price.

So the 8 fold increase in the cost of hauling I mentioned would not make this an uneconomic proposal?

Crap what the hell is the price of trit 2600 a unit?

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Tesal
#1708 - 2012-12-31 01:51:31 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Tesal wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

Yes part of this is the increase is the increase in trit and pyerite in Null, this does need to occur to help make Null more self sufficient as does the nerf to NPC structures and he buff of player owned ones.

As to moon minerals, yes I agree they are not a faucet nor do I believe that any one material should only occur in Sov space. But top down financing should not occur, a corporation should have its life blood via its members not some super afk mining taken to extremes as moon mining is.

Moon mining is the worst idea ever in this game it actually make the current war dec system look good.


If trit and pye were in null the prices would drop in hi-sec until it is more profitable to haul to null from hi-sec. The only thing you will accomplish is crashing the price.

So the 8 fold increase in the cost of hauling I mentioned would not make this an uneconomic proposal?

Crap what the hell is the price of trit 2600 a unit?


Inflicting pain and suffering and making things as inconvenient as possible is not the hallmark of an improvement in the game. Thats a bad idea.
Frying Doom
#1709 - 2012-12-31 02:03:07 UTC
Tesal wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Tesal wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

Yes part of this is the increase is the increase in trit and pyerite in Null, this does need to occur to help make Null more self sufficient as does the nerf to NPC structures and he buff of player owned ones.

As to moon minerals, yes I agree they are not a faucet nor do I believe that any one material should only occur in Sov space. But top down financing should not occur, a corporation should have its life blood via its members not some super afk mining taken to extremes as moon mining is.

Moon mining is the worst idea ever in this game it actually make the current war dec system look good.


If trit and pye were in null the prices would drop in hi-sec until it is more profitable to haul to null from hi-sec. The only thing you will accomplish is crashing the price.

So the 8 fold increase in the cost of hauling I mentioned would not make this an uneconomic proposal?

Crap what the hell is the price of trit 2600 a unit?


Inflicting pain and suffering and making things as inconvenient as possible is not the hallmark of an improvement in the game. Thats a bad idea.

So hold on what your saying is that Null should not be given trit and pyerite because they will flood the market but their ability to get goods to the market should not have an increased cost qas that would inflict pain and suffering, so subsequently Null should not therefore be given trit and pyerite.

Yeah ok then. The increase in costs will allow Hi-sec to have what it produces its self at a cost slightly above there current price due to the NPC facility nerf and T2 goods sold by dangerous space will just end up having the transport cost added on by the seller, hardly pain and suffering.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Tesal
#1710 - 2012-12-31 02:08:55 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Tesal wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Tesal wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

Yes part of this is the increase is the increase in trit and pyerite in Null, this does need to occur to help make Null more self sufficient as does the nerf to NPC structures and he buff of player owned ones.

As to moon minerals, yes I agree they are not a faucet nor do I believe that any one material should only occur in Sov space. But top down financing should not occur, a corporation should have its life blood via its members not some super afk mining taken to extremes as moon mining is.

Moon mining is the worst idea ever in this game it actually make the current war dec system look good.


If trit and pye were in null the prices would drop in hi-sec until it is more profitable to haul to null from hi-sec. The only thing you will accomplish is crashing the price.

So the 8 fold increase in the cost of hauling I mentioned would not make this an uneconomic proposal?

Crap what the hell is the price of trit 2600 a unit?


Inflicting pain and suffering and making things as inconvenient as possible is not the hallmark of an improvement in the game. Thats a bad idea.

So hold on what your saying is that Null should not be given trit and pyerite because they will flood the market but their ability to get goods to the market should not have an increased cost qas that would inflict pain and suffering, so subsequently Null should not therefore be given trit and pyerite.

Yeah ok then. The increase in costs will allow Hi-sec to have what it produces its self at a cost slightly above there current price due to the NPC facility nerf and T2 goods sold by dangerous space will just end up having the transport cost added on by the seller, hardly pain and suffering.


There is already a balance of trade in minerals. Making that go away takes away some of the interdependence between null and hi-sec.
Frying Doom
#1711 - 2012-12-31 02:15:32 UTC
Tesal wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Tesal wrote:


Inflicting pain and suffering and making things as inconvenient as possible is not the hallmark of an improvement in the game. Thats a bad idea.

So hold on what your saying is that Null should not be given trit and pyerite because they will flood the market but their ability to get goods to the market should not have an increased cost qas that would inflict pain and suffering, so subsequently Null should not therefore be given trit and pyerite.

Yeah ok then. The increase in costs will allow Hi-sec to have what it produces its self at a cost slightly above there current price due to the NPC facility nerf and T2 goods sold by dangerous space will just end up having the transport cost added on by the seller, hardly pain and suffering.


There is already a balance of trade in minerals. Making that go away takes away some of the interdependence between null and hi-sec.

Yes it does and it will remove Hi-secs largest customer, it will also give people who want to live out in null in an industrial capability a reason to go there without needing a 7 billion isk ship to be able to build something of substance, while with an increase in fuel consumption by jump ships will allow some protection to Hi-secs remain markets and increased POS capabilities.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Tesal
#1712 - 2012-12-31 02:18:55 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Tesal wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Tesal wrote:


Inflicting pain and suffering and making things as inconvenient as possible is not the hallmark of an improvement in the game. Thats a bad idea.

So hold on what your saying is that Null should not be given trit and pyerite because they will flood the market but their ability to get goods to the market should not have an increased cost qas that would inflict pain and suffering, so subsequently Null should not therefore be given trit and pyerite.

Yeah ok then. The increase in costs will allow Hi-sec to have what it produces its self at a cost slightly above there current price due to the NPC facility nerf and T2 goods sold by dangerous space will just end up having the transport cost added on by the seller, hardly pain and suffering.


There is already a balance of trade in minerals. Making that go away takes away some of the interdependence between null and hi-sec.

Yes it does and it will remove Hi-secs largest customer, it will also give people who want to live out in null in an industrial capability a reason to go there without needing a 7 billion isk ship to be able to build something of substance, while with an increase in fuel consumption by jump ships will allow some protection to Hi-secs remain markets and increased POS capabilities.


The bedrock of the game should not be altered on a whim.

Materials would still be moved by jump freighter even if mined in null.
Simetraz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1713 - 2012-12-31 02:30:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Simetraz
A long time ago in a EVE Galaxy blah blah blah.
THe low end market was capped via shuttle sold from NPC's.
The cap was removed by CCP and ever sense then the prices of Trit and pyerite have gone up.

Now the question is the reason behind the price rise a matter of supply not meeting demand or is it down to market maniputlation or a both.

Giving null the ability to mine vast amounts of trit and pyerite via a SOV belt would not really be a bad thing.
First it would provide a checks and balances.

If the price got too high null-sec would stop buying low ends from high-sec.
WHich would cause the prices in high-sec to drop eventually.

WOuld this stop null from selling there high-ends in high-sec.
No as there is not a big enough market in null to support the current amount being mined and lets face it greed will play a part.
And in this case that is a good thing.

I still say change that spod rock in the small sov belt to a scordite rocks and let the markets sort it out.
And go from there.

But I have always been a firm believer that null should require nothing from high-sec players.
Why, well until that happens CCP can never effectively create a deep null section of space.
Something I would love to see. another section of null way outside what we see today.
But for that to happen Null needs freedom from high-sec.
ANd the farther out you get from high-sec the more likely the players will decide another hub besides Jita needs to be created.


There are some other items but out of scope of this discussion.

EVERYBODY KNOWS
Frying Doom
#1714 - 2012-12-31 02:39:07 UTC
Tesal wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Tesal wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Tesal wrote:


Inflicting pain and suffering and making things as inconvenient as possible is not the hallmark of an improvement in the game. Thats a bad idea.

So hold on what your saying is that Null should not be given trit and pyerite because they will flood the market but their ability to get goods to the market should not have an increased cost qas that would inflict pain and suffering, so subsequently Null should not therefore be given trit and pyerite.

Yeah ok then. The increase in costs will allow Hi-sec to have what it produces its self at a cost slightly above there current price due to the NPC facility nerf and T2 goods sold by dangerous space will just end up having the transport cost added on by the seller, hardly pain and suffering.


There is already a balance of trade in minerals. Making that go away takes away some of the interdependence between null and hi-sec.

Yes it does and it will remove Hi-secs largest customer, it will also give people who want to live out in null in an industrial capability a reason to go there without needing a 7 billion isk ship to be able to build something of substance, while with an increase in fuel consumption by jump ships will allow some protection to Hi-secs remain markets and increased POS capabilities.


The bedrock of the game should not be altered on a whim.

Materials would still be moved by jump freighter even if mined in null.

The lack of abilities in Null and their inability to to be able to built things without the use of billions in ships while at the same time the fact that NPC facilities are massively better than those of player owned and built facilities has been occurring for a long, long time, there alteration is hardly part of a whim. Null is empty industrially due to the massive isk you must risk just to be on par with hi-sec, it hardly encourages anyone to go out and risk more to make more if they can risk less, get as good as free infrastructure and make a crap load of isk with industry in Hi-sec.

Yes it will be an alteration and yes hi-sec does need cushioning against the blow with the increase in jump fuel usage but having NPC facilities better than player owned ones where they are risking more makes no sense. Having Null crippled just so they have to go to Hi-sec just to keep that market going strong makes little to no sense.
Expanding the infrastructure and production abilities of player structures will allow people to gain a fair risk vs reward even if it is just a hi-sec tower vs a hi-sec NPC station, atm those manufacturing in the stations with no-risk are the ones making the larger profits.

I am not a Null sec player but I am an EvE player and it is better for the game as a whole to reward those who take the extra risk.

But the idea of super ores is a really dumb one, it is to much reward.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Frying Doom
#1715 - 2012-12-31 02:43:29 UTC
Simetraz wrote:
A long time ago in a EVE Galaxy blah blah blah.
THe low end market was capped via shuttle sold from NPC's.
The cap was removed by CCP and ever sense then the prices of Trit and pyerite have gone up.

Now the question is the reason behind the price rise a matter of supply not meeting demand or is it down to market maniputlation or a both.

Giving null the ability to mine vast amounts of trit and pyerite via a SOV belt would not really be a bad thing.
First it would provide a checks and balances.

If the price got too high null-sec would stop buying low ends from high-sec.
WHich would cause the prices in high-sec to drop eventually.

WOuld this stop null from selling there high-ends in high-sec.
No as there is not a big enough market in null to support the current amount being mined and lets face it greed will play a part.
And in this case that is a good thing.

I still say change that spod rock in the small sov belt to a scordite rocks and let the markets sort it out.
And go from there.

But I have always been a firm believer that null should require nothing from high-sec players.
Why, well until that happens CCP can never effectively create a deep null section of space.
Something I would love to see. another section of null way outside what we see today.
But for that to happen Null needs freedom from high-sec.
ANd the farther out you get from high-sec the more likely the players will decide another hub besides Jita needs to be created.


There are some other items but out of scope of this discussion.

Ok while I believe trit and pyerite should be in as you call them Sov belts, I actually believe these minerals should be included in all normal belts.

I am not aware of the full mechanics of these sov belts, I am aware they are like grav sites in a WH but do they disappear after a few days if you do not mine them out?

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1716 - 2012-12-31 02:49:00 UTC
Tesal wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

So hold on what your saying is that Null should not be given trit and pyerite because they will flood the market but their ability to get goods to the market should not have an increased cost qas that would inflict pain and suffering, so subsequently Null should not therefore be given trit and pyerite.

Yeah ok then. The increase in costs will allow Hi-sec to have what it produces its self at a cost slightly above there current price due to the NPC facility nerf and T2 goods sold by dangerous space will just end up having the transport cost added on by the seller, hardly pain and suffering.


There is already a balance of trade in minerals. Making that go away takes away some of the interdependence between null and hi-sec.
Good.
Simetraz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1717 - 2012-12-31 02:52:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Simetraz
Frying Doom wrote:

Ok while I believe trit and pyerite should be in as you call them Sov belts, I actually believe these minerals should be included in all normal belts.

I am not aware of the full mechanics of these sov belts, I am aware they are like grav sites in a WH but do they disappear after a few days if you do not mine them out?


They are in the normal belts in most places but like high-sec they are quickly drained, just like high-sec.

The SOV belt show up as a grav site.
There are 5 different belts based on how much you mine in a system.

Once you deplete a belt you leave it and wait five minutes and another one identical to the one you just cleared will spawn again. (in a different location in the system)
If I can find the link to it I will post it here.

Edited
Link same as my next post

EVERYBODY KNOWS
Tesal
#1718 - 2012-12-31 02:55:45 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:

...Yes it will be an alteration and yes hi-sec does need cushioning against the blow with the increase in jump fuel usage...


Increased jump fuel usage is a nerf on hi-sec, not a buff. Its a barrier to trade.
Frying Doom
#1719 - 2012-12-31 02:56:32 UTC
Simetraz wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

Ok while I believe trit and pyerite should be in as you call them Sov belts, I actually believe these minerals should be included in all normal belts.

I am not aware of the full mechanics of these sov belts, I am aware they are like grav sites in a WH but do they disappear after a few days if you do not mine them out?


They are in the normal belts in most places but like high-sec they are quickly drained, just like high-sec.

The SOV belt show up as a grav site.
There are 5 different belts based on how much you mine in a system.

Once you deplete a belt you leave it and wait five minutes and another one identical to the one you just cleared will spawn again. (in a different location in the system)
If I can find the link to it I will post it here.

Seems like a bit of a never ending cycle, cant you just mine what you want out of one and then go next door (within sov space that question is, not just pop past that gate camp in unsecured space)

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Frying Doom
#1720 - 2012-12-31 02:57:55 UTC
Tesal wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

...Yes it will be an alteration and yes hi-sec does need cushioning against the blow with the increase in jump fuel usage...


Increased jump fuel usage is a nerf on hi-sec, not a buff. Its a barrier to trade.

Who would they trade with that requires jump fuel? lo-sec is fairly close to hi and even with the increase in fuel costs would not disable that trade.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!