These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Fix Null > Nerf Hi

First post First post
Author
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#101 - 2013-02-22 20:41:47 UTC
Tesal wrote:
My point is that it won't, it would be a source of strength for the big guys, not a weakness to be exploited.
…and your point ignores the reality of the current situation.

Something that can be attacked is inherently weaker than something that can't. Thus, such an alteration will indeed become a comparative weakness.
Tesal
#102 - 2013-02-22 20:41:51 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Tesal wrote:
The only way to beat a super coalition is with another super coalition.
That's because the current flawed implementation only gives you one thing to attack: the fleet of that coalition. You're facing military power head-on so of course you're going to need massive military power to do so.

If they are given strong incentives to do more than stock their ships out there, you are at the same given more things to disrupt to ensure that their military power loses its staying-power. It might be difficult to harass or pick apart, but that's a vast improvement over being impossible to harass or pick apart, which is what we have at the moment.

So which do you prefer? Super coalitions that can only be attacked head on because all other ways are rendered mechanically impossible, or super coalitions that can be attacked through a number of means, many of which will require a whole lot less in terms of direct striking power…?


I prefer not to give the super coalitions more power than they already have.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#103 - 2013-02-22 20:43:10 UTC
Tesal wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:


You're willfully ignoring reality.


The point was made by Tippia that industry in null would lead to more pvp. My point is that it won't, it would be a source of strength for the big guys, not a weakness to be exploited.


How exactly?
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#104 - 2013-02-22 20:44:28 UTC
Tesal wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Tesal wrote:
The only way to beat a super coalition is with another super coalition.
That's because the current flawed implementation only gives you one thing to attack: the fleet of that coalition. You're facing military power head-on so of course you're going to need massive military power to do so.

If they are given strong incentives to do more than stock their ships out there, you are at the same given more things to disrupt to ensure that their military power loses its staying-power. It might be difficult to harass or pick apart, but that's a vast improvement over being impossible to harass or pick apart, which is what we have at the moment.

So which do you prefer? Super coalitions that can only be attacked head on because all other ways are rendered mechanically impossible, or super coalitions that can be attacked through a number of means, many of which will require a whole lot less in terms of direct striking power…?


I prefer not to give the super coalitions more power than they already have.


We're in agreement then: the supercoalitions should be creating their ships and wealth in 0.0 where it's vulnerable.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Tesal
#105 - 2013-02-22 20:47:12 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Tesal wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:


You're willfully ignoring reality.


The point was made by Tippia that industry in null would lead to more pvp. My point is that it won't, it would be a source of strength for the big guys, not a weakness to be exploited.


How exactly?


They would get money and power by controlling industry. It would make matters worse, not better. The ability to attack and harass wouldn't be any better than the current ability to kill HBC or CFC baby titans, which doesn't happen at all.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#106 - 2013-02-22 20:47:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Tesal wrote:
I prefer not to give the super coalitions more power than they already have.
So you agree then. Good.

Quote:
The ability to attack and harass wouldn't be any better than the current ability to kill HBC or CFC baby titans, which doesn't happen at all.
Of course it would, simply due to scale. It is hard to kill a CSAA because of the amount of care and attention it is given, and you need to project power proportional to that attention. A single ship floating through space, on the other hand, takes very little to kill…
Tesal
#107 - 2013-02-22 20:52:56 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Tesal wrote:
I prefer not to give the super coalitions more power than they already have.
So you agree then. Good.


Nice one.
Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#108 - 2013-02-22 20:58:33 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:

The very vast majority of people are mining in high sec, including your enemies who are also attempting to move large quantities of goods from high to null. You dont' wait for them to get home with the goods, you go to where they're attempting to export from to stop them; that means high sec.


Actually, most blockades take place on the borders of the country you're trying to blockade... just becomes a bit harder when jump drives are involved to do things that way... actually, it makes me doubt that any high sec changes would make them any easier to blockade as they could just wait inside the station until its clear and then jump. And maybe that's the real issue. The obvious response would seem to be to find out where their usual jump points are and jump with them with your own cyno, take em out there, but they likely usually jump to a POS. Maybe they shouldn't be able to jump too close to a protected area? Maybe there should be ways to intercept cyno signals and give them to your own fleet? Maybe something that'd actually work in general.
Mire Stoude
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#109 - 2013-02-22 21:33:15 UTC
Fix Low Sec by nerfing High Sec and Null.
Kate stark
#110 - 2013-02-22 21:36:21 UTC
Mire Stoude wrote:
Fix Low Sec by nerfing High Sec and Null.


just get rid of low sec, it's useless.

Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this.

Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#111 - 2013-02-22 21:52:06 UTC
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
Natsett Amuinn wrote:

We don't build **** in the US, we build in 3rd world or emergent countries. Like China, where they intentially control their economy to keep the value of their currency and inflation down, so that they are the prefered place to produce goods.

Sov holders should have the ability to act like China. They can either make thier space the prefered place to build, or they can develop along another line, like an emphasis on PvE.


http://en.mercopress.com/2011/03/15/china-became-world-s-top-manufacturing-nation-ending-110-year-us-leadership

So "not building crap in the US" means that China's total manufacturing (including for internal consumption) only passed US manufacturing in the last couple of years.

Of course, it isn't like China hasn't been a relatively stable country (with brief interruptions) for thousands of years now, so China would be a better analog for highsec than even the US.

Perhaps more appropriate to the point you wish to make would be to compare the manufacturing capacity of a region like Africa or Central America that has been subject to more political upheaval recently to the stable economies of China, North America, and Europe?

China, INTENTIONALLY keeps thier currency at a low value in order for them to be desirable for manufacturing. That doesn't say anything about the condition of the country, only the intent of the government.

And I used China as my example because of the last part of what you quoted.

"Sov holders should have the ability to act like China."

You'll also note that I didn't just say 3rd world countries, I said emergent ones as well. China is an emergent economy, not a 3rd world country. Nor did I ever mention anything about China surpassing the US in manufacturing, or even when they did so.



Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#112 - 2013-02-22 22:05:16 UTC
Aren Madigan wrote:
Natsett Amuinn wrote:

The very vast majority of people are mining in high sec, including your enemies who are also attempting to move large quantities of goods from high to null. You dont' wait for them to get home with the goods, you go to where they're attempting to export from to stop them; that means high sec.


Actually, most blockades take place on the borders of the country you're trying to blockade... just becomes a bit harder when jump drives are involved to do things that way... actually, it makes me doubt that any high sec changes would make them any easier to blockade as they could just wait inside the station until its clear and then jump. And maybe that's the real issue. The obvious response would seem to be to find out where their usual jump points are and jump with them with your own cyno, take em out there, but they likely usually jump to a POS. Maybe they shouldn't be able to jump too close to a protected area? Maybe there should be ways to intercept cyno signals and give them to your own fleet? Maybe something that'd actually work in general.

It was more the point,

We're not here, because we're there. Everyone seems to have a problem with us not being where they expect us to be, but when people explain why we're not there they don't want to hear it.

As one model high seccer put it, "we would control the economy!!!1" Which is a bunch of bullshit. We'd control OUR eocnomies.

When was the last time some of you high sec ******* dropped a billion in a null market, buying **** made by a null industrialist? Because I've gone through over 3 billion this buying **** in high sec.

Honestly, I'm at the point of just wanting to repsond to most of these threads with a big go **** yourself to the ignorants that have no idea how **** works outside of high sec. All I see are people who want the unbalance to remain because it benefits them.

This is where the null vs high sec animosity stems. Bunch of self entiltled twats who want everything for nothing and have no problem telling the rest of us to go **** ourselves because this is how it should be. Nevermind that those of us joining player run corps in null sec, with much higher difficulty aren't being rewarded; while guys are flying around high sec half braindead and alseep, putting in no effort, crying when someone so much as targets them (oh ******* god, he bumped me!), and getting better rewards for playing on "I'm a down child difficulty".
Kate stark
#113 - 2013-02-22 22:17:46 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
This is where the null vs high sec animosity stems. Bunch of self entiltled twats who want everything for nothing and have no problem telling the rest of us to go **** ourselves because this is how it should be. Nevermind that those of us joining player run corps in null sec, with much higher difficulty aren't being rewarded; while guys are flying around high sec half braindead and alseep, putting in no effort, crying when someone so much as targets them (oh ******* god, he bumped me!), and getting better rewards for playing on "I'm a down child difficulty".


i like this paragraph, a lot.

Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this.

Katran Luftschreck
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
#114 - 2013-02-22 22:28:17 UTC
Tippia wrote:
1. One outpost per system probably has to remain for sov reasons.
2. Every outpost type gets 50 each of every industry slot type. Industry-specific outposts get twice that (up from a best-case scenario of 10 each).
3. Every outpost type gets 20 offices; Gallente outposts get twice that (up from 4–8 / 24).
3. Every outpost type gets a 30% refinery; a 50% refinery is a single basic upgrade.
4. Basic industry upgrades add 50 each of every slot type (up from 5 of a specific type); Intermediate upgrades add 100 (up from 7); Advanced upgrades add 150 (up from 9). Time bonuses could probably remain the same.

Those are be bare minimum buffs required to make a single null system work on par with what you get from highsec. This still hasn't removed any of the costs or logistical hassles that come from having to bring stuff in from elsewhere. Those costs cannot be reduced to less than zero, so there's simply no way of being better than high in that regard. Thus, we have to increase the costs of highsec to give null a margin to operate within


Good, you have identified a facet of this problem, ergo that the base refinery rate for a POS even after the upgrade is only 50%. Now let's compare that hisec and factor in a few things:

1) Hisec station is instant refining, POS refining is not. This can be fixed so that both match, and frankly either way works for me.
2) Hisec station requires high standings (6.7 or so) to avoid being taxed minerals when refining. POS does not, which is a point in POS favor. This is fine as it is.
3) Hisec station requires fewer skills to reach perfect 0% loss than a POS does. This needs to be fixed - why should someone paying all that ISK to keep a POS running end up with something that is less efficient than a NPC station?

Therefor I endorse the idea of POS refining efficiency start at 50% (same as generic NPC stations) and then have the upgrade boost that to 80%. Now your low/nullsec miner working from a friendly POS is going to be getting a better refining rate than they would from using a NPC station. Holy moley, finally a reason to actually use the POS instead of the NPC station!

Next if we add the refining timers from POS to NPC station - already said this is fine - then you've not only equalized the two in this area but you've also created the much ballyhooed mineral bottleneck for hisec. Even with 50 slots, if you've got a hundred miners in that system all dumping at that station then there is going to be a waiting list. POS style refining in NPC stations would, at the very least, break up some of the giant barge clusters that look like bowls of Rice Krispies from taking out entire belts two minutes after server launch on a daily basis. Miners would have to spread out more and production would not all end up clumped into just a few little nodes of hisec space.

And that's just with current mechanics. Adding specialized structures to the game can further enhance the low/null experience. For example, smaller, cheaper, and more easily maintained "habitation modules" of limited but specific purpose. For example, just a portable "mobile refinery" that can be anchored in space and acts as a single refinery slot, take up about 10,000m3 or so and would cost maybe around 1000 ISK per hour to keep fueled with whatever you want to fuel that with. So now your heavily escorted nullsec mining fleet can stuff a few of these into their industrials and strip down a belt with no stations in the system at all, POS or NPC. This would greatly increase the ease of mining in low/null. Just put a rule of "Can only anchor in 0.4 or below" and ta-da - you've jut given the risk takers a buff that hisec can't use. You've sped up nullsec mineral production significantly and in a way that is open to those who aren't billionaires or swearing fealty to an Alliance.

Portable hangers with built in cloaks to allow people to stowe spare ships and gear outside of POS/NPC facilities again open up more possibilities for all kinds of gameplay in null that hisec would never see. Mobile factories and so on and pretty soon the POS itself is no longer seen as the prerequisite foundation of operating in null and instead becomes, to put it metaphorically, a shopping mall in a sea of roadside vendors.

Now you can argue for or against any of these ideas and I don't care. I'm just making a simple point here: I'm suggesting ways to buff low/nullsec game play and what little hisec nerfing to refining I've actually endorsed is simply to place it on par with currently existing POS restrictions. That is the point of this entire thread, in fact, trolls be damned.

http://youtu.be/t0q2F8NsYQ0

Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#115 - 2013-02-22 22:36:13 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:

It was more the point,

We're not here, because we're there. Everyone seems to have a problem with us not being where they expect us to be, but when people explain why we're not there they don't want to hear it.

As one model high seccer put it, "we would control the economy!!!1" Which is a bunch of bullshit. We'd control OUR eocnomies.

When was the last time some of you high sec ******* dropped a billion in a null market, buying **** made by a null industrialist? Because I've gone through over 3 billion this buying **** in high sec.

Honestly, I'm at the point of just wanting to repsond to most of these threads with a big go **** yourself to the ignorants that have no idea how **** works outside of high sec. All I see are people who want the unbalance to remain because it benefits them.

This is where the null vs high sec animosity stems. Bunch of self entiltled twats who want everything for nothing and have no problem telling the rest of us to go **** ourselves because this is how it should be. Nevermind that those of us joining player run corps in null sec, with much higher difficulty aren't being rewarded; while guys are flying around high sec half braindead and alseep, putting in no effort, crying when someone so much as targets them (oh ******* god, he bumped me!), and getting better rewards for playing on "I'm a down child difficulty".


Why would someone from high sec go to the place where things are more expensive to buy stuff? Which really is the thing. Because null sec has low supply, they have high prices. This isn't going to magically change. An interesting part of this is a lot of the most valuable materials come from null sec, but they still bring it to high sec to sell. This isn't going to change unless high sec became null sec, which isn't a reasonable expectation no matter how much some people want it to be. And don't give me that crap about you guys not being rewarded. The most valuable stuff is in null sec and wormhole space. If that isn't a reward, then what the hell is? I'll be heading out to wormhole space and null eventually for just that reason. I'm more than for ways to prevent shipments from reaching null sec safely. Not however for ideas that instead cater to whining about not being able to do whatever they want, when they want, where they want. And that's my problem with a lot of these null sec "suggestions". While their intentions might be one thing, the results go far far beyond their intentions. It always ends up being about these massive drastic changes that change pretty much everything except what's actually broken in the first place or ends up breaking other things, and really those sort of ideas aren't worth much.
Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox
#116 - 2013-02-22 22:37:20 UTC
I think a good way to buff nullsec industry would be to introduce 'super asteroids' that give compressed minerals right off the bat. Right now, there's no way for a Max skilled hulk mining Tritanium in nullsec to get a better profit margin then someone performing the same activity with the same skills in highsec. Therefore there's absolutely no reason to mine any of the low ends in nullsec, and thus creates the logistically necessity of importing items. If nullsec industry could produce raw minerals at a heightened rate then highsec, it would then behoove people to actually go and mine there.
Kate stark
#117 - 2013-02-22 22:39:17 UTC
Saede Riordan wrote:
I think a good way to buff nullsec industry would be to introduce 'super asteroids'


why not just fix the complete waste of space that is spod and gneiss?

Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this.

Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#118 - 2013-02-22 22:39:31 UTC
Saede Riordan wrote:
I think a good way to buff nullsec industry would be to introduce 'super asteroids' that give compressed minerals right off the bat. Right now, there's no way for a Max skilled hulk mining Tritanium in nullsec to get a better profit margin then someone performing the same activity with the same skills in highsec. Therefore there's absolutely no reason to mine any of the low ends in nullsec, and thus creates the logistically necessity of importing items. If nullsec industry could produce raw minerals at a heightened rate then highsec, it would then behoove people to actually go and mine there.


This kind of thing I'd support... give newbie miners a reason to head out there rather than waiting until they can mine morphite without the astroid butchering them.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#119 - 2013-02-22 22:40:38 UTC
All these people who are proposing that we make super asteroids or better low ends or whatnot have no idea what they're talking about or why the imbalance exists.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#120 - 2013-02-22 22:41:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Aren Madigan
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
All these people who are proposing that we make super asteroids or better low ends or whatnot have no idea what they're talking about or why the imbalance exists.


Generally one of the complaints is lack of reward for being in a more dangerous area. How does improving what is available out there not improve on that? Maybe be constructive rather than whine.