These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#301 - 2013-02-24 21:15:29 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Aren Madigan wrote:
If just nerfs are done, it would.
Again: how on earth would balancing production to be the same in all space “obliterate” the economy?

Quote:
You'd have shrinking supply from less people willing to do the industry, a shrink from more getting destroyed, increased cost due to lengthy transportation, reduced mining.
How does balance reduce activity? How does more demand make people do it less? How do reduced need for transportation make it more lengthy and costly? How does any of this reduce mining?

Quote:
I just rather see how far they can bolster null sec first without exploits or new problems being opened up.
Nowhere that matters. Again: how do you balance a cost-free economy against one that comes with inherent and unavoidable costs without either adding costs to the cost-free one or adding repayment to the one with inherent costs?

The only way to make it useful is to introduce legal exploits (which, of course, wouldn't make them exploits, but it would indeed break the economy).

Quote:
As it stands high sec has a steady isk flow for beginning players and I don't think they should mess with that unless its proven necessary.
It has long since been proven necessary and all the numbers have been run and re-run with only one result: you are trying to buff your way past cost-free, which can only be done by giving it negative costs — by making the system pay you for using it rather than the other way around. That breaks the economy by turning sinks into faucets. There really are no two ways about it.

The only other option is to remove the “cost-free” part… and guess what that means?


1) People aren't asking it to be the same, they're asking for it to be better in null sec. Which is fine, if done through only nerfing? I already described the damage done but you insist on ignoring it.

2) Show me the numbers if you want to claim they've already been run. Otherwise, clam it.

3) You can't say the only way would be legal exploits without running the numbers. Even then you couldn't. Efficiency and speed is just a much a buff or even more of one than reduced cost can be. If one can make a 100 products to someone's 90, guess who has the larger potential profit? HMMMM
Brooks Puuntai
Solar Nexus.
#302 - 2013-02-24 21:21:42 UTC
So confused on whats going on here. What does competing with Jita have anything to do with this.

Anyways off the top of my head for buffing without nerfing is:

Increase station research/production slots to unlimited or 10-20x current
Decrease material multiplier in 0.0
Increase yield rates on ore found in 0.0, especially low ends
Add some active way to get different types of moon goo and research mats, outside of your region.

Though there are a few "nerfs" I wouldn't mind seeing to High.

Cutting production lines by 33-50%
Seperating production lines based off of type, and increasing operation cost accordingly
Ice being finite
Reduce belt counts, but increase grav spawn rates.

CCP's Motto: If it isn't broken, break it. If it is broken, ignore it. Improving NPE / Dynamic New Eden

Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#303 - 2013-02-24 21:24:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Captain Tardbar
RubyPorto wrote:
Aside from supers, which are produced from Trit imported from HS, what finished good does Nullsec have a monopoly on?


I said resources. Not final products. I was very clear on that. I'm no miner or industrialist, but from my little understanding there were resources in null like Mercoxit that hi-sec doesn't have access to. Also what about technium? These resources still make their way into Jita somehow which those hi-sec industrialist seems to be making massive profits of somehow. Why are you competing on products that need resources that isn't available to people in Hi-Sec?

Quote:
Ohhhhhh.... I get it. You have no idea what in the world we're actually talking about in this thread.


Great job on argument refutation.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#304 - 2013-02-24 21:24:56 UTC
Aren Madigan wrote:
1) People aren't asking it to be the same, they're asking for it to be better in null sec. Which is fine, if done through only nerfing? I already described the damage done but you insist on ignoring it.

2) Show me the numbers if you want to claim they've already been run. Otherwise, clam it.

3) You can't say the only way would be legal exploits without running the numbers. Even then you couldn't. Efficiency and speed is just a much a buff or even more of one than reduced cost can be. If one can make a 100 products to someone's 90, guess who has the larger potential profit? HMMMM


1) Balance Sheet Profit is not the same as Economic Profit. Nullsec has to have a higher balance sheet profit to be competitive, because calculating Economic Profit includes things like Risk and Effort.

2) We have. Giving Nullsec a 50% build time is the rough equivalent to a 24k ISK/HR/Slot tax on HS. 25% would be 48k. 12.5% = 96k, etc.

3) I have a bunch of perfect 800 AC BPOs. Give me a place with a material multiplier of less than 1, and I will churn out all the free materials I can handle.

"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

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#305 - 2013-02-24 21:26:14 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
Captain Tardbar wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Aside from supers, which are produced from Trit imported from HS, what finished good does Nullsec have a monopoly on?


I said resources. Not final products. I was very clear on that. I'm no miner or industrialist, but from my little understanding there were resources in null like Mercoxit that hi-sec oesn't have access to. Also what about technium? These resources still make their way into Jita somehow which those hi-sec industrialist seems to be making massive profits of somehow. Why are you competing on products that need resources that isn't available to people in Hi-Sec?


In other words, you are having an entirely different conversation than the rest of it. Or, to put it in another way:

Quote:
Ohhhhhh.... I get it. You have no idea what in the world we're actually talking about in this thread.




(Oh, and Tech is not Null sec exclusive. Neither are high end minerals. Just FYI.)

"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

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#306 - 2013-02-24 21:28:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Aren Madigan wrote:
1) People aren't asking it to be the same, they're asking for it to be better in null sec.
…because it makes sense for it to be. The problem is that those that oppose it go so far as opposing even simple balance.

Quote:
I already described the damage done but you insist on ignoring it.
Nope.

Quote:
Show me the numbers if you want to claim they've already been run.
See earlier posts.

Quote:
You can't say the only way would be legal exploits without running the numbers.
…which has been done and which is trivially easy since the only relevant number is 0. The only cost less than 0 is -1 — i.e. giving stuff rather than taking them away; i.e. turning sinks into faucets.

Quote:
Efficiency and speed is just a much a buff or even more of one than reduced cost can be.
…and you can't boost efficiency beyond 100% without creating duping exploits, and increasing speed doesn't take care of the costs — increased speed is just an indirect way of making the same production lines count for more. If you want to use speed to counter negligible costs, then the speed would have to be pretty much instant, which breaks things in other new and interesting ways.

The fact remains: the fundamental problem is that highsec provides too high a benchmark for cost, efficiency, availability, ease of use and logistics. There is no margin for null to be better. In order to make any null buff matter, such a margin will have to be created by lowering the benchmark provided by high.
Takseen
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#307 - 2013-02-24 21:29:05 UTC
Aren, could you please read the Industry and Economy section of
http://themittani.com/features/bottoms-part-one-income-and-industry?

You seem not to understand how lacking in industrial facilities nullsec is at present.
Takseen
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#308 - 2013-02-24 21:31:50 UTC
Brooks Puuntai wrote:
So confused on whats going on here. What does competing with Jita have anything to do with this.

Anyways off the top of my head for buffing without nerfing is:

Increase station research/production slots to unlimited or 10-20x current
Decrease material multiplier in 0.0
Increase yield rates on ore found in 0.0, especially low ends
Add some active way to get different types of moon goo and research mats, outside of your region.

Though there are a few "nerfs" I wouldn't mind seeing to High.

Cutting production lines by 33-50%
Seperating production lines based off of type, and increasing operation cost accordingly
Ice being finite
Reduce belt counts, but increase grav spawn rates.



I like all of these except the underlined one. Can't do that without creating minerals out of nothing, or capping the material efficiency of highsec.
Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#309 - 2013-02-24 21:34:32 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Aren Madigan wrote:
1) People aren't asking it to be the same, they're asking for it to be better in null sec. Which is fine, if done through only nerfing? I already described the damage done but you insist on ignoring it.

2) Show me the numbers if you want to claim they've already been run. Otherwise, clam it.

3) You can't say the only way would be legal exploits without running the numbers. Even then you couldn't. Efficiency and speed is just a much a buff or even more of one than reduced cost can be. If one can make a 100 products to someone's 90, guess who has the larger potential profit? HMMMM


1) Balance Sheet Profit is not the same as Economic Profit. Nullsec has to have a higher balance sheet profit to be competitive, because calculating Economic Profit includes things like Risk and Effort.

2) We have. Giving Nullsec a 50% build time is the rough equivalent to a 24k ISK/HR/Slot tax on HS. 25% would be 48k. 12.5% = 96k, etc.

3) I have a bunch of perfect 800 AC BPOs. Give me a place with a material multiplier of less than 1, and I will churn out all the free materials I can handle.


1) Product availability. Just ask Wal-Mart, that's the BASIS of their profits... being able to sell a lot more product at a lower margin.

2) You're not taking into account the additional profit you gain from having more product being produced. Using your numbers, if you're producing 150 products to someone else's 100, you're making money at a 50% faster rate, assuming you get it all through safely.

3) Well then, you know the area where to NOT to touch efficiency. One of many.
Brooks Puuntai
Solar Nexus.
#310 - 2013-02-24 21:36:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Brooks Puuntai
Takseen wrote:


I like all of these except the underlined one. Can't do that without creating minerals out of nothing, or capping the material efficiency of highsec.


Well that all depends on refine rates of said item which could cause it to be a mineral faucet. Granted its been a long time since I've done any industry. So my logic maybe flawed.

E:Thinking about it now, it would just be easier to cap eff in highsec to say 1.25 and leave perfect to null. Instead of redoing mineral cost vs refine rate on all items.

CCP's Motto: If it isn't broken, break it. If it is broken, ignore it. Improving NPE / Dynamic New Eden

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#311 - 2013-02-24 21:49:13 UTC
Brooks Puuntai wrote:
Well that all depends on refine rates of said item which could cause it to be a mineral faucet. Granted its been a long time since I've done any industry. So my logic maybe flawed.
The problem is that:

Perfect BPO × 0.9 material cost → 1 item produced + 10% materials left over → 1 item that can be refined for 100% base materials + 10% left-over materials = I just created 10% more minerals out of nowhere.

Granted, using ye olde 425mm rails, it'll only be about 1500m³ worth of minerals produced per hour per production line, but that still means that I can passively create 15k m³ minerals an hour 24/7 without ever sullying my hands with a mining laser.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#312 - 2013-02-24 22:49:12 UTC
Aren Madigan wrote:
1) Product availability. Just ask Wal-Mart, that's the BASIS of their profits... being able to sell a lot more product at a lower margin.

2) You're not taking into account the additional profit you gain from having more product being produced. Using your numbers, if you're producing 150 products to someone else's 100, you're making money at a 50% faster rate, assuming you get it all through safely.

3) Well then, you know the area where to NOT to touch efficiency. One of many.


1) What the hell are you talking about? That has nothing to do with the fact that you don't seem to understand the difference between balance and economic profit (i.e. you need a higher balance sheet profit (whether that be by volume or profit/itme, though see 2 on why competing on volume is a losing proposition) to achieve the same level of economic profit in a higher risk activity).

2) Yes I am. That's why I'm quoting the cost for someone in HS to match that 50% time multiplier by running twice as many lines. 1 items in one hour or 2 items in 2 hours are equivalent, so the only difference is the 24k ISK/hr/line for the extra Plex the HS player buys each month.

3) So where do you propose to buff Nullsec to make it competitive with HS. As I've shown you in 3 or 4 posts now, adjusting production time ain't a viable method, no matter how many times you try to say it is.

"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

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#313 - 2013-02-24 22:51:51 UTC
Brooks Puuntai wrote:
E:Thinking about it now, it would just be easier to cap eff in highsec to say 1.25 and leave perfect to null. Instead of redoing mineral cost vs refine rate on all items.


Sure. TBH, that's probably one of the better options on the table.

It kind of breaks refining though. Which is better than an infinite mineral faucet, but not exactly great. It also requires that low end mineral procurement in Nullsec be radically improved.

"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

Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#314 - 2013-02-24 22:55:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Aren Madigan
RubyPorto wrote:
2) Yes I am. That's why I'm quoting the cost for someone in HS to match that 50% time multiplier by running twice as many lines. 1 items in one hour or 2 items in 2 hours are equivalent, so the only difference is the 24k ISK/hr/line for the extra Plex the HS player buys each month.

Well then, it becomes YOUR problem, not anyone else's. Someone with an additional account is going to have an advantage because of the additional account. That isn't related to high sec or null sec.

EDIT: And yes I'm ignoring the rest of what you said, especially three. Answers you refuse to accept are still answers. Quit being a baby.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#315 - 2013-02-25 00:13:37 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
Aren Madigan wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
2) Yes I am. That's why I'm quoting the cost for someone in HS to match that 50% time multiplier by running twice as many lines. 1 items in one hour or 2 items in 2 hours are equivalent, so the only difference is the 24k ISK/hr/line for the extra Plex the HS player buys each month.

Well then, it becomes YOUR problem, not anyone else's. Someone with an additional account is going to have an advantage because of the additional account. That isn't related to high sec or null sec.

EDIT: And yes I'm ignoring the rest of what you said, especially three. Answers you refuse to accept are still answers. Quit being a baby.


You're the one proposing "speed up manufacturing in Nullsec" as your solution. There are exactly 2 ways to measure that:
1) It effectively multiplies the number of lines availible in Nullsec in proportion to the multiplier. (Which is still trying to compete with unlimited using not-unlimited.)
2) It effectively saves the Nullsec industrialist 24k ISK/hr/line (assuming a 50% multiplier).

Pick one. Or show a good justification why you have a third option and explain what it is. Be specific and show your work.


Now, consider the fact that HS has effectively unlimited slots (Sunday afternoon, and a 9hr wait for a slot in Jita), while Nullsec does not, and you can see how "compete on volume" is a bullshit suggestion. Especially since you don't actually get volume discounts on shipping (which Nullsec has to do twice to take its products to market) because of the whole item volumes haven't changed thing.

When I've shown that your suggestion doesn't work, that's not "refusing to accept" it. That's it simply not being viable. If you disagree, show how your suggestion would actually make Nullsec industry viable. You keep asking for numbers, present some of your own.

"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

Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#316 - 2013-02-25 00:18:13 UTC
As long as you ignore the additional profit through less resources being used portion, I don't give a **** about anything you say. You can't ignore that as a bonus and there isn't an unlimited number of manufacturing slots anywhere, not to mention there's a limit to the number of jobs you can have running based off skills in the first place. One character having max jobs at 50% speed boost > one character having max with no speed boost. The instant you start bringing multiple characters in, it stops being about high sec/null sec.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#317 - 2013-02-25 00:31:19 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
Aren Madigan wrote:
As long as you ignore the additional profit through less resources being used portion, I don't give a **** about anything you say. You can't ignore that as a bonus and there isn't an unlimited number of manufacturing slots anywhere, not to mention there's a limit to the number of jobs you can have running based off skills in the first place. One character having max jobs at 50% speed boost > one character having max with no speed boost. The instant you start bringing multiple characters in, it stops being about high sec/null sec.


Ah, so the enormous material faucet option. (Remember, your premise is that you can do this without nerfing HS. Slapping a big ole' material penalty on HS fails your premise).

When I can spend a month manufacturing 2 jumps outside of Jita without seeing a queue, there is no effective limit on HS manufacturing capacity.

There is not a limit. Each additional job simply costs 24k isk/hr/slot. PLEX and characters are a commodity, just like Labor IRL. If you need more, you buy more.

One character with 50% boost = 2 without it. That second one just costs 24k isk/hr/slot (call it 72k if we just use one character slot per account. It's still less than POS fuel.), and there's no really feasible way to increase the number of slots availible in Nullsec to even come close to matching what is currently availible in HS (Itamo's 550 manufacturing slots [3 from Jita] are more than most, if not all, Nullsec regions), so the nullsec industrialist cannot simply keep adding characters the way the HS one can. That's why it's still about HS and Nullsec with multiple characters. Because industrialists understand arithmetic and the fact that PLEX is a freely traded commodity (oh, and running 2 characters at 1.0 speed is less effort than 1 character at .5 speed because long builds are easier to time to match your schedule.). And HS industrialists can make use of those facts in a manner that nullsec industrialists cannot.

"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

Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#318 - 2013-02-25 00:47:56 UTC
Forgot the 722k ISK per an hour for the PLEX cost if you're going to add PLEX to the mix. Regardless, equal number of null sec industrial accounts would be > than equal number of high sec, and that should be the main concern. Otherwise your complaint isn't about high sec, its about alt accounts. Plus, BAM! Give null access to more industry slots, issue solved.
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#319 - 2013-02-25 00:52:09 UTC
We shouldn't factor multi-accounting into game design because...

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal

Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#320 - 2013-02-25 00:53:26 UTC
Aren Madigan wrote:
Forgot the 722k ISK per an hour for the PLEX cost if you're going to add PLEX to the mix. Regardless, equal number of null sec industrial accounts would be > than equal number of high sec, and that should be the main concern. Otherwise your complaint isn't about high sec, its about alt accounts. Plus, BAM! Give null access to more industry slots, issue solved.


Most slots alone would not fix much. There are additionnal cost related to building in null which many high sec people seem to always forget about.