These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Malcanis for CSM 8 Vote till you drop

First post
Author
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#461 - 2013-02-28 19:08:38 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
I have said before that I would be concerned that improving null-sec production to compete favourably with hi-sec might lead to the development of self-contained Eve 'bubbles' with little need for interaction between them.

Would it not be better to come up with a radical solution to the problems of null-sec rather than, in some respects, copying hi-sec?

Do you have any thoughts what could be done to improve null-sec apart form improving production?

I ask this not to be awkward in any way Malcanis, I am simply wondering if you have any ideas for radical solutions to the issues of null-sec.


Honestly I think the contingency is remote. And even if it isn't, I'd far rather see 'bubble's of players being where they want to be than every producer being forced to operate in hi-sec and JFing the produce to their local part of 0.0. It's not like there's a thriving direct trade between nullsec area A and nullsec area B right now that's being threatened. This talk of 'bubbles' can easily be translated as "Oh no, fewer people will need to be in hi-sec SadSadSad".

Without any explaination of why that's bad, exactly.

Why is it bad, exactly? Can you lay out a plausible scenario of how it would be worse for someone?

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#462 - 2013-02-28 19:16:56 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
I have said before that I would be concerned that improving null-sec production to compete favourably with hi-sec might lead to the development of self-contained Eve 'bubbles' with little need for interaction between them.

Hmm. Let's see, on one hand we have lots of people just hauling minerals (mined by people who are mostly safe to a station), in nigh-on full safety, 2 jumps out of jita, spend 2k isk to build a maelstrom, and fly it back the same 2 jumps, to sell it to someone who then load it into a JF and ships it to nullsec. On the other hand, we have people actually manufacturing in nullsec, still have to import various things like T2 stuff etc, but ends up sourcing minerals locally, thus making it more lucrative to mine in nullsec than it is in hisec, thus creating a nullsec which isn't dead outside of fleet fights, i.e. a place where roaming gangs can actually have a chance of catching more dumbasses who aren't watching local, creating a need for an actual unironic home defense fleet, etc etc etc.

Well, we can't have that happen, now can we? That's definitely more isolationist and bubbly than having literally all ships, modules, ammo etc made in hisec by people you don't know. Roll

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#463 - 2013-02-28 19:19:58 UTC
Honestly, these arguments remind me of the "southern way of life" ones made against the VRA in the 50s.

"If we make 0.0 just as good as hi-sec, then these dirty nullers will be just as good as god-fearin' hi-sec folks! What if they start drinking at hi-sec water fountains? Going to hi-sec schools? What if they start bothering hisec women???"

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#464 - 2013-03-01 04:05:51 UTC
Malcanis, what's your take on a mining ship that mines more than a hulk but can't be operated in empire space? Or maybe just not in highsec. Say, a mining-oriented capital ship, or whatever it might need to be.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#465 - 2013-03-01 07:58:38 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Malcanis, what's your take on a mining ship that mines more than a hulk but can't be operated in empire space? Or maybe just not in highsec. Say, a mining-oriented capital ship, or whatever it might need to be.


What problem is it intended to solve? I'm not aware of anyone saying that we don't have enough miners.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Amyclas Amatin
SUNDERING
Goonswarm Federation
#466 - 2013-03-01 08:27:31 UTC
Due to changes in my gameplay and from being exposed to different communities, I've finally seen the light.

My 3 votes go to Malcanis, as the most reasonable of the pro null/low-sec candidates.

Malcanis, how do you see the future of low-sec?

For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/

Remember that whenever you have a bad day in EVE, the correct reponse is "Thank you CCP, may I please have another?"

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#467 - 2013-03-01 09:11:53 UTC
Amyclas Amatin wrote:
Due to changes in my gameplay and from being exposed to different communities, I've finally seen the light.

My 3 votes go to Malcanis, as the most reasonable of the pro null/low-sec candidates.

Malcanis, how do you see the future of low-sec?



I have no specific proposals for lo-sec - as I said earlier in this thread, the best thing I can do for lo is keep my fool mouth shut. If Marc Scaraus or some other lo-sec focused candidate gets elected,t hen I'll evaluate their proposals for impact on 0.0, and otherwise support them.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Bi-Mi Lansatha
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#468 - 2013-03-01 09:12:46 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
In other words, I want CCP to make 0.0 industry as good as they possibly can...
Wouldn't this in turn buff Null Alliances?
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#469 - 2013-03-01 09:14:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Malcanis
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
In other words, I want CCP to make 0.0 industry as good as they possibly can...
Wouldn't this in turn buff Null Alliances?


Null alliances currently conduct their (non supercap) industry in hi-sec. I'd like to see them conduct those productive activities in their own space where it can be messed with. Does this constitute a buff?

It's also worth noting that if it is a buff, it's a buff for the ordinary alliance member, not a direct passive income buff for the alliance wallet...

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#470 - 2013-03-01 09:16:56 UTC
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
In other words, I want CCP to make 0.0 industry as good as they possibly can...
Wouldn't this in turn buff Null Alliances?

How? Alliances which would move some (or all) their industry into nullsec would be more vulnerable to interference, as opposed to today's situation where it's ... not.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Bi-Mi Lansatha
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#471 - 2013-03-01 09:17:44 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:
If “…95% of productive activity takes place in hi-sec…”, then that means 0.0 and Lowsec are broken. Nerfing highsec doesn’t fix those areas. It just leaves all areas broken. Some would argue for this... so that everything is level… it all sucks. Other might think that changing 0.0 and Lowsec would be the answer.

Tell us more about what CCP could possibly do to nullsec industry to make it compete with f.ex a maelstrom costing 2k isk in fees in total safety, and within 2 jumps of jita. By making the stations pay us for using them? Make refinery yield more minerals than hisec? Make minerals pop up out of thin air?
Are you asking me how to 'fix' nullsec industry?

I was conversing with Malcanis... questioning whether his position wasn't just a Nerf Highsec. Is it you feeling that is the only answer?
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#472 - 2013-03-01 09:22:32 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
In other words, I want CCP to make 0.0 industry as good as they possibly can...
Wouldn't this in turn buff Null Alliances?

How? Alliances which would move some (or all) their industry into nullsec would be more vulnerable to interference, as opposed to today's situation where it's ... not.


The end result will be that those alliances that actively and effectively protect their local production will see a "buff", with that being balanced by the overhead of providing that protection, which in turn will mean more small gang/solo targets for outsiders, and more small gang activity for the alliance in question. I am absolutely OK with making this trade-off.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Bi-Mi Lansatha
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#473 - 2013-03-01 09:36:14 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
In other words, I want CCP to make 0.0 industry as good as they possibly can...
Wouldn't this in turn buff Null Alliances?


Null alliances currently conduct their (non supercap) industry in hi-sec. I'd like to see them conduct those productive activities in their own space where it can be messed with. Does this constitute a buff?

It's also worth noting that if it is a buff, it's a buff for the ordinary alliance member, not a direct passive income buff for the alliance wallet...

My Alliance is building T1 ships and giving them to my Corp so we can die on our adventures in to 0.0. Do Null Alliances lack ship replacement options? There must be some form of ship production for/by the Alliances/Corp members in Null.

More efficient ship production in Null means a Buff. How much that Buff is… I couldn’t say.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#474 - 2013-03-01 09:40:45 UTC
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
In other words, I want CCP to make 0.0 industry as good as they possibly can...
Wouldn't this in turn buff Null Alliances?


Null alliances currently conduct their (non supercap) industry in hi-sec. I'd like to see them conduct those productive activities in their own space where it can be messed with. Does this constitute a buff?

It's also worth noting that if it is a buff, it's a buff for the ordinary alliance member, not a direct passive income buff for the alliance wallet...

My Alliance is building T1 ships and giving them to my Corp so we can die on our adventures in to 0.0. Do Null Alliances lack ship replacement options? There must be some form of ship production for/by the Alliances/Corp members in Null.

More efficient ship production in Null means a Buff. How much that Buff is… I couldn’t say.


It'll be a buff for alliances that don't have the capability to simply JF everything up from Empire, which currently is the most efficient model.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Bi-Mi Lansatha
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#475 - 2013-03-01 09:41:08 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:

How? Alliances which would move some (or all) their industry into nullsec would be more vulnerable to interference, as opposed to today's situation where it's ... not.
Are you saying this would be bad for Null? If, so ... then would they just ignore this change and continue with Highsec production? Why make the change at all, unless it improves EVE?
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#476 - 2013-03-01 09:41:31 UTC
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:
If “…95% of productive activity takes place in hi-sec…”, then that means 0.0 and Lowsec are broken. Nerfing highsec doesn’t fix those areas. It just leaves all areas broken. Some would argue for this... so that everything is level… it all sucks. Other might think that changing 0.0 and Lowsec would be the answer.

Tell us more about what CCP could possibly do to nullsec industry to make it compete with f.ex a maelstrom costing 2k isk in fees in total safety, and within 2 jumps of jita. By making the stations pay us for using them? Make refinery yield more minerals than hisec? Make minerals pop up out of thin air?
Are you asking me how to 'fix' nullsec industry?

I was conversing with Malcanis... questioning whether his position wasn't just a Nerf Highsec. Is it you feeling that is the only answer?

I don't propose to answer for malcanis, but I've made my position on the way industry is done in hisec quite clear over a myriad of posts, but I'll elucidate to make it crystal clear here as well:

No, it's not the only answer, but it is a part of the answer. The fact of the matter is, the only way you can make nullsec industry actually "properly worthwhile" in nullsec is to make adjustments to both nullsec and hisec. By all means make changes to nullsec first, and then adjustments to hisec, but as long as I can go to jita, buy all the minerals I can possibly need in a few minutes, haul that 2 jumps out of jita, find a shittonne of available manufacturing capacity essentially for free (again, 2k per maelstrom, that's for free), and then ship it to nullsec with barely any effort on my part at all, as opposed to all the effort which would have to be put in just to make this even remotely work in nullsec (yes, I have actually tried manufacturing in nullsec, and I had the luxury of constantly having access to free slots; have you?).

In addition, making very specific adjustments to how f.ex manufacturing slot costs, refinery and sales taxes etc work would solve (or provide tools to solve) a lot of additional issues such as how alliances today aren't as encouraged to build up a proper farms and fields initiative, because the only direct income which isn't easily circumventable is ... ratting. Encouraging alliances to switch their funding from a top down funding to a bottom up funding, through actual activity in their space would also let small gangs have something crunchy and lazy to run around and try to catch, as opposed to the 1-3 ratters who'll be more alert and more setup to dock/pos up the instant something non-blue appears in local. This in turn could foster resentments between alliances, and in turn this would lead to more fights over grudges done in retaliation etc, instead of more of the same old same old "hurr let's hit their moons/sov structures it'll be awesome guys guys guys? where are you guys?"

So no, it's not just a matter of "nerf hisec", it's a matter of "make the proper adjustments to even begin to be able to foster industry in nullsec", and trying to boil my position down to just "nerf hisec" is ludicrous.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#477 - 2013-03-01 09:42:47 UTC
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:
There must be some form of ship production for/by the Alliances/Corp members in Null.


Almost entirely imporation, actually. I say almost as I'm sure there's some small amount of stuff built locally (not counting supercaps which have to be), but the vast majority is importation.

"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["

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#478 - 2013-03-01 09:44:30 UTC
To use a ship balancing analogy: when you're trying to balance Ship A with Ship B, it doesn't matter how much you buff Ship A's DPS if you leave Ship B with 100% resists.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#479 - 2013-03-01 09:49:56 UTC
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:

How? Alliances which would move some (or all) their industry into nullsec would be more vulnerable to interference, as opposed to today's situation where it's ... not.
Are you saying this would be bad for Null? If, so ... then would they just ignore this change and continue with Highsec production? Why make the change at all, unless it improves EVE?


Alliances which are good at protecting their productive activities will benefit. Those that aren't will lose out. Where's the problem?

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#480 - 2013-03-01 09:55:20 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
In other words, I want CCP to make 0.0 industry as good as they possibly can...
Wouldn't this in turn buff Null Alliances?

How? Alliances which would move some (or all) their industry into nullsec would be more vulnerable to interference, as opposed to today's situation where it's ... not.


The end result will be that those alliances that actively and effectively protect their local production will see a "buff", with that being balanced by the overhead of providing that protection, which in turn will mean more small gang/solo targets for outsiders, and more small gang activity for the alliance in question. I am absolutely OK with making this trade-off.

As am I. In fact, I'd welcome it with open arms.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat