These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#821 - 2013-03-04 17:28:40 UTC
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:
I haven't said I am against improving areas of the game (0.0 industry).

Except that you have, because you're refusing to accept a nerf to highsec.
You can't improve 0.0 industry without nerfing highsec. That's what this entire thread has been about and it's been demonstrated repeatedly.

Pretending that something must be torn down to make something else better is the sign of a serious lack of imagination, or a simple desire for destruction.


Pretending that equalising two unequal things equates to "a simple desire for destruction" is flat out dishonest.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Takseen
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#822 - 2013-03-04 17:41:47 UTC
Yonis Kador wrote:
Lazy? What does any of this have to do with being lazy? I'm trying to make isk not play with logistics all day.

"or do you want it fixed so that they are never ending?" Never wrote it. Why do you think I'm working all over the map now?

"if you are moving through so many systems a day that to be in proximity you would need to move it 4 times a day, you are barely mining now..." Dude, some regions are huge. In excess of 30-40 jumps across. I stash identical sets of gear in different areas and travel by shuttle. I'm not fueling/maintaining 4 POS's. Nor should I have to.

But hey, you're right, when I'm not busy engaged in the 2 hrs required to take down/put up my POS 4 times a day and when I'm not busy freightering my goods all across New Eden, I'm sure my profits will skyrocket due to all the extra work.

I look forward to all the riches promised from this obvious buff to industry.

YK


The perfect example of the spoiled government subsidised "industrialist" right there.
"Oh noes, I have to take a private jet around to visit all of my factories that the government pays for". "Build my own factories? Pay someone else to run them for me? Ridiculous!"
Takseen
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#823 - 2013-03-04 17:49:07 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
As to casual players not able to compete with dedicated indy players, why should they be? If I put in more hours and a crap load more capital why should they be able to be on the same profit margin as me? The fact that they can pretty much compete even though I take higher risks and expend billions a month definitely means reward = risk*capital is broken. So is the fact that the most profitable industry is done in NPC facilities in Hi-sec.


Profit margin? Heck even in RL a small entity can easily make the same or better profit margins than a larger one due to the "small and agile and efficient" factors. Yet the large entity will field huge numbers and in the end the small entity will easily earn their Honda for their CEO, while the large entity with same margins will earn their Ferraris collection for their CEO.


You could try to implement this into Eve by allowing each character one cheaper/more efficient manufacturing slot even in Empire. But if you want to expand beyond that, you need to pay more, move out of congested highsec or set up a POS.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#824 - 2013-03-04 17:50:49 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

No I went on reality, unless you can name me a car company that does not own (or use government facilities) and competes directly with Toyota.


You went on reality, based on points I did not make. I made a case of a small company (small EvE Rifter builder) that even if it made as much margin as a large company (like you) he would still not be able to afford your own scale and thus he's still not able to "beat you".

So I will take that is tony in his back shed can not compete with Toyota within the same market.

And yes if he made rifters and I made jump freighters than yes the amount of my profit would be greater but back on the original point I was saying that if I was using my own manufacturing and he was renting it and we were both building rifters, does it not make sense that I should profit more per unit of rifter?


If he'd renting facilities in a lower wages and costs country than you do, then he'll still out-compete you.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#825 - 2013-03-04 18:02:03 UTC
Takseen wrote:

You could try to implement this into Eve by allowing each character one cheaper/more efficient manufacturing slot even in Empire. But if you want to expand beyond that, you need to pay more, move out of congested highsec or set up a POS.


Yeah this could work.
I.e. allow up to 3-5 NPC slots per account (not character) so that newbies can still manufacture their stuff.
But even then, the cost of those slots would go to "POS price" after the account is 1 month old.

I am not here to give lazy mofos a free meal, just to try defend newbies from zealous "nerf it all" overlords that don't see what they are going to cause.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Buzzy Warstl
Quantum Flux Foundry
#826 - 2013-03-04 18:11:22 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:
I haven't said I am against improving areas of the game (0.0 industry).

Except that you have, because you're refusing to accept a nerf to highsec.
You can't improve 0.0 industry without nerfing highsec. That's what this entire thread has been about and it's been demonstrated repeatedly.

Pretending that something must be torn down to make something else better is the sign of a serious lack of imagination, or a simple desire for destruction.


Pretending that equalising two unequal things equates to "a simple desire for destruction" is flat out dishonest.

Well, tell me what you can make in highsec that you *can't* in nullsec.

For the number of nullsec players, if all there was to be made was things that can be made and used in highsec there would be quite adequate manufacturing capacity.

But the simple truth is that there are things that can't be made in highsec, that can't be made in station manufacturing slots even in nullsec, and that are higher priority goods for nullsec manufacturing than the items that can be made in NPC highsec stations.

Yet somehow nullsec manufacturing is inferior.

Pull the other one, it's got bells on it.

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#827 - 2013-03-04 18:43:59 UTC
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
Well, tell me what you can make in highsec that you *can't* in nullsec.
Anything for free, at any time, completely safe, with no hassle and logistical obstacles.

Quote:
Yet somehow nullsec manufacturing is inferior.
Yes, largely because the quality isn't determined by what you can and can't build.

The simple truth is that manufacturing in nullsec is inferior in pretty much every way it could conceivably be inferior, and buffing your way out of that isn't going to work.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#828 - 2013-03-04 18:49:52 UTC
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:
I haven't said I am against improving areas of the game (0.0 industry).

Except that you have, because you're refusing to accept a nerf to highsec.
You can't improve 0.0 industry without nerfing highsec. That's what this entire thread has been about and it's been demonstrated repeatedly.

Pretending that something must be torn down to make something else better is the sign of a serious lack of imagination, or a simple desire for destruction.


Pretending that equalising two unequal things equates to "a simple desire for destruction" is flat out dishonest.

Well, tell me what you can make in highsec that you *can't* in nullsec.

For the number of nullsec players, if all there was to be made was things that can be made and used in highsec there would be quite adequate manufacturing capacity.

But the simple truth is that there are things that can't be made in highsec, that can't be made in station manufacturing slots even in nullsec, and that are higher priority goods for nullsec manufacturing than the items that can be made in NPC highsec stations.

Yet somehow nullsec manufacturing is inferior.

Pull the other one, it's got bells on it.


Are you familar with the concept of "overhead"?

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Buzzy Warstl
Quantum Flux Foundry
#829 - 2013-03-04 19:00:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Buzzy Warstl
Tippia wrote:
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
Well, tell me what you can make in highsec that you *can't* in nullsec.
Anything for free, at any time, completely safe, with no hassle and logistical obstacles.

Quote:
Yet somehow nullsec manufacturing is inferior.
Yes, largely because the quality isn't determined by what you can and can't build.

The simple truth is that manufacturing in nullsec is inferior in pretty much every way it could conceivably be inferior, and buffing your way out of that isn't going to work.

So, the huge fleets of capital ships and supercaps that exist in nullsec are there because it isn't practical to make T1 and T2 subcaps in sovereign nullsec?

That's a relief to know.


How many battle cruisers worth of materials and time goes into the production of a single titan?

[edit] and yes, I am familiar with overhead, are you familiar with "disingenuous"?

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs
samualvimes
Brothers At Arms
#830 - 2013-03-04 19:04:46 UTC
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
Well, tell me what you can make in highsec that you *can't* in nullsec.
Anything for free, at any time, completely safe, with no hassle and logistical obstacles.

Quote:
Yet somehow nullsec manufacturing is inferior.
Yes, largely because the quality isn't determined by what you can and can't build.

The simple truth is that manufacturing in nullsec is inferior in pretty much every way it could conceivably be inferior, and buffing your way out of that isn't going to work.

So, the huge fleets of capital ships and supercaps that exist in nullsec are there because it isn't practical to make T1 and T2 subcaps in sovereign nullsec?

That's a relief to know.


How many battle cruisers worth of materials and time goes into the production of a single titan?

[edit] and yes, I am familiar with overhead, are you familiar with "disingenuous"?


And how many of those capitals are built there because it is a necessity as opposed to a choice?

And how many lines are taken up by that one capital as opposed to that large number of T1 ships?

If you've never tried PvP in EvE it's quite possible you've missed out on one of the greatest rushes available in modern gaming.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#831 - 2013-03-04 19:09:16 UTC
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
So, the huge fleets of capital ships and supercaps that exist in nullsec are there because it isn't practical to make T1 and T2 subcaps in sovereign nullsec?
No, they're there because they need to be there. One has nothing to do with the other.

Quote:
How many battle cruisers worth of materials and time goes into the production of a single titan?
A lot. It doesn't change the fact that it's better to build those BCs in high and then importing them. In fact, the two are pretty much completely disconnected from each other for game-mechanical reasons.

Quote:
and yes, I am familiar with overhead, are you familiar with "disingenuous"?
How can we not, when you provide such ample example of it?

No, the presence of cap production does not make null industry better than high. It makes null production as horrible as ever, but it's what you have to employ in order to build the null-only products, and it's that horribleness that makes it far better to import just about all goods except maybe battleships (and even then, it's iffy).
Stray Bullets
Perkone
Caldari State
#832 - 2013-03-04 19:16:05 UTC
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:
Stray Bullets wrote:

CONs
Would make it impossible for the casual player to compete with a dedicated and indy focused player/corp/alliance....
Ugh

Sound like a very bad change.


Yes, it's bad. It's bad that those that are actually committing to the industrial path in a environment that implies risk can't compete with the casual work that empire industry is! Currently, nullsec simply can't even compete. It's two different leagues. One has all the downsides, the other all the upsides. Doesn't look right to me! :)

Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
So, 8-10B is casual now?

"Hey guys I buy my Supercarrier every 2-3 months I am casual, trust me!"


Seriously? A char with almost 3 years invested into indy / trade having problems doing a couple of bil a week while playing casually? Like I said before, I play about 10h a week. If that is not casual, then the mistake was mine. If casual is playing 3h a week, then I'd say the rewards will adjust accordingly to, say, 500mil a week. FFS, even with PI alone you can pretty much do this amount if you know what you're doing! :|

Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:
What? So you support the elimination of Tech 2 BPOs?


Even though they are not the problem you think they are, as they are really awesome but lose all practical value due to their cost. Most T2 BPOs take years to break even. So, actually, I make more of a profit inventing T2 than the owner of the T2 BPO.

Anyway, T2 BPOs should be replaced with a max runs copy and phased out. This is almost trivial due to what I said above. They are mostly a collectors item in 90% of the cases.

Murk Paradox wrote:
For industry, highsec has more risk than nullsec since industry is based on creating, moving, and selling.

Not hostility brought on by combat. "Risk vs Reward" isn't only based on combat. But elemental risk in that field.


Yes, you are right. Currently empire industry does have more risk than nullsec industry, but not in the way you think. Empire industry has more risk because, besides capital ships, there is no nullsec industry! So comparing the very low risk of empire with the non existent risk (due to the activity itself not existing) of nullsec, you are absolutely right. Big smile


Anyway, I did not support a removal of empire slots but a reduction in number or taxing the existing ones, combined with making it harder to haul everything to and from empire space.

Basically, there's no way to solve this problem by simply buffing nullsec. There's no way nullsec can compete in risk, so no matter what buffs you put out, empire will always present itself as the most attractive option. You need to phase industry to the players (POSs) and sideline the NPC production. No other way around this.

Example:

Player A - Lives in SOV Null
Player B - Lives in Empire space

Player A has to deal with limited slots, limited available outposts, defending the space that holds the outposts, defend the supply lines for raw materials (either hauled in or gathered locally)
Player B has more than twice the slots, I'd say at least a couple of thousand more stations and does NOT have to defend any part of his production line, with the exception of the occasional suicide ganker.

Why in the **** would I choose to be player A? It involves a lot more work for the same potential profit as hauling built stuff from empire! It's simply broken. Player A has to risk everything he has while player B risks jack and **** :)
Buzzy Warstl
Quantum Flux Foundry
#833 - 2013-03-04 19:18:52 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
So, the huge fleets of capital ships and supercaps that exist in nullsec are there because it isn't practical to make T1 and T2 subcaps in sovereign nullsec?
No, they're there because they need to be there. One has nothing to do with the other.

Quote:
How many battle cruisers worth of materials and time goes into the production of a single titan?
A lot. It doesn't change the fact that it's better to build those BCs in high and then importing them. In fact, the two are pretty much completely disconnected from each other for game-mechanical reasons.

You say those words, yet I know for fact that there exist industrialists that would happily take on the risks of nullsec industry for T1 and T2 production if it wasn't for "higher priority jobs": capital and supercap production.

Do you think that this prioritization would magically change if highsec had less productive capability?
Would it change if nullsec had more?

How much more of a market is there for capital ship production right now?
Quote:

Quote:
and yes, I am familiar with overhead, are you familiar with "disingenuous"?
How can we not, when you provide such ample example of it?

No, the presence of cap production does not make null industry better than high. It makes null production as horrible as ever, but it's what you have to employ in order to build the null-only products, and it's that horribleness that makes it far better to import just about all goods except maybe battleships (and even then, it's iffy).

You are right, capital ship production doesn't make nullsec industry better, nor does drug production or moon mining, what it makes nullsec industry is qualitatively different.

You don't fix qualitative differences with quantity. It just doesn't work that way.

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs
Stray Bullets
Perkone
Caldari State
#834 - 2013-03-04 19:24:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Stray Bullets
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
So, the huge fleets of capital ships and supercaps that exist in nullsec are there because it isn't practical to make T1 and T2 subcaps in sovereign nullsec?
No, they're there because they need to be there. One has nothing to do with the other.

Quote:
How many battle cruisers worth of materials and time goes into the production of a single titan?
A lot. It doesn't change the fact that it's better to build those BCs in high and then importing them. In fact, the two are pretty much completely disconnected from each other for game-mechanical reasons.

You say those words, yet I know for fact that there exist industrialists that would happily take on the risks of nullsec industry for T1 and T2 production if it wasn't for "higher priority jobs": capital and supercap production.

Do you think that this prioritization would magically change if highsec had less productive capability?
Would it change if nullsec had more?


You are absolutely clueless! :) You don't build anything below BS in nullsec, at least with intention of competing on your local trade hub. People hauling stuff in from empire will whip your ass silly and you'll have a **** ton of work for very very little profit.

The amounts they can haul in, at the prices they can make it, simply kills any kind of prospect for building hulls in nullsec. For modules it's even worse! A single JF run can stock a market with T2 modules for a week or more. To build these modules you'd need basically all the ******* slots in the region.

You should do some research before posting out of your ass :)
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#835 - 2013-03-04 19:31:22 UTC
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
You say those words, yet I know for fact that there exist industrialists that would happily take on the risks of nullsec industry for T1 and T2 production if it wasn't for "higher priority jobs": capital and supercap production.
…and they'd do in in high after about five minutes because of the massive losses they'd incur in terms of time and effort and materials and ISK. That's roughly the time span their happiness would last.

Quote:
Do you think that this prioritization would magically change if highsec had less productive capability?
Would it change if nullsec had more?
The prioritisation would remain exactly the same, except that the lower-priority stuff would also be produced locally because there's no longer automatically better to do it elsewhere. Again, the existence of cap ships makes no difference.

Quote:
You are right, capital ship production doesn't make nullsec industry better, nor does drug production or moon mining, what it makes nullsec industry is qualitatively different.

You don't fix qualitative differences with quantity. It just doesn't work that way.
…and that's why no-one is suggesting anything of the kind either, and why you can stop with the nonsensical straw men. What people are discussing is making nullsec just as good as (or, preferably, better than) highsec so that it becomes a valid, non-stupid choice to do your production there. This is in part a question of quantity — hence the repeated references to “availability” — but also one of many different costs. Both prongs need to be adjusted on both ends to create a competitive balance.
Buzzy Warstl
Quantum Flux Foundry
#836 - 2013-03-04 19:41:31 UTC
Stray Bullets wrote:
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
So, the huge fleets of capital ships and supercaps that exist in nullsec are there because it isn't practical to make T1 and T2 subcaps in sovereign nullsec?
No, they're there because they need to be there. One has nothing to do with the other.

Quote:
How many battle cruisers worth of materials and time goes into the production of a single titan?
A lot. It doesn't change the fact that it's better to build those BCs in high and then importing them. In fact, the two are pretty much completely disconnected from each other for game-mechanical reasons.

You say those words, yet I know for fact that there exist industrialists that would happily take on the risks of nullsec industry for T1 and T2 production if it wasn't for "higher priority jobs": capital and supercap production.

Do you think that this prioritization would magically change if highsec had less productive capability?
Would it change if nullsec had more?


You are absolutely clueless! :) You don't build anything below BS in nullsec, at least with intention of competing on your local trade hub. People hauling stuff in from empire will whip your ass silly and you'll have a **** ton of work for very very little profit.

The amounts they can haul in, at the prices they can make it, simply kills any kind of prospect for building hulls in nullsec. For modules it's even worse! A single JF run can stock a market with T2 modules for a week or more. To build these modules you'd need basically all the ******* slots in the region.

You should do some research before posting out of your ass :)

You should do some research as well, those POS manufacturing slots that are dedicated to titans could be as many as 60 module manufacturing slots. Each.

The amount of manufacturing capacity tied up in making supercaps is a lot more than most people understand it to be, and it is one of the reasons that nullsec industry for anything else is a hot mess for anyone not intimately involved in the capital ship production chain.

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs
Stray Bullets
Perkone
Caldari State
#837 - 2013-03-04 19:46:21 UTC
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
Stray Bullets wrote:
You are absolutely clueless! :) You don't build anything below BS in nullsec, at least with intention of competing on your local trade hub. People hauling stuff in from empire will whip your ass silly and you'll have a **** ton of work for very very little profit.

The amounts they can haul in, at the prices they can make it, simply kills any kind of prospect for building hulls in nullsec. For modules it's even worse! A single JF run can stock a market with T2 modules for a week or more. To build these modules you'd need basically all the ******* slots in the region.

You should do some research before posting out of your ass :)

You should do some research as well, those POS manufacturing slots that are dedicated to titans could be as many as 60 module manufacturing slots. Each.

The amount of manufacturing capacity tied up in making supercaps is a lot more than most people understand it to be, and it is one of the reasons that nullsec industry for anything else is a hot mess for anyone not intimately involved in the capital ship production chain.



Ok, keep ignoring what other people write! Let me know how that works out for you. I've been in nullsec building capitals mate. It's not what you think, nor is it on the scale you imagine (yes, that scale exists only in your imagination!).

Anyway, you compared nullsec having to build out of POSs to the player in empire building out of NPC stations for free. Awesome comparison! ;) Keep it up :D
Buzzy Warstl
Quantum Flux Foundry
#838 - 2013-03-04 19:48:54 UTC
Tippia wrote:

Quote:
You are right, capital ship production doesn't make nullsec industry better, nor does drug production or moon mining, what it makes nullsec industry is qualitatively different.

You don't fix qualitative differences with quantity. It just doesn't work that way.
…and that's why no-one is suggesting anything of the kind either, and why you can stop with the nonsensical straw men. What people are discussing is making nullsec just as good as (or, preferably, better than) highsec so that it becomes a valid, non-stupid choice to do your production there. This is in part a question of quantity — hence the repeated references to “availability” — but also one of many different costs. Both prongs need to be adjusted on both ends to create a competitive balance.

Nonsensical strawmen like sharply reducing the quantity of NPC manufacturing slots, suggested repeatedly (even in this thread!). Or simply increasing the number of manufacturing slots available in nullsec (also a quantitative solution).

That's trying to fix a perceived problem in nullsec manufacturing due to it having different qualities by changing the quantity of manufacturing slots in nullsec or highsec.

The problem isn't at all that there is too much highsec manufacturing, or that there is too little nullsec manufacturing, it is people expecting to do the sorts of manufacturing in one part of the game that they can in another when the game is specifically designed to make manufacturing in those regions different.

If you want to be doing industry in a part of the game that has an exclusive on a particular industrial process, and you don't want to be involved in that particular process, you are doing it wrong.

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#839 - 2013-03-04 19:49:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
Stray Bullets wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
For industry, highsec has more risk than nullsec since industry is based on creating, moving, and selling.

Not hostility brought on by combat. "Risk vs Reward" isn't only based on combat. But elemental risk in that field.


Yes, you are right. Currently empire industry does have more risk than nullsec industry, but not in the way you think. Empire industry has more risk because, besides capital ships, there is no nullsec industry! So comparing the very low risk of empire with the non existent risk (due to the activity itself not existing) of nullsec, you are absolutely right. Big smile


Anyway, I did not support a removal of empire slots but a reduction in number or taxing the existing ones, combined with making it harder to haul everything to and from empire space.

Basically, there's no way to solve this problem by simply buffing nullsec. There's no way nullsec can compete in risk, so no matter what buffs you put out, empire will always present itself as the most attractive option. You need to phase industry to the players (POSs) and sideline the NPC production. No other way around this.

Example:

Player A - Lives in SOV Null
Player B - Lives in Empire space

Player A has to deal with limited slots, limited available outposts, defending the space that holds the outposts, defend the supply lines for raw materials (either hauled in or gathered locally)
Player B has more than twice the slots, I'd say at least a couple of thousand more stations and does NOT have to defend any part of his production line, with the exception of the occasional suicide ganker.

Why in the **** would I choose to be player A? It involves a lot more work for the same potential profit as hauling built stuff from empire! It's simply broken. Player A has to risk everything he has while player B risks jack and **** :)



My point being that when people say industry needs to be increased in null based on "risk vs reward", they are using that term incorrectly. Combat risk has nothing to do with industrial reward in the same regards as if it were talking about say... ratting. Or anomalies.

What "risk" is there in using stations with worse refine %s? By your account, null is in fact less riskier since there shouldn't be any problems creating anything at all!

For an industrialist your reward comes from the market right?

And why does an industrialist have to worry about defending? Isn't the point of sov is that you have people assigned roles to perform different functions? I was told sov isn't small group friendly.

So if your Player A is having that much trouble, maybe (as was told to me) that person shouldn't be in sov to begin with. I dunno.

I mean, if all he wants to do is make **** and sell it, highsec is the palce to be. If he wants to be a part of a community and work where he sleeps and all the benefits entailed... sounds like he is taking a paycut for better benefits.

Pros and cons.

Or, you can play the douchebag role and use an alternate pilot not affiliated with your alliance be in highsec and utilize the highsec benefits while still pretending to be a member of that sov alliance and flex all over the place as one.

Either or.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Stray Bullets
Perkone
Caldari State
#840 - 2013-03-04 19:55:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Stray Bullets
Murk Paradox wrote:
Stray Bullets wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
For industry, highsec has more risk than nullsec since industry is based on creating, moving, and selling.

Not hostility brought on by combat. "Risk vs Reward" isn't only based on combat. But elemental risk in that field.


Yes, you are right. Currently empire industry does have more risk than nullsec industry, but not in the way you think. Empire industry has more risk because, besides capital ships, there is no nullsec industry! So comparing the very low risk of empire with the non existent risk (due to the activity itself not existing) of nullsec, you are absolutely right. Big smile


Anyway, I did not support a removal of empire slots but a reduction in number or taxing the existing ones, combined with making it harder to haul everything to and from empire space.

Basically, there's no way to solve this problem by simply buffing nullsec. There's no way nullsec can compete in risk, so no matter what buffs you put out, empire will always present itself as the most attractive option. You need to phase industry to the players (POSs) and sideline the NPC production. No other way around this.

Example:

Player A - Lives in SOV Null
Player B - Lives in Empire space

Player A has to deal with limited slots, limited available outposts, defending the space that holds the outposts, defend the supply lines for raw materials (either hauled in or gathered locally)
Player B has more than twice the slots, I'd say at least a couple of thousand more stations and does NOT have to defend any part of his production line, with the exception of the occasional suicide ganker.

Why in the **** would I choose to be player A? It involves a lot more work for the same potential profit as hauling built stuff from empire! It's simply broken. Player A has to risk everything he has while player B risks jack and **** :)



My point being that when people say industry needs to be increased in null based on "risk vs reward", they are using that term incorrectly. Combat risk has nothing to do with industrial reward in the same regards as if it were talking about say... ratting. Or anomalies.

What "risk" is there in using stations with worse refine %s? By your account, null is in fact less riskier since there shouldn't be any problems creating anything at all!

For an industrialist your reward comes from the market right?



What risk? The risk of your system being taken by someone else. The risk of someone dropping a couple dozen supers on your POS and shitting all over your day! :) The risk of your logistic convoy hauling in some (and I do mean some) of the raw materials being ... errr... blow to hell? :)

That may come as a surprise, but nullsec has risk involved just by having to live there. You logout out for a couple of days, come back and your system is ... no longer yours and you got all your **** stuck in there! Hurray! Let me know when you get that kind of scenario in empire :)