EVE General Discussion

Once again, you can't say what has to be changed, if anything, unless you have a complete FACTUAL picture.
You don't have that. I don't have that. NO ONE has that, except perhaps CCP, and they are not saying.

And that is the point of the whole thread.
If CCP actually released the data needed to paint the entire picture, people could have intelligent conversations, even heated arguments, about if anything needs to be changed.

But until CCP does that, any changes you suggest are just based on propaganda, and hence pure garbage.

Sadly, some people dismiss information they don't like. When presented with some information, you said nothing about it, but are now trying to discount what we do know because it doesn't fit with what you want to believe.

*snip*
Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.

Interesting fact: if just 24 manufacturing outposts were destroyed, then the whole of nullsec, NPC and sov, would have the same number of manufacturing slots as the single hi-sec region of Lonetrek.

EDIT: updated.

I'm certainly no sov null industry expert, but comparing NPC station facilities doesn't seem to provide a true reflection of the manufacturing capacity of sov null, especially when there are these, these, these and these - none of which can be built in Empire.

Tbh, I'm looking for enlightenment as to why, given the opportunity to build the above, there is an apparent problem?

Did you know that the 5 best hi-sec systems could out-produce the whole of sov 0.0 by 13%?

5 systems: Itamo, Nonni, Haatomo, Suroken, and Annaro

Outproduce.

The whole of sov 0.0

*snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.

Of course we could just ignore the problem, since at the current rate of outpost building, the problem will be resolved into equality by the year 2300AD or so.

i'd quite like to be in null sec again. however, there's nothing to draw me there as a miner. i'm a miner in probably the purest sense of the phrase.
i log in, i shoot asteroids, i sell minerals, i log out.

the fact is sitting in an npc corp in high sec nets me more isk/hour of active gaming than being in null sec would.
because i null sec i'd be expected (not forced, but expected) to attend fleets for home defence and such like. in addition i'm then also subject to the rules and regulations of a corp, and an alliance, and even a coalition.
further more there's the actual mining issues. to flip a belt i have to mine ores worth 1/3 of high sec ores, i have to move my stuff back to high sec to sell it, etc.
there's virtually no compensation for that when all is said and done. i'd probably earn *less* isk in null sec after logistics costs, and opportunity costs etc.

having said that, even in high sec there's no reason to be in a player corp. when mining is your primary activity in eve your choice is generally npc corp in high sec or do something else.

i do keep meaning to knock up a spreadsheet for the 5 grav sites in 0.0 to see what their true isk/hour or isk/jetcan value is in comparison to just cherry picking scordite in high sec.



it's quite easy to see that adding low end minerals to ores such as gneiss and spod will go a long way to addressing the issues with mining, which form a pretty solid base from which to help fix other industry related issues in null sec.

the composition of null sec grav sites, and the minerals contained with in the ores are not secret to ccp, they are widely available.

if low ends were added to gneiss and spod then there would be an increase in supply for low ends, which would reduce their price and thus devaluing high sec mining whilst keeping null sec mining just as lucrative as it is now. this would draw more players to mine in null sec as it's then worth their time to do so as there's a wider gap between high sec, and non-high sec ores/minerals.

sure it's not the miracle solution but it's a very solid first step to fixing the issues surrounding null sec industry.

noob here ... so keep bashing to minimum.

been reading alot of these threads lately on null vs high industry stuff....

the more i read, the less interested i am becoming in continuing this game in its current state of affairs. im all for nerfing high sec (even though, thats where i spend most of my time, for now). i thought i was getting into a game that was supposed to be harsh and cruel, not some carebear land. isnt highsec supposed to be for "beginners" to get their feet under them? as far as im concerned, high sec should be where you stay if you are satisfied with making minimum wage. not somewhere you can flourish and get in game rich at pretty much NO risk.

anyways, why dont the nullsec alliances leaders just come to an agreement to boycott highsec? ......this would crush highsec economy, would it not?

highsec rely's on nullsec

Per the data provided by Tippia, nullsec is utterly incapable of producing the goods required to support itself. We can't "crush" hi-sec - we completely rely on it.

Incidentally, in my view the concept of hi-sec as just a "starter area" has been obsolete for a very long time. At least 6 or 7 years. Read this for more detail.

PS please don't quit. The situation will get better. CCP are aware of it. All that remains is to put a good enough case that resolving the crushing imbalance will make good business sense because it will revitalise 0.0

If you mean Empire NPC stations in the last sentence, there's also the fact you are competing for access to those slots against other players from different corps and alliances, whereas in sov null you are competing with members of your own alliance.

Also, access to the bonuses to Empire NPC require sufficient standings with that NPC. Correct me if I'm wrong, but for sov null outposts, the full benefit of any upgrades is automatically sanctioned by having access to said alliances outpost.