These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Should nullsec industry > hisec industry?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Onomerous
Caldari Black Hand
Caldari Tactical Operations Command
#541 - 2013-03-08 13:06:55 UTC
Kane Alvo wrote:
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Kane Alvo wrote:
*insanity*



Say goodbye to any T2 in highsec then. As it needs moongoo. which means, pretty much, nullsec.


Wait. You mean that no one area of space can have everything? Is it possible that they're in some way dependent on each other as part of a bigger picture? That interaction between the two is a necessity by design?

Say it ain't so. Shocked


shuush you!! No one is supposed to think like that. ;)
Goldnut Sachs
#542 - 2013-03-08 13:11:53 UTC
http://themittani.com/features/sov-problems-why-no-new-blood
while not exactly newbies, it is also important for fledgling alliances to have enough incentive to carve out a foothold in nullsec. while most constellation may lack tech moons, the proposed improvements to industry may be the ticket, as an accessible source of income for line members who actually use the space actively as intended.
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#543 - 2013-03-08 13:36:32 UTC
Even if you insane highsec bears don't think nullsec should have industry that is better than highsec, it's pretty unarguable that the current industry capabilities in nullsec are a joke and need a big boost. Even if it were brought up to say 75% of that of highsec, nullsec would be a much more vibrant place
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#544 - 2013-03-08 13:47:30 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Even if you insane highsec bears don't think nullsec should have industry that is better than highsec, it's pretty unarguable that the current industry capabilities in nullsec are a joke and need a big boost. Even if it were brought up to say 75% of that of highsec, nullsec would be a much more vibrant place


There's no reason to keep null sec industry below 100% of hi sec.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#545 - 2013-03-08 13:57:52 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Even if you insane highsec bears don't think nullsec should have industry that is better than highsec, it's pretty unarguable that the current industry capabilities in nullsec are a joke and need a big boost. Even if it were brought up to say 75% of that of highsec, nullsec would be a much more vibrant place

you are saying it like anyone from high-sec would care about how vibrant is 0.0 Shocked

the main problem here is: this rebalance can't be done without nerfing high-sec. NERFING HIGH-SEC BECAUSE OF SOME WHINY 0.0-SECCERS. That's why you will not see enough support from high-seccers.

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#546 - 2013-03-08 13:59:32 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Even if you insane highsec bears don't think nullsec should have industry that is better than highsec, it's pretty unarguable that the current industry capabilities in nullsec are a joke and need a big boost. Even if it were brought up to say 75% of that of highsec, nullsec would be a much more vibrant place


There's no reason to keep null sec industry below 100% of hi sec.


I think highsec industry needs heavily nerfed, and nullsec brought up to above that of the new highsec level.

Though I guess some people would say "no nullsec needs to be worse, so there's some reliance on highsec, you can't have one bit of eve that does everything the best!" or whatever - but even if you allow that as a possible argument, the current level is just ridiculous
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#547 - 2013-03-08 14:00:18 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Even if you insane highsec bears don't think nullsec should have industry that is better than highsec, it's pretty unarguable that the current industry capabilities in nullsec are a joke and need a big boost. Even if it were brought up to say 75% of that of highsec, nullsec would be a much more vibrant place

you are saying it like anyone from high-sec would care about how vibrant is 0.0 Shocked

the main problem here is: this rebalance can't be done without nerfing high-sec. NERFING HIGH-SEC BECAUSE OF SOME WHINY 0.0-SECCERS. That's why you will not see enough support from high-seccers.


High seccers not caring about balance and just wanting more and more boosts for themselves? I'm shocked.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#548 - 2013-03-08 14:00:28 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Even if you insane highsec bears don't think nullsec should have industry that is better than highsec, it's pretty unarguable that the current industry capabilities in nullsec are a joke and need a big boost. Even if it were brought up to say 75% of that of highsec, nullsec would be a much more vibrant place

you are saying it like anyone from high-sec would care about how vibrant is 0.0 Shocked

the main problem here is: this rebalance can't be done without nerfing high-sec. NERFING HIGH-SEC BECAUSE OF SOME WHINY 0.0-SECCERS. That's why you will not see enough support from high-seccers.


Good thing we don't needs your support, since your kind can't be bothered to so much as click a louse to vote for csm lol.
Frying Doom
#549 - 2013-03-08 14:02:59 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Even if you insane highsec bears don't think nullsec should have industry that is better than highsec, it's pretty unarguable that the current industry capabilities in nullsec are a joke and need a big boost. Even if it were brought up to say 75% of that of highsec, nullsec would be a much more vibrant place

you are saying it like anyone from high-sec would care about how vibrant is 0.0 Shocked

the main problem here is: this rebalance can't be done without nerfing high-sec. NERFING HIGH-SEC BECAUSE OF SOME WHINY 0.0-SECCERS. That's why you will not see enough support from high-seccers.

What nerf specifically are you refering too?

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
flakeys
Doomheim
#550 - 2013-03-08 14:15:48 UTC
Industry in reality will allways be done there where it is safest ....

We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#551 - 2013-03-08 14:18:59 UTC
flakeys wrote:
Industry in reality will allways be done there where it is safest ....


I tried saying that so many times but no.

For some reason they are strongly convinced that manufacturing high tech stuff in the middle of a Somalian battlefield is the most natural thing ever and HAS to be vastly more $$$ rewarding than doing it in China.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#552 - 2013-03-08 14:24:07 UTC
Again, you are arguing the ontological fallacy: "because things are this way, that's the way they must be."

Since I have explained this to you at least twice, at this stage you're just trolling.

The tl;dr is that the "Nullsec = Somalia" is nothing more or less than a giant assumption that you're asserting without any evidence or analysis of why that might be other than HURR DURR NULLBEARS R ALL BIG DUMBO GANKERS DURR HURR stereotyping.

Frankly, it's beneath you, but on the other hand it does encourage me in my campaign, since if you had an argument with a shred of intellectual consistency, you'd be using that. And you're not.

"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
#553 - 2013-03-08 14:30:55 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Again, you are arguing the ontological fallacy: "because things are this way, that's the way they must be."

Since I have explained this to you at least twice, at this stage you're just trolling.

The tl;dr is that the "Nullsec = Somalia" is nothing more or less than a giant assumption that you're asserting without any evidence or analysis of why that might be other than HURR DURR NULLBEARS R ALL BIG DUMBO GANKERS DURR HURR stereotyping.

Frankly, it's beneath you, but on the other hand it does encourage me in my campaign, since if you had an argument with a shred of intellectual consistency, you'd be using that. And you're not.

To get what you want WRT industry, sovereignty rules need to change first.

You can't have the benefits of exclusivity and inclusivity at the same time, among other reasons because it's bad game design.

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#554 - 2013-03-08 14:31:56 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
flakeys wrote:
Industry in reality will allways be done there where it is safest ....


I tried saying that so many times but no.

For some reason they are strongly convinced that manufacturing high tech stuff in the middle of a Somalian battlefield is the most natural thing ever and HAS to be vastly more $$$ rewarding than doing it in China.


You haven't provided any convincing arguments that industrial endeavours would never be undertaken in null other than saying "SOMALIA! BATTLEFIELD!!!111" nonsense. The reason it doesn't happen at the moment is because how easy and cheap it is in highsec is ridiculous. It's not because omg somalia battlefield, it's because of how pitiful the capabilities are - as has been discussed before, there's more slots in sobaseki than there are in entire nullsec REGIONS - and how there's at the moment no downside to using highsec instead. If the capabilities were buffed, and if there were some downside (say for example a 5% tax on slots in highsec) then I very easily see a lot more people doing their work in null.
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#555 - 2013-03-08 14:42:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Kidd
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Mr Kidd wrote:
They only need invest in, build and protect the facilities. It is "their" space. They went out there to own it. They just don't want to pay the bill for it.

It is a non-existent problem.

Let me ask you honestly:
If killing sleeper rats netted you about 10 mil/hour on average in a C5 or C6 with an optimal fleet comp and tactics, but still required the same fleet compositions, effort, risk, infrastructure, etc. to kill them, would you begrudge wormhole dwellers for going to highsec to run lvl 4 missions or incursions to get a reasonable income? Would you consider their requests to buff w-space PVE reasonable? Or would you tell them to HTFU and get a bigger and more expensive fleet composition?


I understand what you're saying. I even understand why null wants better industry. So understand what I'm about to tell you. Nullsec has the best of almost everything in the game. It's rats, second only to w-space. But since we don't get bpc or mod drops worth billions, the loot froom for our sleepers might barely make up for it over time. You have Sov, no other space has that ability. You have outposts that belong to the space holding alliance. No other space has that. You have the best DED & cosmos sites in the game. You have the best incursions. You have the best ore and the best ice. You have the best PI. You have supercaps that you can cyno around. Try that in w-space: cant have supercaps cant cyno. And on top of all that you have moon-goo to net you billions of isk per month for doing nothing.

Null has not spent its time building bridges to the rest of the game. It has, instead, spent it telling CCP why it should have everything and everyone else nothing.

So, as a member of the rest of the game, your cries of disproportionate distribution of something else in the game that doesn't vastly slant the game in null's favor yet again is falling on my deaf ears especially what you're talking about wanting to do what could be done if only you take that moon-goo and invest it in pos production infrastructure. As far as I'm concerned, it appears to me you just don't want to make that investment. Instead, what you want is a vast industrial complex that is immune to destruction. Oh sure, they can change hands but there is no lost investment. And in a mostly blue null, you haven't really lost anything.

Don't ban me, bro!
Notorious Fellon
#556 - 2013-03-08 14:47:30 UTC
Seems everyone is avoiding the elephant in the room.

If it were harder to move the goods from Null to Jita, then manufacturing and trade would *need* to move to where it is needed (back to null). We would once again see large hauling caravans complete with escort when trade between regions was absolutely needed.

I only say this because it is the very same argument as those who want to nerf the hell out of hisec.

Given that nerfing hisec into oblivion will also have the side effect of making new players less likely to hang onto the game long enough to see null/wh/whatever, I know which option I would prefer.

It all comes down to the same argument regarding "Power projection". This is simply "Commerce Projection".

"Jumping" made the universe too small.

Crime, it is not a "career", it is a lifestyle.
Josef Djugashvilis
#557 - 2013-03-08 14:50:28 UTC
Just give the null-sec zealots everything they want; and a bit extra for luck.

This is not a signature.
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#558 - 2013-03-08 14:53:32 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Even if you insane highsec bears don't think nullsec should have industry that is better than highsec, it's pretty unarguable that the current industry capabilities in nullsec are a joke and need a big boost. Even if it were brought up to say 75% of that of highsec, nullsec would be a much more vibrant place

you are saying it like anyone from high-sec would care about how vibrant is 0.0 Shocked

the main problem here is: this rebalance can't be done without nerfing high-sec. NERFING HIGH-SEC BECAUSE OF SOME WHINY 0.0-SECCERS. That's why you will not see enough support from high-seccers.


Good thing we don't needs your support, since your kind can't be bothered to so much as click a louse to vote for csm lol.

yea, because CSM decides what CCP will do Lol

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#559 - 2013-03-08 14:54:18 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Even if you insane highsec bears don't think nullsec should have industry that is better than highsec, it's pretty unarguable that the current industry capabilities in nullsec are a joke and need a big boost. Even if it were brought up to say 75% of that of highsec, nullsec would be a much more vibrant place

you are saying it like anyone from high-sec would care about how vibrant is 0.0 Shocked

the main problem here is: this rebalance can't be done without nerfing high-sec. NERFING HIGH-SEC BECAUSE OF SOME WHINY 0.0-SECCERS. That's why you will not see enough support from high-seccers.


High seccers not caring about balance and just wanting more and more boosts for themselves? I'm shocked.

show me one thread where high-seccer industrials requests "more boosts" Lol

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
#560 - 2013-03-08 15:06:24 UTC
Null sec/WH>Low Sec> High Sec.

High sec isk should be deplorable, there is zero reason to lose a single ship in high sec and ISK should reflect this. It should be imposible to plex an account in high sec via missions, industry and mining to encourage people to leave. High sec faction space should be seperated low sec so as to create and island of high between all factions. Market PVP is excused as high should remain the focus for trade.