These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Goldnut Sachs
#701 - 2013-03-09 16:02:30 UTC
goons goons goons goons goons goons
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#702 - 2013-03-09 16:09:06 UTC
I admit, sometimes it's hard to not wonder - where can I read about "our" secret plan to wtfpwn EVE Online that I see referenced so often on General Discussion.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#703 - 2013-03-09 16:36:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
I was told I didn't know what I was talking about. That I should stay out of it. I didn't understand the mechanics.

This is true, I don't understand the mechanics. I am still learning.


Finish learning, then go & look at CCP's history of nerfing now & planning to make up for it later (Hint: The making up for it part never happens). You were basically suggesting another nerf to nullsec for the benefit of highsec, which would give CCP more reason to ignore the glaring holes they've left in nullsec on the basis that they had just done a revamp (nerf) for it.



I am not suggesting a nerf, or a buff. I am explaining to people who give a false reason, why their reason is false. I have brought up ideas that COULD fix it, in hopes that someone would explain why it wouldn't. The only answer beyond trollish behavior was "go learn about the mechanics" which I have. In any post/report/blog that shows information to learn, I have read it. I have then used that information accordingly. If any suggestion is to be had, is that CCP will change things when they deem it necessary, but they won't do it to cater a specific crowd. It will be hard to explain to the devs that YOU should have this added benefit when you already have found a more economical fix for it. That doesn't show it's broken, it shows you found a way of doing things that's "better" for you. Because in the end its about the economics of it all, which again is player driven. Profits are not a mechanic server side issue when using a player ran market.

Again, it comes down to you, not me.

It's real easy to tell someone what to do, it's far harder for you to do the effort yourself.

I am merely pointing that out.

Again, I did clamor for a change to nullsec industry; when it was said how much better npc highsec's industry is over all else, I did suggest that npc industry should be better using the same MECHANIC from highsec. Because it SHOULD.

I just don't think the argument of "risk vs reward" should be a kneejerk blanket statement as to why null should have better industry than npc, when NPC has shown to be better the entire time it has been there.

But talking about it, or having you yell at me, any other player versus player, is going only going to gain nothing but forum epeen. Being able to discuss it without antagonizing is what is going to show CCP how it's a problem.

It's not a debate. You nor I have any say in the matter apart from discussing our own opinions.

If you want to show ccp how their system needs to be reworked, using an existing working mechanic is not the way to go about it. Which is what you proved back in that power projection thread. You need to show how you cannot do it WITHOUT using the only method you have to make it work.

But thanks for contributing to the thread using half a quote so you can justify being an *******, I'm sure you are well on your way to getting things done.

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.
Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#704 - 2013-03-09 17:16:40 UTC
La Nariz wrote:

VFK market and whatever the TEST one is are the busiest nullsec trade hubs in the game. The problem is the logistics cost is not properly rewarded and that the industrial capacity of the sov space cannot meet the demand of the trade hub. This makes a lot of people go :effort: and JF in a batch of stuff from jita instead of buying locally. I would agree with you about the self-inflicted wound thing iff the industrial capacity was there.
They aren't exactly huge hubs - the TEST one is about the size of Hek as I write this and both together don't match Rens. I certainly wouldn't bother hauling stuff to either to sell, even if I did know and have a friendly relationship with the owners.
Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#705 - 2013-03-09 17:51:14 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:

As to high-ends they do not exist only in Null and I think giving everything to high sec hardly makes reward=risk*capital expenditure work do you?
I'm not seeing a lot of argument from nullsec types in favour of this equation actually having the same net result no matter where you are. The argument isn't that highsec should have low risk, low reward, and thus modest net reward, whilst nullsec has high risk, high reward, and thus modest net reward (after losses from that high risk). No, the argument is that highsec should have low risk, very low reward, and trivial net reward, and that nullsec should have 'high risk', very high reward, and very high net rewards.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#706 - 2013-03-09 18:04:49 UTC
Josilin du Guesclin wrote:
No, the argument is that highsec should have low risk, very low reward, and trivial net reward, and that nullsec should have 'high risk', very high reward, and very high net rewards.


Expectations. Always so many of them, result always so uncertain.

I'll just leave this here. P

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Zhade Lezte
#707 - 2013-03-09 18:08:10 UTC
Josilin du Guesclin wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

As to high-ends they do not exist only in Null and I think giving everything to high sec hardly makes reward=risk*capital expenditure work do you?
I'm not seeing a lot of argument from nullsec types in favour of this equation actually having the same net result no matter where you are. The argument isn't that highsec should have low risk, low reward, and thus modest net reward, whilst nullsec has high risk, high reward, and thus modest net reward (after losses from that high risk). No, the argument is that highsec should have low risk, very low reward, and trivial net reward, and that nullsec should have 'high risk', very high reward, and very high net rewards.



Uh....no? A lot of us think that the net being the same is fine. The problem is that it absolutely is not for nullsec industry, simply because hisec is better not only in risk of logistics but also in terms of station services and minerals available.

If there's anything biased about an average nullseccer's perception of risk vs. reward it's the very human tendency to overrate your abilities and believe that you should be getting very high net rewards because you are clearly better than anyone at mitigating the risk. Much like 90% of people asked if they are better than the "average driver" will say yes.

This argument would have some merit in stuff like say, perceived rewards for ratting/exploration in 0.0 where it's at least a bit more grey if risk reward is in balance compared to missioners/incursion runners.

But as long as highsec industry has all the advantages over nullsec industry, this particular instance of risk vs. reward is a very black and white issue. And despite highseccers and nullseccers individual perceptions of CCP being biased one way or the other (generally biased in favor of the other security status, heh), and CCP not being perfect, at least there is a *relatively* neutral party actually arbitrating what changes are made.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#708 - 2013-03-09 19:13:41 UTC
Zhade Lezte wrote:
Uh....no? A lot of us think that the net being the same is fine. The problem is that it absolutely is not for nullsec industry, simply because hisec is better not only in risk of logistics but also in terms of station services and minerals available.

If there's anything biased about an average nullseccer's perception of risk vs. reward it's the very human tendency to overrate your abilities and believe that you should be getting very high net rewards because you are clearly better than anyone at mitigating the risk. Much like 90% of people asked if they are better than the "average driver" will say yes.

It's because people learned to not be morons are are now able to use the intel channel.

This means local needs to be nerfed.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
#709 - 2013-03-09 19:38:32 UTC
Zhade Lezte wrote:
hisec is better not only in risk of logistics but also in terms of station services and minerals available.


Exhibit A: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=16718947

Exhibit B:http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Item_Database:Starbase_&_Sovereignty_Structures:Starbase_Structures:Assembly_Arrays

Exhibit C: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Locations_of_ore_and_ice_in_space

Zhade Lezte wrote:
highsec industry has all the advantages over nullsec industry


So move to high sec. See you in Jita!

P.s.
Tippia wrote:
Saying that they have more options is much like saying that, if accepting an L4 instantly exploded your ship and caused you to fail the mission, running them was still an option for making ISK.


Can you exaggerate that just a little bit harder? Maybe use some plague, famine, decay, and death or something about bunny genocide? I'm not quite getting the fear and impending doom I think you were intending to convey.
Kane Alvo
Doomheim
#710 - 2013-03-09 20:11:53 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Never not be nerfing nullsec. Eventually the crying will stop.

When it's dead.


Let it die. Reading these threads, it sure sounds like you need high sec a lot more than high sec needs you. And that's the part the pisses off the null bears the most.

Null sec has ABC, but they want XYZ.
High sec has XYZ, so nerf high sec.

Sounds fair. Where's my snazzy Vote for Malcanis campaign button?

Caldari Militia  ☜★☞ Psychotic Monk for CSM8

Frying Doom
#711 - 2013-03-09 21:36:45 UTC
Kane Alvo wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Never not be nerfing nullsec. Eventually the crying will stop.

When it's dead.


Let it die. Reading these threads, it sure sounds like you need high sec a lot more than high sec needs you. And that's the part the pisses off the null bears the most.

Null sec has ABC, but they want XYZ.
High sec has XYZ, so nerf high sec.

Sounds fair. Where's my snazzy Vote for Malcanis campaign button?

I will admit I cant believe there are people around that would like to see EvE turned into Hi-sec online.

Yes there are people who like Hi-sec, people who need it.

I used to work 14 hours a day 6 days a week and frankly I enjoyed my mining on my day off, I was stuffed and the idea of running around in lo-sec even was too much as I was more zombie than alive

But never was I so simple minded to think that the rest of the game was unimportant and did not need improvements.
Yes I argued for the fact that mining barges needed better stats but I did not argue that they shouldn't be able to be ganked.

They are both sides of the same coin just like Dangerous areas of space need better industry while Hi-sec retains its capabilities.

Just as players who want to fund their own production facilities should be rewarded but those that do not should not be massively handicapped.

I cannot believe the level of entitlement I have read in this thread, that people In hi-sec believe that they should have the best rewards, the least on No risk, Massive facilities costing nothing and no competition, while at the same time believing that other areas of this game should make due on frankly bugger all.

It is a sad state of affairs that anyone who was not mentally handicapped would believe this.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#712 - 2013-03-09 21:44:16 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Kane Alvo wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Never not be nerfing nullsec. Eventually the crying will stop.

When it's dead.


Let it die. Reading these threads, it sure sounds like you need high sec a lot more than high sec needs you. And that's the part the pisses off the null bears the most.

Null sec has ABC, but they want XYZ.
High sec has XYZ, so nerf high sec.

Sounds fair. Where's my snazzy Vote for Malcanis campaign button?

I will admit I cant believe there are people around that would like to see EvE turned into Hi-sec online.

Yes there are people who like Hi-sec, people who need it.

I used to work 14 hours a day 6 days a week and frankly I enjoyed my mining on my day off, I was stuffed and the idea of running around in lo-sec even was too much as I was more zombie than alive

But never was I so simple minded to think that the rest of the game was unimportant and did not need improvements.
Yes I argued for the fact that mining barges needed better stats but I did not argue that they shouldn't be able to be ganked.

They are both sides of the same coin just like Dangerous areas of space need better industry while Hi-sec retains its capabilities.

Just as players who want to fund their own production facilities should be rewarded but those that do not should not be massively handicapped.

I cannot believe the level of entitlement I have read in this thread, that people In hi-sec believe that they should have the best rewards, the least on No risk, Massive facilities costing nothing and no competition, while at the same time believing that other areas of this game should make due on frankly bugger all.

It is a sad state of affairs that anyone who was not mentally handicapped would believe this.

Highsec is the way of the future. The only question is the rate of convergence, and the mechanism involved.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#713 - 2013-03-09 22:14:47 UTC
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:
So move to high sec. See you in Jita!

You know how smalltime highsec industrialists complain about never being able to find open industry slots?
Yeah... we're way ahead of you there.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Zhade Lezte
#714 - 2013-03-09 22:20:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Zhade Lezte
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:

Zhade Lezte wrote:
highsec industry has all the advantages over nullsec industry


So move to high sec. See you in Jita!


Hey I'm making the best of a terribly broken situation already. Two characters doing industry in highsec with a third one training up. And highsec's inherent safety leaves a lovely amount of fat, bloated fools that can't even bother to learn enough about the game enough to take the minimal amounts of steps to ensure that their cargo is immune from scanning (or have and have decided to not take the steps anyways), and have managed to get hilariously rich and complacement in spite of this.

Of course, clearly linking an example of one of these eve-o darwin awards losing a heap of industrial goods "proves" that nullsec is 100% safe and not that highsec is, in fact, not 100% idiot-proof. (Maybe we can conclude that the relative lack of nullsec freighter killmails filled with industry goods means that nullsec industry is fine? There certainly can't be other reasons, like a lack of nullsec freighters carrying industrial goods to gank in the first place.)

So thankfully I've carved my niche in this space. Of course, expecting all wannabe nullsec industrialists to just "go to highsec" is terribly uncouth of you, as I will explain...

PS: Guess whose industry alt also flies a talos and is on that killmail you linked? Big smile

Mayhaw Morgan wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Saying that they have more options is much like saying that, if accepting an L4 instantly exploded your ship and caused you to fail the mission, running them was still an option for making ISK.


Can you exaggerate that just a little bit harder? Maybe use some plague, famine, decay, and death or something about bunny genocide? I'm not quite getting the fear and impending doom I think you were intending to convey.


...about now. Okay, let me try to actually communicate to you instead of failing and being as sarcastic and snippy as I am in earlier in this post*

Think about this:

Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that you're a mission runner who loves highsec, can't take those nullsec jerks or whatever the heck. The freedom from a larger alliance, ability to play casual, whatever means that highsec is the place you want to be.

But CCP changed the game recently and now highsec mission running is broken! Maybe it's Tippia's L4 accepting ship explosion bug, maybe the rewards are just worse than mining veldspar, who knows.

You go to the forums to ask for help! You try to explain, in as much detail as possible, how it's wrong, what can be done to change it without horribly breaking the game, or whatnot.

I, a fiendish nullsec zealot, respond with a brief reply, where I, uh, maybe...

...link a killmail of a deadspace-fit tengu that is actually a highsec exploration tengu or something. "Hah, missions are broken indeed". I chortle to myself.

...link the military connections skillbook, showing that I am completely ignorant of the wider issue with missioning and think that you just need to get more LP or something.

...and then, to cap off my masterful post:

"So move to nullsec. See you in Providence!"

I mean, you would make better ISK doing anomalies in CVA's NRDS space if missions were broken, so why wouldn't you move there?

*yet I still couldn't help being sarcastic, at least to some extent, in my analogy. So it goes!
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#715 - 2013-03-09 22:27:37 UTC
Kane Alvo wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Never not be nerfing nullsec. Eventually the crying will stop.

When it's dead.


Let it die. Reading these threads, it sure sounds like you need high sec a lot more than high sec needs you. And that's the part the pisses off the null bears the most.

Null sec has ABC, but they want XYZ.
High sec has XYZ, so nerf high sec.

Sounds fair. Where's my snazzy Vote for Malcanis campaign button?

Yeah, you don't get it.
More like: Highsec has 100%
Nullsec has 20%
Nullsec really should be 20% better than highsec or some other random number
However you can't get higher than 100% without breaking things
So highsec has to be nerfed and nullsec is made at or close to 100%


Why does nullsec deserve the ability to make better facilities than in highsec?
Because we BUILD THEM. We spend billions and billions of ISK on facilities yet with the current state of affairs, they're nowhere CLOSE to the capabilities of facilities that highsec residents get FOR FREE.
Because our facilities are at actual risk of being captured or destroyed.
Because what we have right now isn't a conflict driver. Materials being sent to highsec to build ships and then ships being sent back down to nullsec doesn't really put any part of this at risk
Because nullsec is, as stated by CCP, a place where we're supposed to build empires. We can't have empires without industry
Because we have industrialists who want to play in nullsec but don't because the current state of affairs makes doing so entirely pointless

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#716 - 2013-03-09 22:31:21 UTC
So let me ask YOU

Why do YOU feel entitled to a massive, risk-free, instantly available, and virtually cost-free industrial capability?

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Dave stark
#717 - 2013-03-09 22:32:17 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
So let me ask YOU

Why do YOU feel entitled to a massive, risk-free, instantly available, and virtually cost-free industrial capability?


because why shouldn't i be entitled to that?
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#718 - 2013-03-09 22:35:32 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
So let me ask YOU

Why do YOU feel entitled to a massive, risk-free, instantly available, and virtually cost-free industrial capability?


because why shouldn't i be entitled to that?

Gee I don't know, maybe all of the reasons I listed above and more.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Dave stark
#719 - 2013-03-09 22:40:40 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
So let me ask YOU

Why do YOU feel entitled to a massive, risk-free, instantly available, and virtually cost-free industrial capability?


because why shouldn't i be entitled to that?

Gee I don't know, maybe all of the reasons I listed above and more.

i thought that was just a list of why null sec should be buffed, rather than high sec being nerfed. *shrug*
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#720 - 2013-03-09 22:42:53 UTC
It's already been said several times why nullsec can't properly be buffed without highsec being nerfed. Tippia and Malcanis can both demonstrate that part of the argument a lot better than I can, and they've posted their reasons several times in this thread.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)