These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Separate the four empires with low security space.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#361 - 2013-05-07 16:22:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Commander Ted
Caljiav Ocanon wrote:
Carebear
Noun
A word used by generally unemployed/unemployable males to describe anyone who they dislike in a video game, usually teenage virgins or "men" in their 30s and 40s with no life.


Carebear is an Eve only term used to describe anyone who doesn't pvp.

Not derogatory in itself, however since carebear is used mostly in a negative connotation it has become an insult like midget or the r word.


Please stop posting if you can't actually defend your own points or have nothing to contribute except for short statements that don't add anything to the conversation.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative
#362 - 2013-05-07 16:27:22 UTC
Caljiav Ocanon wrote:
Carebear
Noun
A word used by generally unemployed/unemployable males to describe anyone who they dislike in a video game, usually teenage virgins or "men" in their 30s and 40s with no life.


In EvE, a carebear is someone who avoids pvp at all costs.

Real simple, actually. Carebears can be in hisec, losec, nulsec or w-space. But generally, a carebear will work so hard to avoid pvp that they'll actually petition CCP to change the game so that it is easier for them to be a carebear.

They also seem to hate the idea that the market is pvp, and that they can negatively affect other players' games by simply trying to mind their own business. It's an anti-social sentiment that as long as they don't shoot other players, they are in their own bubble and shouldn't be held accountable for other actions.

If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality. That "griefer/thief" is probably more sane than you are. How screwed up is that?
Xavier Thorm
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#363 - 2013-05-07 16:44:33 UTC
In response to several different claims that separating the Empires with lowsec space would not disrupt the current system of massive trade hubs, I have this to say: separating the Empires with lowsec should be only part of a larger plan.

If fuel prices climb and nullsec industry actually gets a kick in the pants like it's supposed to in Odyssey (both big "if"s, I know) massive trade hubs will already be taking a hit, and think lowsec (shifting-sec-status FW space, or even nullsec) between Empires would be a good additional step.
ravill rivyll
Doomheim
#364 - 2013-05-07 16:47:14 UTC
I cant say if its good or bad but its definitely interesting... I would go for it.
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#365 - 2013-05-07 16:48:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Nahkep Narmelion
Ruze wrote:


Honestly, I like the idea because I feel that it will minimize the 'central trade hub' idea a lot and start pushing local hubs a lot more. The centralized hub of Jita, in my mind, needs a lot of it's oomph taken out and more placed in regional and local hubs.

Plus, if it's dangerous to haul goods, the value of said goods will vary more greatly in each region. I'll have lasers all day in Amarr, but getting missiles or autocannons might cost me more than they would in their areas.

Finally, as mentioned earlier, I hate the fact that mass-trade is mostly a solo endeavor. Single accounts living in NPC corps, flying freighters to and from Jita. They stick to NPC corps to keep from getting war dec'd, to avoid loss. I like the fact that this idea would sincerely push those who are willing to make trade into a group endeavor into more profitable territory, while nuking the solo trader's profit margin considerably.


Feel? You like it because it makes you feel something. I like the idea of me staying home all day playing Eve while I collect $80,000 from the government so I can...I like it because it would make me feel good.

Feelings are great, but I think you should have some sort of reason beyond feeling it will do something. It is entirely possible that Jita and possibly Amarr will get a boost out of this, not a nerf. Did that feeling crop up?

And what exactly does price differentials bring to the game? Greater profits? Maybe. Maybe not. If prices go up, but the demand goes down you might not see any change in your profit. As I noted price is not everything.

As for trade, you don't trade do you. Sure, the hauling alt may very well be in an NPC corp, but the rest of the operation probably is not. Depends on what that person is doing. For example, when I was doing invention and manufacturing I had several alts all in the same corp doing various things. Why? I needed a POS, can't have a POS in high sec in an NPC corp. Having them all in the same corp allowed for sharing a hangar as well that made doing all that crap easier.

It would be nice if you guys actually knew what you were talking about.
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#366 - 2013-05-07 16:51:58 UTC
Ruze wrote:
[quote=Caljiav Ocanon]

They also seem to hate the idea that the market is pvp, and that they can negatively affect other players' games by simply trying to mind their own business. It's an anti-social sentiment that as long as they don't shoot other players, they are in their own bubble and shouldn't be held accountable for other actions.


Then this proposal is decidedly anti-market PvP. Market PvP has another name. Competition. To the extent that a guy who is set up in say Caldari space already making say, Amarr T2 items, will have less competition if most of the other Amarr T2 inventors/manufacturers are in Amarr, Gallente or Minmatar space.

Any time anybody is advocating for something that will raise prices for the greater good of everyone else, it is ******* bullshit. That person is advocating higher prices to line their own pocket.
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#367 - 2013-05-07 16:55:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Commander Ted
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:


Any time anybody is advocating for something that will raise prices for the greater good of everyone else, it is ******* bullshit. That person is advocating higher prices to line their own pocket.


Won't prices drop for other things at the same time?

I would say the competition in medium hubs like amarr and dodixie is fairly adequate.

If all the hubs were equal they would all probably have average local populations of 700, making for an adequate amount of competition everywhere, unlike hek and rens which are so small they just are terrible.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative
#368 - 2013-05-07 17:03:03 UTC
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:
Ruze wrote:
[quote=Caljiav Ocanon]

They also seem to hate the idea that the market is pvp, and that they can negatively affect other players' games by simply trying to mind their own business. It's an anti-social sentiment that as long as they don't shoot other players, they are in their own bubble and shouldn't be held accountable for other actions.


Then this proposal is decidedly anti-market PvP. Market PvP has another name. Competition. To the extent that a guy who is set up in say Caldari space already making say, Amarr T2 items, will have less competition if most of the other Amarr T2 inventors/manufacturers are in Amarr, Gallente or Minmatar space.

Any time anybody is advocating for something that will raise prices for the greater good of everyone else, it is ******* bullshit. That person is advocating higher prices to line their own pocket.


As for both posts, I see that your personal opinion is wrapped in this. Else why would you be so insulting? As far as I can tell, this is a fairly civil discussion.

I argue that with the break up of the one trade hub and (hopefully) the practice of penny bidding that is so very common in Jita (so common that the devs have to work extra hard to crack down on third-party programs that are abusing the trade system), you'll see more market variance. More market variance between hubs creates more price variance. The person importing trade goods has an actual means to make a profit. The cost of local goods goes down, and the cost of others go up.

What Jita is doing is baselining all the items to at, or sometimes even below, their actual production value. Great for buyers, bad for sellers. It is actually stifling competition, when you combine the mass of products, the ease and regional access of the market database, and the penny bots.

If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality. That "griefer/thief" is probably more sane than you are. How screwed up is that?
Xavier Thorm
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#369 - 2013-05-07 17:06:17 UTC
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:
Ruze wrote:
[quote=Caljiav Ocanon]

They also seem to hate the idea that the market is pvp, and that they can negatively affect other players' games by simply trying to mind their own business. It's an anti-social sentiment that as long as they don't shoot other players, they are in their own bubble and shouldn't be held accountable for other actions.


Then this proposal is decidedly anti-market PvP. Market PvP has another name. Competition. To the extent that a guy who is set up in say Caldari space already making say, Amarr T2 items, will have less competition if most of the other Amarr T2 inventors/manufacturers are in Amarr, Gallente or Minmatar space.

Any time anybody is advocating for something that will raise prices for the greater good of everyone else, it is ******* bullshit. That person is advocating higher prices to line their own pocket.


You complain about other people making unsupported claims you go off like this...
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#370 - 2013-05-07 17:11:16 UTC
Pinky Denmark wrote:
Gate camping =! True piracy


Shouldn't that be != ? Smile

"The game is mostly played by men - 97%. But 40% of them play as women... so thats fine."  - CCP t0rfifrans 
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#371 - 2013-05-07 17:13:27 UTC
Commander Ted wrote:
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:


Any time anybody is advocating for something that will raise prices for the greater good of everyone else, it is ******* bullshit. That person is advocating higher prices to line their own pocket.


Won't prices drop for other things at the same time?

I would say the competition in medium hubs like amarr and dodixie is fairly adequate.

If all the hubs were equal they would all probably have average local populations of 700, making for an adequate amount of competition everywhere, unlike hek and rens which are so small they just are terrible.


Noting that prices for something you produce will drop while the prices of things I produce does not negate what I said.

And there is nothing in this proposal/suggestion that indicates trade hubs will become more equal. They might, but that is unlikely. Think of it this way. The possibilities are:

1. Hubs become more equal.
2. Jita and/or Amarr get increased shares of trade.

We have two outcomes, so an a priori non-informative probability assessment would be to put the chances of these two events happening at 50-50.

Now, if you disagree with that probability assessment that is fine, but it would be nice if you said why you think that Jita will lose ground. For example, I used to invent/manufacture in Sinq Laison. If I decided to keep doing that and this change was announced what would keep me from moving to Caldari space if I wanted to avoid these low sec regions prior to the patch that introduces these changes?

Or if I thought Amarr was going to get a buff, what would keep me from moving to Amarr prior to the change. That I might get awesome prices for the T2 autocannons I was making in Dodixie?

See, what I'd do is look at the demand in systems like Dodixie. I'd look at the price. I'd then have to come up with how many guns I'd have to sell at different prices to keep things going and make a profit. If the demand is weak that would necessitate a higher price post-change. If Idon't think I'm going to get it, I just might scoot over to Caldari or Amarr space thinking that many null alliances will still use Jita or Amarr.
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#372 - 2013-05-07 17:14:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Nahkep Narmelion
Xavier Thorm wrote:
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:
Ruze wrote:
[quote=Caljiav Ocanon]

They also seem to hate the idea that the market is pvp, and that they can negatively affect other players' games by simply trying to mind their own business. It's an anti-social sentiment that as long as they don't shoot other players, they are in their own bubble and shouldn't be held accountable for other actions.


Then this proposal is decidedly anti-market PvP. Market PvP has another name. Competition. To the extent that a guy who is set up in say Caldari space already making say, Amarr T2 items, will have less competition if most of the other Amarr T2 inventors/manufacturers are in Amarr, Gallente or Minmatar space.

Any time anybody is advocating for something that will raise prices for the greater good of everyone else, it is ******* bullshit. That person is advocating higher prices to line their own pocket.


You complain about other people making unsupported claims you go off like this...


WTF are you talking about? Right there in the OP the claim is that the goal of this is to reduce trade. Reducing trade reduces competition.

Its pretty ******* simple.

BTW, you do know what a conditional statement is, right? You know, "if...., then..."?
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative
#373 - 2013-05-07 17:18:53 UTC
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:
Commander Ted wrote:
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:


Any time anybody is advocating for something that will raise prices for the greater good of everyone else, it is ******* bullshit. That person is advocating higher prices to line their own pocket.


Won't prices drop for other things at the same time?

I would say the competition in medium hubs like amarr and dodixie is fairly adequate.

If all the hubs were equal they would all probably have average local populations of 700, making for an adequate amount of competition everywhere, unlike hek and rens which are so small they just are terrible.


Noting that prices for something you produce will drop while the prices of things I produce does not negate what I said.

And there is nothing in this proposal/suggestion that indicates trade hubs will become more equal. They might, but that is unlikely. Think of it this way. The possibilities are:

1. Hubs become more equal.
2. Jita and/or Amarr get increased shares of trade.

We have two outcomes, so an a priori non-informative probability assessment would be to put the chances of these two events happening at 50-50.

Now, if you disagree with that probability assessment that is fine, but it would be nice if you said why you think that Jita will lose ground. For example, I used to invent/manufacture in Sinq Laison. If I decided to keep doing that and this change was announced what would keep me from moving to Caldari space if I wanted to avoid these low sec regions prior to the patch that introduces these changes?

Or if I thought Amarr was going to get a buff, what would keep me from moving to Amarr prior to the change. That I might get awesome prices for the T2 autocannons I was making in Dodixie?

See, what I'd do is look at the demand in systems like Dodixie. I'd look at the price. I'd then have to come up with how many guns I'd have to sell at different prices to keep things going and make a profit. If the demand is weak that would necessitate a higher price post-change. If Idon't think I'm going to get it, I just might scoot over to Caldari or Amarr space thinking that many null alliances will still use Jita or Amarr.

I argued this same point earlier in this post. Amarr space is considerably larger than the other empires. What would stop players from moving to Amarr in order to use the larger quantity of available stations and belts?

That is a fair argument. The markets don't necessarily balance out. Sure, if everyone moved to Amarr, the markets in Minmatar space would get higher rates. But you can already sell things for above market value in Khanid or Derelik. You can already get better prices further from the central hub.

If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality. That "griefer/thief" is probably more sane than you are. How screwed up is that?
Za'kerak
#374 - 2013-05-07 17:19:03 UTC
step closer to WOW Ugh
Xavier Thorm
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#375 - 2013-05-07 17:35:45 UTC
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:
Xavier Thorm wrote:
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:
Ruze wrote:
[quote=Caljiav Ocanon]

They also seem to hate the idea that the market is pvp, and that they can negatively affect other players' games by simply trying to mind their own business. It's an anti-social sentiment that as long as they don't shoot other players, they are in their own bubble and shouldn't be held accountable for other actions.


Then this proposal is decidedly anti-market PvP. Market PvP has another name. Competition. To the extent that a guy who is set up in say Caldari space already making say, Amarr T2 items, will have less competition if most of the other Amarr T2 inventors/manufacturers are in Amarr, Gallente or Minmatar space.

Any time anybody is advocating for something that will raise prices for the greater good of everyone else, it is ******* bullshit. That person is advocating higher prices to line their own pocket.


You complain about other people making unsupported claims you go off like this...


WTF are you talking about? Right there in the OP the claim is that the goal of this is to reduce trade. Reducing trade reduces competition.

Its pretty ******* simple.

BTW, you do know what a conditional statement is, right? You know, "if...., then..."?


"Reducing trade reduces competition" is not an argument, it is a claim that needs to be supported by an argument.

One reason I would be happy to see the scope of common trade within Empire space reduced is so that systems/stations other than the current trade hubs would have a better chance to grow more, since there would be incentive for traders/manufacturers to NOT move their goods to the centralized hubs. This could (and I think would) open up new opportunities for daring traders to move goods between empires in smaller volumes to take advantage of the price difference. It would also probably reduce the extent to which real players have to "compete" with trade bots, by spreading them out.

Further, with less traders concentrated in a single area, it could potentially lower the barrier to entry (or at least the perceived barrier to entry) on marketing for new players, increasing the competition by bringing more people into the market, over a wider area.
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#376 - 2013-05-07 19:50:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Commander Ted
Za'kerak wrote:
step closer to WOW Ugh

what crack are you smoking, WoW has PvE servers that prevent all non consensual combat.

You compare eve to WoW when a change would bring about less meaningful player interactions.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#377 - 2013-05-07 19:51:57 UTC
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:


WTF are you talking about? Right there in the OP the claim is that the goal of this is to reduce trade. Reducing trade reduces competition.


No no no no.

What is the difference between competition from someone who is moving things in with an obelisk and competition from someone who produced it locally?

Massive ******* facepalm right their.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#378 - 2013-05-07 19:59:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Commander Ted
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:


Now, if you disagree with that probability assessment that is fine, but it would be nice if you said why you think that Jita will lose ground. For example, I used to invent/manufacture in Sinq Laison. If I decided to keep doing that and this change was announced what would keep me from moving to Caldari space if I wanted to avoid these low sec regions prior to the patch that introduces these changes?


Lack of demand and resources,duh.

Jita right now has the best prices and the most demand, an extremely large part of that is 0.0 alliances buying things to JF and that is probably one of the biggest reasons jita is a super hub, which is about to be nerfed. The fact that lots of demand in Jita encourages more items, making more people move in, forming a self feeding cycle, all of these people don't care about location really because traveling across space is safe so it doesn't matter where you live.

If even more of that demand were cut out by people from other regions not coming to Jita, then Jita has less demand.
Consumers (mission runners and pvp pilots in empire space) will not want to move to caldari space because it cuts off access to their preferred LP rewards and combat zones. If you took the average populations per system for all of the empires (excluding Jita) then you would find the populations of these places are fairly homogenous. If anything Amarr would become the biggest hub because it has the most space to live in.

Many industrialists can't go to Jita due to lack of ice/station slots. Ice will soon be in finite supply, and caldari capital ships aren't that great. Certain minerals are also not as common in certain empires, incentivising production of certain ships in their home space.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
Sakkar Arenith
Kenmei Corporation
#379 - 2013-05-07 20:07:23 UTC
agreed

the empires ought to be more "isolated". That will actually boost regional/empire markets and actually give reason to not shop in jita ll the time
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#380 - 2013-05-07 20:08:39 UTC
Commander Ted wrote:
stupid blathering....


We've been over this before.

For example, inventors rarely use station slots as they are already taken up now. Inventors put up POS so they can:

1. Work on PE/ME of their BPOs.
2. Do invention.

The idea that the lack of stations is a constraint is not really valid given the vast number of moons in Caldari and Amarr space.

So, I'm going to TL;Dr the rest of your crap, because you still haven't learned how to use dotlan.