These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Why is there no way for us to attack supply lines in eve?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#481 - 2013-06-01 17:10:09 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Adeh Gamalar wrote:


So, why would the hull price be higher? Mineral costs are what you're thinking of, I guess. But if the costs are going to be that much higher because the mins are mined in null then the income from mining in null will also rise proportionately, and won't stay the same as it is in high-sec...


Nullsec is shockingly deficient in low-end minerals. Obviously you're unaware of this, but even after the high-end ore buff planned in odyssey, there isn't going to be nearly enough trit and pyer and especially not enough mexallon in 0.0 anoms.

Really I think you need to educate yourself on what the actual problems of 0.0 manufacturing are before you make any more suggestions about it.



People should loot their wrecks. I am able to get the minerals to build 1 BS and 5 cruisers from just looting BS sized wrecks, ignoring the cruiser and frig wrecks.

And I have dealing with wrecks.

Takes roughly.... oooohhh I think 5 belts worth for 1 maller's worth of minerals. So assume 10 bs wrecks for 1 cruiser.

Anyone, raise your hand if you rat in a carrier or do only sites to rat for isk? That's ALOT of minerals right there. Not a solution to be sure, but can definitely offset the cost of those t1 hull minerals that you NEED to import in...

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.
Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#482 - 2013-06-01 17:25:57 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
Because null is about player created things. Highsec is about it being handed to you.

So.... create. Go on. Get to it. Chop chop.

YOU (null resident) wanted to "carve out your own empire and be the master of your domain". Guess it's up to "you" to do it.
If someone said that you are mentally deficient, I would trust it at this point.
Normally I'm all for beating the dead horse to death, but in this instance it's a futile effort.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#483 - 2013-06-01 17:34:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
Malcanis wrote:
Adeh Gamalar wrote:


There is a huge gap in your argument here. So far you haven't explained why it would cost three times as much to make a battleship in a pos in nullsec than it would to make it in a slot in a station. I have no idea why you would think this would be the case. It seems to be a purely made-up number.


There is the ISK overhead of buying and setting up a destructible POS in the first place

There is the ISK and time overhead of maintaining it.

There is the very high overhead of defending it.

There is the actuarial cost of risking losing it - and in an EVE where 0.0 was filled with thousands of manufacturing POS, they

WOULD be obvious targets, and it would be impossible to reliably defend them all.

There is the ISK and actuarial (risk) overhead of ferrying materials to and finished products from the POS (In a station you can just list them straight onto the market)

POS are capped at 75% refine efficiency, so you need to import bulk minerals from the nearest Minmatar station. And you just removed all bulk jump logistics, so it has to be done with haulers or freighters, making your operation extremely vulnerable. This adds on to your effective cost.

0.0 is cripplingly short of low end minerals, and 0.0 mining is more "expensive" than hi-sec mining because it's much easier for hostiles to disrupt it.

POS operations are far easier for spies and saboteurs to disrupt than station operations. This again adds to the actuarial overhead.

The political situation in 0.0 can change very rapidly. At any given time, you're no more than a coouple of strategic battles away from losing some or all of your space. This means at best, a massive amount of time tearing down your industrial POS (and moving them in slow vulnerable freighters), and at worst, you can simply lose everything. Again, this risk has to be factored into total production cost.

Honestly, I think 2x is a lowball estimate.



Sounds like that would encourage alliances to pick their systems a bit more carefully then and not just have swathes of unused, worthless, space.

But hey, we all like structure grinds right?

I mean, it's not like it would be a conflict driver, or help encourage uhm, what was that word... oh yes! "gudfights".

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.
Adamai
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#484 - 2013-06-01 17:37:47 UTC
Jowen Datloran wrote:
Meh, I never saw the introduction of jump drives as a benefit for the game in general. Sure it is of benefit of the individual player, but in total it reduces game play aspects for many just to make things more convenient for a few.

Though, I am still living in the hope that one day all low sec systems will have cynosural blockers.



jump drives came about by the very people who dominate nullsec, not todays nullsec boys but the boys back in 2004 and onwards, if you moan enough then change does happen.

they manufactured nullsec around alliances. its why only an alliance can own space. now back then the devs also played eve with the players, the direct result was the devs becoming the players them selves and instead of thinking balance and fairness their thoughts drifted to living in nullsec.. the result was capital ships and jump drives.

how can you possibly live 56 jumps from empire for a very very long duration of time when null sec markets are none existant with out having to travel 56 jumps..

the answer is!!!

jump drives and capitals..

its true. i would dream of living in null without my capital ship. it would be too tedious to have to run a 56 jump pipe just fit out a pvp thorax. it would force my hand and make me a permanent resident of empire space.

ive done the whole 56 jumps to fit a ****** ship out routine and i didnt like it.

thats the genral reason we have jump drive now and jump bridges so better get used to it as that will never ever change,
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#485 - 2013-06-01 17:38:28 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Rebecha Pucontis wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Rebecha Pucontis wrote:
Right now importing is virtually risk free


Then please explain all those dead Jump Freighters. You do realise that even if the JF pilot is in a NPC corp, that he's actually a 0.0 alt, right?

I'm not saying there is zero risk, but just virtually zero risk. I think it would be difficult to be killed if you do everything correctly, so those pilots achieved quite a feat by managing to die. I would be interested in the circumstances of their deaths.


OK so a jump freighter can't cyno directly into hi-sec. It has to jump into a lo-sec system and then use gates to get to Jita (or whichever other trade hub). After loading up at the trade hub, it might have to take a few hi-sec gates to get within cyno range of the lo-sec midpoint. From there it can jump into 0. Or depending on the route, it may be able to cyno directly from Jita.

If the JF pilot is in a player corp, then they can obviously be wardecced, and you'd be appalled at how many JFs empire wardec corps harvest.

Even if the pilot isn't in a player corp, JFs can still be suicide ganked relatively easily, and this is also surprisingly common.

And remember: this is a 6.5 billion ISK hull, not to mention the value of the cargo, with no slots and no defences other than its hitpoints. It's slow and clumsy. If they were routinely killable in the way that, say, a 3 million ISK Iteron V is, then they'd be useless.

If you have for example a 10% chance of losing your JF (let's say it's holding 3.5B worth of cargo, bringing the total loss to 10 billion ISK), then that makes the average cost of a trip to empire a billion ISK each way, plus whatever the fuel is. Obviously you're going to make pretty damb sure that your risk is a lot less than 10%. People don't fly JFs like they're T1 cruisers, nor is it a problem that they don't.

In short: what makes you think they're "too safe". How safe would be "just right"?


So it would be prudent to mention to that JF pilot that maybe doing smaller trips through the non null areas using less appealing gank worthy ships might be better right? Plenty of guides about highsec freighting around for those that do not wish to RISK their 6bil holds.

It's not like that JF can't dock up in low or anything and just ferry out in smaller trips.

Oh wait, :effort:.

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.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#486 - 2013-06-01 17:40:54 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
YOU (null resident) wanted to "carve out your own empire and be the master of your domain". Guess it's up to "you" to do it.
Too bad the game doesn't allow it.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#487 - 2013-06-01 17:41:21 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Adeh Gamalar wrote:

Stop being so condescending.



He's not being condescending (yet lol), he's utterly destroying your argument. You're leaving so many variables out (on purpose it seems) that Malcanis could drive a Dread through the gaps. I mean seriopusly, you're demonstrating that you don't really know what you are talkign about (example "the minerals will cost the same"...minerals you can't get in null sec?).

Malcanis is illustrating a point I've made several times in this thread: the shear incredible amount of changes needed to the game to make any of this nostalgic "attack the convoy! Ho!" crap would would probably involve so much dev time and game reworking that that it would probably be cheaper and faster for CCP to make a whole new game called "Space Convoy Attack" than do in any of the things people are suggesting.

Things do need to change, but the need to change in a reasonable way and CCP need knowledgeable advice from players for that to happen. "Force null sec players to use crappy industry" is not reasonable advice.



And, just to add, Malcanis sucks (there, now no one can accuse me of Malcanese Jock Riding Twisted ) .



You mean minerals you cannot MINE in null. You can still get the minerals needed for production in null.

Mind the gap!

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.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#488 - 2013-06-01 17:47:25 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Adeh Gamalar wrote:


I asked you to explain the discrepancy between building from a POS and building from a station slot in null. You can't add the cost of mining and logistics in null just to building from a POS. Those will be exactly the same for building from a station.

As to the rest, yes, there are some minor additional costs in terms of time and convenience but you are massively overstating them. Supercaps are built at POSes and the assembly arrays are certainly not moved with the kind of frequency you imply would be necessary. I think you also massively underestimate how much product a single POS can churn out when running at full efficiency. As I said in an earlier post, a single large tower can churn out something in excess of 600 battleships a month. When you get down to modules, weapons and rigs the numbers are simply enormous. The amount of equipment that can be turned by, say, forty or so towers set up in a couple of fortified systems is huge. And, of course, the costs associated with any individual tower will be divided across everything it produces each month.

Really, I don't see 2x as being anywhere near credible.


Hi I can explain this to you. Building from a POS is similar to shaving your face with a blunt shard of glass, incredibly painful and incredibly more expensive (medical bills) than doing it in a station, or in other words using a regular razor. To build in a POS you have to set it up, fuel it, defend it, and supply it with the build materials. That doesn't sound like much but, it really is. Setting up a POS can take hours. People can swoop in and murder your tower quickly with a small fleet of dreads so defending it can be miserable. Fueling it causes people to burn out as it is so tedious and boring we end up paying people to do it for us, GSOL is awesome. Supplying build materials is the most terrible part as sometimes it takes multiple freighter trips in non-highsec, that means no autopilot, you must be at the keyboard and there is a real chance of you getting killed. On top of that you have to manage the outputs which if not done correctly you lose your product. Whereas in a station you just plop it all in and use a slot. Supercaps are built in POS because they cannot be built in stations; if they could be built in stations then DBRB would have to put away his coat hangars.

So because I don't expect you to understand or read any of that, the isk:effort:tedium:reward ratio is horribly horribly skewed towards building in stations for POS to be a viable alternative.



So based on that information you would rather nerf highsec stations, or would you clamor for changes to pos? Because the discussion here is slighting towards the former and I'm only on post #261 as you can see.

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.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#489 - 2013-06-01 17:50:31 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Stonecrusher Mortlock wrote:


The only way you lose a JF is by being a complete moron, and any one that dose logistics for any group is far from it.

There for to safe.


You light your cyno and the JF jumps in. Because you've used your usual spot on the usual station, there's a cloaked stealthbomber waiting between you and the station. He lights his cyno the instant you jump in, and a dreadnaught plus a couple of tackle ships jump in and you get bumped out of docking range by the suddenly appearing dread. You don't have enough cap to jump out and you're quickly pointed. The dreadnaught melts you in a few seconds.

The only counter is to never jump into a system with any hostiles in. If you follow this rule, your route is trivially interdictable.



I don't think you've ever pvp'd in null, or lived in a null system you had to defend.

If you think only 1 bookmark is gonna cut it....

Hell, I have 15 if not more per system just to be ready to follow a FC's commands. Perches, safes, warp ins for all gates, belts, points of interests (pos/stations/etc)

That's not even counting the routes I use as home system or regular ratting areas. That's just staging areas.

Any JF only using 1 bm to lend himself to be dependable onto a warp in deserves to be dropped.

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.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#490 - 2013-06-01 17:51:25 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
You mean minerals you cannot MINE in null. You can still get the minerals needed for production in null.
…but not in the quantities needed.

Quote:
So based on that information you would rather nerf highsec stations, or would you clamor for changes to pos?
…or a nerf to highsec stations to create a margin where other production methods could be better than they are, followed by a buff to outposts, and a revamp of POSes for some unrelated purpose.

I'll take the latter, please.

Quote:
Because the discussion here is slighting towards the former
Not really, no. You're just missing out on half of the actual suggestions and the reasons why they need to happen in conjunction with an overall rebalance effort.
James 420
EVE Corporation 98188875
#491 - 2013-06-01 18:00:53 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
You mean minerals you cannot MINE in null. You can still get the minerals needed for production in null.
…but not in the quantities needed.

Quote:
So based on that information you would rather nerf highsec stations, or would you clamor for changes to pos?
…or a nerf to highsec stations to create a margin where other production methods could be better than they are, followed by a buff to outposts, and a revamp of POSes for some unrelated purpose.

I'll take the latter, please.

Quote:
Because the discussion here is slighting towards the former
Not really, no. You're just missing out on half of the actual suggestions and the reasons why they need to happen in conjunction with an overall rebalance effort.


What you want, to manufacture locally for the nullsec wars/event whatever you call it (AHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAH), or manufacture in null using superior industry and then unload everything in jita for the hs market using ungankable jf? Null should never be self-sufficient like wspace should never be self-sufficient, it's a bad design.
Tho, I agree people should be able to do some local manufacturing, CCP is already buffing the null industry with the next patch so stop crying.
By the way have fun mining ice in null, I'll be there with my mighty purifier. Pirate

Proud enforcer of 420 BLAZE IT
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#492 - 2013-06-01 18:33:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Murk Paradox wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Adeh Gamalar wrote:

Stop being so condescending.



He's not being condescending (yet lol), he's utterly destroying your argument. You're leaving so many variables out (on purpose it seems) that Malcanis could drive a Dread through the gaps. I mean seriopusly, you're demonstrating that you don't really know what you are talkign about (example "the minerals will cost the same"...minerals you can't get in null sec?).

Malcanis is illustrating a point I've made several times in this thread: the shear incredible amount of changes needed to the game to make any of this nostalgic "attack the convoy! Ho!" crap would would probably involve so much dev time and game reworking that that it would probably be cheaper and faster for CCP to make a whole new game called "Space Convoy Attack" than do in any of the things people are suggesting.

Things do need to change, but the need to change in a reasonable way and CCP need knowledgeable advice from players for that to happen. "Force null sec players to use crappy industry" is not reasonable advice.



And, just to add, Malcanis sucks (there, now no one can accuse me of Malcanese Jock Riding Twisted ) .



You mean minerals you cannot MINE in null. You can still get the minerals needed for production in null.

Mind the gap!


And to do that you have to shoot yourself in the foot.

Sure, you can make people salvage sites OR you can do then quicky and efficently and make the REAL isk from the escalations (each completed anomaly represents 1 chance for escalation to the good stuff).

So there's the choice, make people do something that isn't fun (going back and salvaging sites or using a marauder and juggling guns, target painters and tractor/salvagers) OR do it right in less tedious but more profitable (and for some of us, fun) way and only have to worry about how you're going to get that mach/nightmare/bhaalgorn/etc BPC or deadspace mod back to empire for some mission runner to buy.

Some choice there. It's the same choice for explorers and anom farmers in null as it is for industrialists: Take stuff to high sec and bring finihsed goods back are break your back and do it for yourself more expensivley in null. The Choice that invovles high sec is just faster and easier. Jump-ships help but even without jump-ships it would be easeir to stuff the loot into a cloaky/nullifed tech3 or transport and run it 30 jumps to Jita and use the isk there than it is to do what you suggest.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#493 - 2013-06-01 18:37:20 UTC
James 420 wrote:


What you want, to manufacture locally for the nullsec wars/event whatever you call it (AHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAH), or manufacture in null using superior industry and then unload everything in jita for the hs market using ungankable jf? Null should never be self-sufficient like wspace should never be self-sufficient, it's a bad design.
Tho, I agree people should be able to do some local manufacturing, CCP is already buffing the null industry with the next patch so stop crying.
By the way have fun mining ice in null, I'll be there with my mighty purifier. Pirate


CCP dont agree with you.

They want 0.0 empires to be 99% self sufficient.
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
#494 - 2013-06-01 18:40:54 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
At present it takes a large force to assault an outpost. If industry is moved to POSes through mechanisms which work equally for everyone (regardless of the space they work in), nullsec denizens will have the option of running industry in POSes — industry which works just as well if not better than hisec, thanks to fuel consumption and manufacturing time bonuses from Planetary Conquest — which provides targets for medium sized fleets to shoot at.


They already have the option to run industry out of a POS. What is at question is the "efficiency" at which they do it. They keep saying that it is not as efficient as high sec, but what no one seems to be taking into account is that null's ice and asteroids are the best in the game by a wide margin and they have the option of using a Rorqual to increase the efficiency of harvesting/mining. If you refine at a 30% handicap, but harvest/mine at a 50% bonus, then you actually end up with a 20% increase in potential output over someone producing in high sec.

The problem of security is where the overhead can get out of hand, but that's PVP. If they don't want to do PVP to pave the way for industry in the current model, I don't see why they are going to want to do PVP to pave the way for industry in ANY model. After all, it's much easier to attack miners than it is to defend miners, to attack haulers than it is to defend haulers. You say :

Mara Rinn wrote:
Because given the choice between running POSes and doing industry in nullsec versus hauling stuff down from Jita at a 30% penalty, many nullseccers would prefer to pay the 30% penalty.


But, I think that number is an understatement. Let's not forget that many people would prefer to pay real out-of-game currency to not have to "carebear". It's just not why they play the game. And, if those people go live in null because they can "PVP" there unimpeded, they're not going to all of the sudden decide that they want to go mining.

For the industrial people that have chosen to do industry in null, there should definitely be bonuses to their activities, and there are, but there should also be drawbacks, and in the current model, there are. Namely, other players are free to interfere. "Buffing" null industry is a euphemism for "make null industry better than high sec industry". The problem is that it already is. The reason it may not seem that way is because for the most part, the people with the expertise to make use of null's superior industrial capacity don't live there. In large part, they live in high sec, and just sit back and wait for null players (or their alts) to deliver null sec to their front door. That is the system that PLAYERS have constructed. Fine.

What I and maybe some others in this thread are saying is not that null should work a certain way or that high sec players need to do x, y, and z or that low sec players need to be something that they're not, etc. What I am saying is that jumping from point A to point Z instantly and safely is not in the spirit of the game, as I understand it. It is not fair to allow a player in system A to move his stuff to system Z in a way that disallows the possibility of players in systems B-Y to affect him. Player interaction is the whole selling point of this game, as I understand it. (Please correct me if I'm wrong.) It's ironic that null players would complain about the "safety" of high sec in one thread and their inability to war dec NPC corp members in another, but here they are arguing that their moon goo and their tritanium should travel from A->M and M->S and S->Jita in near perfect safety, and that, somehow, the few seconds of session change immunity between undocking and jumping constitutes sufficient "risk" to their assets.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#495 - 2013-06-01 18:41:36 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Stonecrusher Mortlock wrote:


The only way you lose a JF is by being a complete moron, and any one that dose logistics for any group is far from it.

There for to safe.


You light your cyno and the JF jumps in. Because you've used your usual spot on the usual station, there's a cloaked stealthbomber waiting between you and the station. He lights his cyno the instant you jump in, and a dreadnaught plus a couple of tackle ships jump in and you get bumped out of docking range by the suddenly appearing dread. You don't have enough cap to jump out and you're quickly pointed. The dreadnaught melts you in a few seconds.

The only counter is to never jump into a system with any hostiles in. If you follow this rule, your route is trivially interdictable.



I don't think you've ever pvp'd in null, or lived in a null system you had to defend.

If you think only 1 bookmark is gonna cut it....

Hell, I have 15 if not more per system just to be ready to follow a FC's commands. Perches, safes, warp ins for all gates, belts, points of interests (pos/stations/etc)

That's not even counting the routes I use as home system or regular ratting areas. That's just staging areas.

Any JF only using 1 bm to lend himself to be dependable onto a warp in deserves to be dropped.


And yet the "invulnerable" "immune" JFs keep dying....

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#496 - 2013-06-01 18:44:30 UTC
James 420 wrote:
What you want, to manufacture locally for the nullsec wars/event whatever you call it, or manufacture in null using superior industry and then unload everything in jita for the hs market using ungankable jf?
Yes. Well, aside from the whole “ungankable JF” part, which obviously won't happen no matter how many highsec players beg for it.

Quote:
Null should never be self-sufficient like wspace should never be self-sufficient, it's a bad design.
…which is why the design goal is 99% self-sufficiency by volume for industry.

Quote:
Tho, I agree people should be able to do some local manufacturing, CCP is already buffing the null industry with the next patch
…to such a minute extent and in such a limited area that it's mainly a symbolic gesture rather than something that will actually fix the problem.
James 420
EVE Corporation 98188875
#497 - 2013-06-01 18:58:11 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
CCP dont agree with you.

They want 0.0 empires to be 99% self sufficient.


[citation needed]

Tippia wrote:
Yes. Well, aside from the whole “ungankable JF” part, which obviously won't happen no matter how many highsec players beg for it.

…which is why the design goal is 99% self-sufficiency by volume for industry.

…to such a minute extent and in such a limited area that it's mainly a symbolic gesture rather than something that will actually fix the problem.

Risk averse superior industry seems like a good idea, using your logic CCP should give JF for HS too.
99% is not fine.
Malcanis wrote:


And yet the "invulnerable" "immune" JFs keep dying....

Well, if they keep dying I see no reason to not have them in hs I'm sending a mail to CCP they might add them for odyssey.

Proud enforcer of 420 BLAZE IT
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#498 - 2013-06-01 19:02:44 UTC
James 420 wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
CCP dont agree with you.

They want 0.0 empires to be 99% self sufficient.


[citation needed]



CCPs white board.
Stonecrusher Mortlock
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#499 - 2013-06-01 19:04:41 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
So the POS option isnt an option.

Don't be silly. It is an option. You just don't choose it.

It's not an option because it doesn't nearly offer the efficiency of highsec NPC stations. And no, it's not just a matter of setup and runing costs, but of the actual industry part of the problem. If it was just a matter of cost, it could be counterbalanced by various discounts, but that's only a small part of the problem. Moreover, if POSes were an option, the use would simply move from highsec NPC stations to highsec POSes.

Short of making nullsec POSes (and only nullsec POSes) work exactly he same as outposts, they are not a solution. The problem is that doing so is meaningless: we already have that, they're called outposts, and they don't work. So fixing that part is a far better solution than replacing it with the exact same thing, only better.

Murk Paradox wrote:
I'm all for buffing nullsec, we need it badly, but I do not think that what you are proposing is to buff null to compete with highsec, but you want highsec to be nerfed to nullsec's level.
No. What we want is highsec to be nerfed so that there is a margin of efficiency within which low and null industry can be better. Until such a margin exists, no reasonable buffs to null will have any effect since it will always be worse doing your industry there.




Why dose null have to be " the efficiency of highsec NPC stations"? Why do they have to be as good or better than high sec before you start using them?

Why cant we buff NULL industry but not better than highsec, and at the same time nurf the ability to move the easy built stuff in high sec to null. To the point its equal to do it ether way.

so now you have the option's, Do i

A. Buy in highsec and ship it down.

B. Build my own in Null.

C. Shoot the guy moving it down and take his.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#500 - 2013-06-01 19:05:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
James 420 wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
CCP dont agree with you.

They want 0.0 empires to be 99% self sufficient.


[citation needed]


Trasnlation: I haven't even bother to read the thread that I am posting in.