These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

What would happen if CCP finally nerfed hisec?

First post First post
Author
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#281 - 2014-01-11 13:13:04 UTC
So, assuming you can only do 1 upgrade of each level and not both manufacturing upgrades.....

You can only have..... 170*2 = 340 slots in a single system. If that is only a tiny fraction of what is needed.... Yea, Bull. 340 in a system is plenty. 3400 would just be stupid and you know it.

The refinery I'll give is an issue, and I do believe most refineries should be 40%. Which if my maths is right allows for 100% refine if you have really trained your skills to maximum. Including most high sec ones. 50% should be rare and restricted to only the mining corps and be separate stations from the manufacturing slots sure. I'm not against tweaks here, especially tweaks that buff area's null is weak in. But tweaks aren't a whole-scale slaughter nerf of highsec.

Research doesn't need to be in the same system and most high sec industrialists live with their research slots quite a few jumps away from their manufacturing. So you can deal with 1 jump over for a research outpost. Which gives you 80 copy/me/pe slots which are at a 50% time discount also if I remember right.
Josef Djugashvilis
#282 - 2014-01-11 13:15:06 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
baltec1 wrote:


We do, that's the problem. We want to build our things in our space but we are punished if we do that by the game mechanics.

Except you aren't punished any more. Not with hundreds of slots with bonuses to certain types of construction. You just won't be satisfied till high sec can't produce anything anywhere near the price null can. Nothing to do with entitlement other than yours. You believe you are entitled to the best at everything and everyone else gets the dregs. Someone else has something EQUAL and you scream. Because the costs for the industrialist don't include the outposts.

We ARE entitled to the best.


Nice to see that some one from null-sec has a sense of humour.

This is not a signature.

James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#283 - 2014-01-11 13:18:37 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Nice to see that some one from null-sec has a sense of humour.

It's not humor, it's the truth. The significantly greater amount of organization, work, resources, and time we have to put in to make industry work in nullsec entitles us to better than what you can get for nothing in highsec.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Josef Djugashvilis
#284 - 2014-01-11 13:23:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Josef Djugashvilis
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Nice to see that some one from null-sec has a sense of humour.

It's not humor, it's the truth. The significantly greater amount of organization, work, resources, and time we have to put in to make industry work in nullsec entitles us to better than what you can get for nothing in highsec.


The sense of entitlement EGO is strong in this one. ^^^

This is not a signature.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#285 - 2014-01-11 13:25:14 UTC
TharOkha wrote:
Yes prime time would be a significant factor.
No, it really isn't. Manufacturing is entirely asynchronous to your time online. You can queue up to get it started whenever everyone else would get their jobs started; yours and their jobs end whenever they end, at which point someone else can start using the slot.

If the people online at prime time find stations full of empty slots, it's because everyone else have not filled up those slots when they were online. The prime time players are subject to the exact same queues and availability as everyone else. Just because they're online at any given time does not mean the slots are automatically and magically available to them.

Quote:
Yes, but while one is literally forcing to people to spread (or move to null), the other one is giving them a choice to rethink if it is viable to manufacture in tradehubs or move to more distant MS but with a lot cheaper manufacturing costs.
…except I'm not talking about distance-based fees — just flat ones, and letting the queues do the work.

Nevyn Auscent wrote:
So, assuming you can only do 1 upgrade of each level and not both manufacturing upgrades.....

You can only have..... 170*2 = 340 slots in a single system. If that is only a tiny fraction of what is needed.
…then it's not particularly strange. That's 34 characters worth of slots, which is a fairly small group of manufacturers (and even smaller amount of actual people). And that's with all manufacturing — you have now created a huge problem with materials and blueprint logistics and you still have something that is strictly inferior to what highsec offers (before we have even started to look at costs and labour and security).

Quote:
But tweaks aren't a whole-scale slaughter nerf of highsec.
…which no-one has ever suggested.
Vespiidius
Alpha Republic - Transcenders of Space and Time
Solyaris Chtonium
#286 - 2014-01-11 13:27:24 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Nice to see that some one from null-sec has a sense of humour.

It's not humor, it's the truth. The significantly greater amount of organization, work, resources, and time we have to put in to make industry work in nullsec entitles us to better than what you can get for nothing in highsec.


So besides the nightmare of having to freighter certain materials in (especially if you don't have a Titan on retainer), are you completely ignoring the fact that raising capital is far easier in Nullsec? One of the main hurdles to any industrial player is the seed money, to buy blueprints, ships needed for resource collecting, that egg you're going to try and drop without losing, etc... All of this is easier in null than highsec. In null, of course depending upon system standing, ISK literally falls out of space if you are half competent and part of a half competent alliance with an intel channel. And if you are part of a half competent alliance, much of the work was already done for you.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#287 - 2014-01-11 13:29:29 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Nice to see that some one from null-sec has a sense of humour.

It's not humor, it's the truth. The significantly greater amount of organization, work, resources, and time we have to put in to make industry work in nullsec entitles us to better than what you can get for nothing in highsec.


The sense of entitlement EGO is strong in this one. ^^^

You're free to make a counterargument.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#288 - 2014-01-11 13:31:25 UTC
Except everyone who has been suggesting that Tippea. 340 slots is also more than the high sec average per system by quite a bit. And when you consider how much larger null sec is than high sec it's quite competitive now in terms of outright potential, assuming average outpost distribution, which simply wouldn't be true, Null would be able to outproduce high by about a factor of five overall. I acknowledge the mineral bottleneck now with the 30% refine, but I've also proposed the solution to that already as well. And BPO/BPC's can be run around very fast in inti's and cov ops, so that's no real bottleneck.

The only thing 'stopping' you now if anything is the 30% refine. Which is quite common in high sec. Even your example system will have a number of 30% refines, so Industrialists have to move minerals from the 50% refine to the station they have empty queues in. Rather than all packing into just the 50% stations. So if you want to assume no movement, you have to eliminate every manufacturing line which doesn't also have an ME line, and a 50% refine in the same station. Which you will find eliminates nearly all of high sec's stations under the same criteria you are trying to use.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#289 - 2014-01-11 13:31:42 UTC
Vespiidius wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Nice to see that some one from null-sec has a sense of humour.

It's not humor, it's the truth. The significantly greater amount of organization, work, resources, and time we have to put in to make industry work in nullsec entitles us to better than what you can get for nothing in highsec.


So besides the nightmare of having to freighter certain materials in (especially if you don't have a Titan on retainer), are you completely ignoring the fact that raising capital is far easier in Nullsec? One of the main hurdles to any industrial player is the seed money, to buy blueprints, ships needed for resource collecting, that egg you're going to try and drop without losing, etc... All of this is easier in null than highsec.

I want whatever you're smoking.

Vespiidius wrote:
In null, of course depending upon system standing, ISK literally falls out of space if you are half competent and part of a half competent alliance with an intel channel. And if you are part of a half competent alliance, much of the work was already done for you.

Literally, huh? Or did you mean figuratively? Both are wrong by the way.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Vespiidius
Alpha Republic - Transcenders of Space and Time
Solyaris Chtonium
#290 - 2014-01-11 13:38:06 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Vespiidius wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Nice to see that some one from null-sec has a sense of humour.

It's not humor, it's the truth. The significantly greater amount of organization, work, resources, and time we have to put in to make industry work in nullsec entitles us to better than what you can get for nothing in highsec.


So besides the nightmare of having to freighter certain materials in (especially if you don't have a Titan on retainer), are you completely ignoring the fact that raising capital is far easier in Nullsec? One of the main hurdles to any industrial player is the seed money, to buy blueprints, ships needed for resource collecting, that egg you're going to try and drop without losing, etc... All of this is easier in null than highsec.

I want whatever you're smoking.

Vespiidius wrote:
In null, of course depending upon system standing, ISK literally falls out of space if you are half competent and part of a half competent alliance with an intel channel. And if you are part of a half competent alliance, much of the work was already done for you.

Literally, huh? Or did you mean figuratively? Both are wrong by the way.


I guess my experience must be the result of my own kernite dust induced fantasies. That is good to know since knowing is the first step toward acceptance which of course can lead to getting help. Oh' and you're correct, "literally," was incorrect, again a mistake I blame on the kernite dust.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#291 - 2014-01-11 13:41:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Except everyone who has been suggesting that Tippea.
Nope. Just balance. If you believe that balancing high and null would require a slaughter of high, then you have to admit that it is immensely imbalanced right now…

Quote:
340 slots is also more than the high sec average per system by quite a bit.
Not for the industry systems, no. It just means it is a decent industry system — one that people will actually do industry stuff in. A dedicated manufacturing system in null should be able to beat that twice over and easily be on par with the best highsec system, and also offer all the other benefits that a decent highsec system offers for this profession, which it currently can't.

That's demonstrative of the whole issue: even after the buffs, pouring everything you can into a single aspect of S&I, and you get something that is “descent” for that aspect alone when compared to high. Not wtfawesome, not even on par… just “meh” in one area and gutwrenchingly pukeworthy in every other.

And, once again, that's just the massive deficit in slots — the stuff that actually makes them worthwhile is still missing. The slot deficit is just a small part of the problem and could be increased to high heaven without making things much better overall.
Shirley Serious
Gutter Press
#292 - 2014-01-11 13:41:35 UTC
There are a whole lot of inter-dependencies that a lot of people don't always realise. And a whole lot of less-than-ideal game mechanics.

Things like:
Nullsec, one of the resources there are high-meta modules, things like A-type modules, officer modules.
A lot of those are useful on capital and supercapital ships, but for others, the only market for them is for bling-boats.
highsec lvl4 mission bling boats, and highsec incursion bling boats, in particular.
A substantial nerf to highsec - such as the often proposed "move all lvl4s to lowsec", or "remove highsec incursions entirely", means a nerf to the value of those officer modules, which would have a big impact on the enjoyment of several nullsec dwellers, living and earning in nullsec. "Yay, a-type loot!" becomes "Meh".

Anyway, for manufacturing in nullsec:

The whole invention system, is reliant on pointless make-work. Collect datacores from agents, use them with copied blueprints, for a chance at a t2 blueprint. It's reliant on waiting for proverbial fruit to grow, and on expending effort setting up a blueprint copying system - POS and the like, and all the tediousness that POS involves. All for a roll of the dice that says "sorry, you lose this time".

Manufacturing things requires large amounts of tritanium, one of the most common minerals, (and until fairly recently, the cheapest). Mining for tritanium is basically, the lowest job there is in EVE. It's rock bottom. But manufacturing requires it to be done. Thing is, people don't really want to go to nullsec and do that job. They want to go to nullsec and make ~mad isk~ mining for morphite, and megacyte, and so on. Mining for tritanium has no glamour. Going to nullsec to mine tritanium doesn't have the fun factor.

The distribution of moon minerals, ice types, rat salvage, also affects things. Guristas rats only drop guristas salvage - if you want any other salvage, it has to be imported. Ice isotopes also have to be imported, because the different POS have different fuel requirements, and different jump ships use different isotopes.


So, an industrialist, wanting to live and manufacture in nullsec, has to import datacores, ice products, moon minerals and salvage materials, because those are not available in their home region. Most of those materials are also larger in volume than the products that are made from them, requiring more effort to import the materials than importing the finished product.
Ships fly in both directions, it's simpler to just import finished products.

So, why live in nullsec, with all the problems of availability of materials, and the inconvenience of the station being attacked, when it is so much simpler to just live in highsec ?

Nerfing highsec in itself will do nothing to address the problems of material availability and importing.


What CCP has to do, is to decide what nullsec is supposed to be for, and what highsec is supposed to be for, and then to think about what game mechanics are necessary to support this.

Just the facts.

James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#293 - 2014-01-11 13:43:45 UTC
Vespiidius wrote:
I guess my experience must be the result of my own kernite dust induced fantasies. That is good to know since knowing is the first step toward acceptance which of course can lead to getting help. Oh' and you're correct, "literally," was incorrect, again a mistake I blame on the kernite dust.

Glad we had this chat.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Deunan Tenephais
#294 - 2014-01-11 13:45:43 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Nice to see that some one from null-sec has a sense of humour.

It's not humor, it's the truth. The significantly greater amount of organization, work, resources, and time we have to put in to make industry work in nullsec entitles us to better than what you can get for nothing in highsec.

This is only true if you are counting person per person, due to difference in numbers.

Frankly, perhaps part of the problem is high sec industry but it goes beyond that, to make highsec the sole culprit is misleading.
Considering the attractiveness in having one's own infrastructures, nullsec industry should have dwarfed the empires' ones years ago, yet it does not.

I very much suspect that nullsec players are simple not numerous enough for that to happen, and I still don't think it has to do with highsec attractiveness but rather with nullsec lack of it, even if compared to highsec.
Let's get frank, compared to the amount of entertainment that other parts of the game offer nullsec is backward at this level, in nullsec you can pvp and nothing much else, it accounts for something.

As far as I'm concerned CCP can nerf highsec as much as they want, if I do not find fun in it anymore then I will simply move to another part of the game or to another game altogether, but I really do not think it will make nullsec more attractive in absolute, and that's in itself a problem that need to be adressed, and it's not even an economical potential problem.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#295 - 2014-01-11 13:50:22 UTC
Deunan Tenephais wrote:
Considering the attractiveness in having one's own infrastructures, nullsec industry should have dwarfed the empires' ones years ago, yet it does not.

What attractiveness? Are you ******* serious?

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Vespiidius
Alpha Republic - Transcenders of Space and Time
Solyaris Chtonium
#296 - 2014-01-11 13:57:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Vespiidius
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Deunan Tenephais wrote:
Considering the attractiveness in having one's own infrastructures, nullsec industry should have dwarfed the empires' ones years ago, yet it does not.

What attractiveness? Are you ******* serious?


What do you mean by "attractiveness?" The one factor of nullsec industry that is being over focused upon in this thread is the lack of infratructure support and or allowance in the game design. A nullsec system cannot be built up to the level of a highsec system of "equal" value at this time. It's impossible.

Did you mean "literally" attractive? Some of the outposts are quite pretty.

I think I quoted the wrong person here.
Deunan Tenephais
#297 - 2014-01-11 13:58:00 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Deunan Tenephais wrote:
Considering the attractiveness in having one's own infrastructures, nullsec industry should have dwarfed the empires' ones years ago, yet it does not.

What attractiveness? Are you ******* serious?

Being one's own man ? Not having to rely on NPCs ?
It's you who is not being serious, it's an huge temptation to an industrious type to really become an independant self-made man with one's own producing capacities, not owning anything to anyone even if deals are necessary to avoid being busted up by a bunch of barbarians who are in for the easy killboard.
Blue Binary
Polychoron
#298 - 2014-01-11 15:05:40 UTC
Stepping back into the general theme of this thread, I think people are forgetting that CCP is fundamentally a business. If a significant proportion of the company's cash flow is generated by players who are active in Empire then they will not tip that cart. Less cash flow will mean cutting back on resources, staff and projects. It would materially affect CCP and the playerbase by doing so.

Pipa Porto wrote:
Blue Binary wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Nope. They've never produced any data on where players are (largely because they don't have any such data themselves).

I think a fairer statement would be that the majority of Eve players are in Empire space compared to other areas of New Eden.

CCP produced population distribution figures in their Q3 2010 QEN released in April 2011. Based on those figures (QEN Q3 2010 - page 13) Empire was home to 86.5% of the population, followed by Nullsec at 11%, whilst Wormhole dwellers occupied the last 2.5%.


And, again, the problem is that the QEN is not measuring Player population.

It's measuring Character population. Which is a significantly different thing.

Granted. But is it really that significant?

A player can be logged in with multiple characters in multiple places around New Eden. If Empire is the most economically active region of New Eden, those regions will naturally attract a higher proportion of characters operated by players to those regions. Miners and haulers will attract pirates, missioners will attract traders and gankers, etc. There is an entire food chain in Empire supporting these microeconomies that require goods and services.
Blue Binary
Polychoron
#299 - 2014-01-11 15:06:42 UTC
On the subject of nerfing highsec production slots. People will just start throwing up production POS's in highsec (or as close to highsec) to meet demand, I know I would. At the moment it's convenient to store all my resources in a station hangar and switch production with relative ease. Logistics is the only real time consuming part. It's efficient as should most economies be in an ideal world.

If you nerf the highsec slots you drastically increase the amount of logistics involved in production. Some will adapt, others will give up. But either way prices would inevitably rise due to reduced suppliers on the market. You would have too much ISK chasing too few goods and the inevitable price instability, to what degree no-one can really say until (if) it happens.

With an increase in logistics chains passing through null/lowsec you have a target rich environment for pirates and wardecs concentrating on economic damage to corps. That would make quite a few players happy because it suits what they want from the game. Cool. But you also have people dealing with the loss of assets (resources, goods and ships). Sure, it creates demand for resources and goods. Again, the pressure on resources required to build the assets (ships & modules) goes up as do the prices, with resources increasing in value in each stage of the value chain, the end product also increases in price.

My own opinion on a possible path to change would be to move the yield from basic resources away from high sec in a managed stage by stage operation. By doing so you encourage production to move closer to where the resources are, rather than the other way round. Resources take up far more space for logistics than finished products.

With a stage by stage degradation of resource yield in highsec, it would allow CCP to initiate a stage, then reviewing the effects, progress to another stage and review again. By managing and observing this process you would have the option to reverse back should it have detrimental effect on the economy.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#300 - 2014-01-11 15:07:47 UTC
Kimmi Chan wrote:
I remember this discussion from a year ago that essentially started this same way, with the same arguments made, by some of the same people.

The same discussion a year ago.

There were times it would get derailed. But there were some people that I believe were genuinely interested in seeing nullsec not suck anymore. I took a break shortly after the conclusion of this thread and before I came back several months later I watched the Fanfest 2013 keynote, where I believe it was CCP Seagull or CCP Soundwave mentioned they were working to un**** null industry.

It sounds like there is still work to do then?


Very much so. Only the first small baby steps have been taken (relaxing the restrictions on office slots, adding some more build slots, making outpost upgrades slightly less worthless). The core issues remain. It will take a long time, and CCP are deliberately moving slowly on this.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016