These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
First pagePrevious page8910
 

No More High Sec Manufacturing?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#181 - 2014-04-17 09:41:27 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
I get it though, your basic point is "the people who want to avoid PvP will do anything to avoid it." The basic point of a lot of us is that those people are playing the game wrong, and that doing that should not be so consistently rewarded as it has been.

When you say most people think those people are playing the game wrong, you in fact actually mean only yourself.

People like you give pvpers a bad name and don't deserve to be called as such. What you want is catching fish in a bucket. How about going into the sea instead of trying to get CCP to put all the fish in the bucket for you.
Lady Areola Fappington
#182 - 2014-04-17 09:52:40 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

I get it though, your basic point is "the people who want to avoid PvP will do anything to avoid it." The basic point of a lot of us is that those people are playing the game wrong, and that doing that should not be so consistently rewarded as it has been.

I still don't get this mindset.

In a game where you chose the means to get to your goals why is evasion of people trying to actively hinder you frowned upon?



Some of the best fights come from targets trying to evade vs. fleets trying to kill.

There's a huge difference though, between "Some guys are trying to kill me best take action to prevent it" and "Waaagh CCP the evil PVPer exploded my space canoe make it so they can't!"

Sadly, most carebear types will go for the latter, with a heaping helping of "What about the newbies/subs/CCP's bottom line!" thrown in for good measure.

7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided. --Eve New Player Guide
GreasyCarl Semah
A Game as Old as Empire
#183 - 2014-04-17 10:01:57 UTC
Shiloh Templeton wrote:
Slade Trillgon wrote:
Actually that exact scenario has been happening in the US for a decade or more. The cost of manufacturing got so high due to labor costs that the owners of many companies have either shipped their production lines to Asia or have completely sold their company to a foreign investor.
A lot longer than a decade but off-shoring is more about tax and regulation avoidance for multi-national companies than labor savings.

I have a US based textile company where I can subcontract cut and sew operations for less than 10% difference of what it would cost in SE Asia - while improving time to manufacture and quality control. The problem is sourcing fabrics in the US. China is full of brand new 9001 factories while US manufacturers haven't made capital improvements of US facilities in decades.

Here are a couple of articles:
Forbes: How does Apple avoid taxes ,
Huffington:18 large tax avoiders


Solid points in here. The consideration of the skills of the workforce is what a lot of people forget. Skilled labor is a bit harder to come by overseas.

Have you dealt with Fabric.com and Golden D'or here in the states? Just curious, I have dealt with them and it seems like an interesting business.
GreasyCarl Semah
A Game as Old as Empire
#184 - 2014-04-17 10:10:35 UTC
King Fu Hostile wrote:

Security for your operations has a price counted in money and manpower (just like in RL), and it gets progressively higher as sec status gets lower. Paying an external body for protection in hisec is still peanuts compared to the costs of security you pay in higher class wormholes, which again is peanuts compared to what nullsec entities have to invest in the upkeep of their defenses.

Ideally these changes would lead to a substantial price hike for ships and modules, lead by the increase of costs in highsec. This opens up opportunities for the birth/revival of lesser trade hubs, and higher profits for those who manufacture in lowsec.

And, gasp, a reason for entities to actually have an industrial wing which can supply them with reasonably priced gear.


Sounds like you typed it right out of a textbook. Unfortunately the lazy asses in null sec aren't going to produce anything for themselves because such work is beneath them. So your whole nonsensical diatribe of a plan depends on high sec manufacturers moving to null sec and working for the gigantic A-holes who run the alliances out there. Good luck with that.
Victoria Sin
Doomheim
#185 - 2014-04-17 10:52:34 UTC
Manufacturing at an NPC station will still be viable, just don't manufacture at the same station everybody else is if you want to reduce your costs (and if you're running a little "business", you need to watch your costs carefully). It's no different to renting an office. If you want prestige and don't care about cost, rent one at Jita. If you're watching the bottom line, go into the sticks and rent one there, preferably where there are lots of Dusties talking rubbish in local.

The alternative is to get a POS and build there, but remember for a large POS the cost is around 450m a month in fuel :p.
Salvos Rhoska
#186 - 2014-04-17 10:58:24 UTC
I think a good benchmark and indicator for success of these changes, is if the changes result in a substantial re-location of industry alts and operations from HS to NS.

If that happens on a significant scale, I would call it a huge success and improvement for the meta.

I have some serious misgivings about that happening though. Some of the proposed changes seem counter-active, and may result in just a magnification of the current lamentable status quo.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Victoria Sin
Doomheim
#187 - 2014-04-17 11:09:34 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
I think a good benchmark and indicator for success of these changes, is if the changes result in a substantial re-location of industry alts and operations from HS to NS.

If that happens on a significant scale, I would call it a huge success and improvement for the meta.

I have some serious misgivings about that happening though. Some of the proposed changes seem counter-active, and may result in just a magnification of the current lamentable status quo.


It won't, no. I already build everything at my POS in HS. I also research my BPs there so it's not an extra cost for me. I would still have that cost even if I built at an NPC station. In fact the only change I see here that'll affect my business is the BP copy time change. Of course the market will go screwy for the 3 months after the expansion as many people like me will be watching which way it's going rather than actually making anything.
Salvos Rhoska
#188 - 2014-04-17 11:40:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Victoria Sin wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
I think a good benchmark and indicator for success of these changes, is if the changes result in a substantial re-location of industry alts and operations from HS to NS.

If that happens on a significant scale, I would call it a huge success and improvement for the meta.

I have some serious misgivings about that happening though. Some of the proposed changes seem counter-active, and may result in just a magnification of the current lamentable status quo.


It won't, no. I already build everything at my POS in HS. I also research my BPs there so it's not an extra cost for me. I would still have that cost even if I built at an NPC station. In fact the only change I see here that'll affect my business is the BP copy time change. Of course the market will go screwy for the 3 months after the expansion as many people like me will be watching which way it's going rather than actually making anything.


My point was actually more directed at players and the community who's actual main impetus is in NS, and who's activities in HS are secondary to that.

I'm not really informed enough to comment decisively on the ramifications for HS centric players from the changes, but I think that if the criteria for success that I stated above are met, ie: the migration of NS indy back to NS, instead of remaining in HS, it will be beneficial to HS centric entities who then have some more elbow room in their native HS space. And beneficial to NS entities because they can finally bring their Indy home to their own space, and benefit from added % and the resource wealth there.

I think it would be good for everyone if NS alts returned to NS, and ran their entire process, from mining to production, in NS.

I think that is a significant and important goal to achieve, that would improve the game across all sectors, rather than the current schizophrenic split between being essentially a NS entity, but actually running most of your indy in HS. Its bad design. I can understand niche uses for such a split, but the majority of the community should WANT to operate primarily in their own chosen sector.

In order for that to happen, it needs to be sufficiently incentivised. I think largely it is, but the POS changes in HS give me pause, and to me, include some counter-active changes that would infact also incentivise NS entities remaining in HS with their alts, in addition to having their new NS benefits passive in the background.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Slade Trillgon
Brutor Force Federated
#189 - 2014-04-17 12:05:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Slade Trillgon
Shiloh Templeton wrote:
Slade Trillgon wrote:
Actually that exact scenario has been happening in the US for a decade or more. The cost of manufacturing got so high due to labor costs that the owners of many companies have either shipped their production lines to Asia or have completely sold their company to a foreign investor.
A lot longer than a decade but off-shoring is more about tax and regulation avoidance for multi-national companies than labor savings.

I have a US based textile company where I can subcontract cut and sew operations for less than 10% difference of what it would cost in SE Asia - while improving time to manufacture and quality control. The problem is sourcing fabrics in the US. China is full of brand new 9001 factories while US manufacturers haven't made capital improvements of US facilities in decades.

Here are a couple of articles:
Forbes: How does Apple avoid taxes ,
Huffington:18 large tax avoiders


True, but the cost of labor and supporting your employees is a large part of equation, hypothetically second only to tax evasion.

Forbes:

"Imagine what kind of job opportunities would come to America if an iPhone factory were located here and hired 230,000 American assembly workers.

That is indeed a very appealing scenario, but unfortunately, a very bad one. The average manufacturing wage in 2010 is about $2.00 in China and $34.75 in America. By locating the same iPhone factory in America, Apple would add more than $25 billion in labor costs a year, which would completely wipe out Apple’s 2010 profit of $14 billion. "

Bureau of Labor Statistics 2011
- US manufacturing labor cost/hr - $35.53
- China manufacturing labor cost/hr - not on the list...lowest listed is the Philippians at $2.01

Trading Economics lists the hourly manufacturing wage at $19.51/hr...these numbers are probably including all non-skilled manufacturing cost but still makes a workforce, that will work at under $2/hr, look like a gold mine.

Thank you for the links.

P.S. I hate that I continuously have to resew buttons on my cargo pants EvilBlinkBig smile
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#190 - 2014-04-17 12:11:29 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

I get it though, your basic point is "the people who want to avoid PvP will do anything to avoid it." The basic point of a lot of us is that those people are playing the game wrong, and that doing that should not be so consistently rewarded as it has been.

I still don't get this mindset.

In a game where you chose the means to get to your goals why is evasion of people trying to actively hinder you frowned upon?


"actively trying to hinder (me)" is just fine.

Exploiting mechanics to be completely immune to the primary intended way to shoot someone legally in highsec? Not fine.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Zeera Tomb-Raider
Vega Farscape
#191 - 2014-04-17 12:49:16 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Malcanis wrote:


It might be nice to actually have a reason to start wardec.

Even nicer to actually have a reason to defend one.

While this is a nice sentiment, war decs have many significant outstanding problems. The two most glaring:

(1) The significant difference in cost to wardec small entities vs. large entities
-If I want to wardec Bob's 10 man corp, it's dirt cheap.
-If I want to wardec a 10,000+ member corp, it can get prohibitively expensive.
-It is therefore cheaper and easier to wardec a small corp.
-Some larger entities become effectively immune to all but the most dedicated of war-deccers.

(2) Neutral Reps
-If you are war-decced and go after the deccer, they almost always have neutral reps. Yes, yes, HTFU, I'll get to that later.
-These reps are either provided by alts or through a neutral logi pact with other war dec entities.

So, given that war decs will almost always be larger aggressor corp vs. smaller corp, and the aggressor will almost always have neutral logi available, the status quo will not change with the introduction of these changes. HTFU? Sure people will dock up, or avoid the war dec in other ways, just as they do now. And they'll ditch they're POS too. Is that what these changes are meant to encourage?

One way or the other, war decs are a poor solution for removing/defending a POS.

Your rigtth cant fors people to playe the game you want to playe it, they playe as they like .if thats taken away maybe do somthing different in game or quit
Tanuki Kittybeta
Ripperoni in Pepperoni
#192 - 2014-04-17 12:59:36 UTC
Time to invest in post fuel?

T/F?
Sacred Powers
Rubber Chicken Bombers
#193 - 2014-04-17 13:15:10 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
if i was them, i'd be going for 'doable in highsec, done better in lowsec'


I think the order is "Doable in hisec, done better in lowsec, done best in null sec"

More risk. More reward.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#194 - 2014-04-17 13:48:29 UTC
Sacred Powers wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
if i was them, i'd be going for 'doable in highsec, done better in lowsec'


I think the order is "Doable in hisec, done better in lowsec, done best in null sec"

More risk. More reward.

Yep, or another way to put it would be simply "Spread out", as the further you are from an industrial hub the cheaper it will be.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#195 - 2014-04-17 14:03:45 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Medalyn Isis wrote:
Devblog - Building Better Worlds
Yes, and that Dev-blog has a feedback thread where you should have posted.

Thread locked.

The rules:
16. Redundant and re-posted threads will be locked.

As a courtesy to other forum users, please search to see if there is a thread already open on the topic you wish to discuss. If so, please place your comments there instead. Multiple threads on the same subject clutter up the forums needlessly, causing good feedback and ideas to be lost. Please keep discussions regarding a topic to a single thread.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
First pagePrevious page8910