EVE Information Portal

I don't really care to be honest. Just a balancing cost.

I'd love to see J-space bonused for T3 and booster production and lowsec for subcaps and T2 modules (or whatever). Some differentiation would be nice apart from cost alone.

skim read back across the last posts and two things come out. One is that hisec has every advantage for S&I. I still don't believe that since to produce many goods I need materials or products that can only be sourced from low/null. Choose to no longer supply those and you choke hisec industry. Hand in hand with this is 'level the playing field' in S&I.

Fine, I have no problem with nullsec stations being opened up ( just with nullsec *always* having to be better for every area) to allow more slots etc...in return how about giving hisec and WH's moon goo? That'll level the manufacturing capabilities of all the areas in terms of materials available. Simply have moons in hisec less profitable as with the other materials. of course the moons in WH should then be super profitable.

It was my understanding that having less mexallon in null and no moon goo in hi was intended to increase player and goods mobility. Buffing null industry (not simply opening it up on an even basis) would surely go against this as null has everything available locally where the other areas do not, setting aside the obvious retorts about how hard it is to acquire resources in null. The point is that null will be the only self contained area capable of producing everything in game. To level the playing field every area would have to have everything accessible.

The game should either keep the principle of player and goods mobility which I would prefer, more people moving around means more interaction. Different security areas being better (or the only) option for certain goods or services makes for a more diverse setting.

Otherwise level the playing field by making everything available everywhere, with amounts available and effort required to gather those amounts being scaled based upon security area. This would be the only way to argue that risk vs reward is truly in play.

Somebody a while back pointed out that they wanted to do S&I in null rather than use the current hisec alt. If this was a case of wanting to do S&I as something else to do in the game then what is the issue with having a hisec alt to do this? The drive to move S&I into null is for ease of production and improved profit in nullsec otherwise why push so hard for the change?

The strength of Eve as a game is the diversity of playstyles and areas, a push to 'encourage' players to move to null as they progress is artificial and stifling in my opinion.. I would argue that more and stronger differences between the security areas would be much better.

I would also quite like to see something like the border zones between losec and null becoming a warzone between null and empire (kind of extended faction war I guess but pitting empire fleet backed capsuleers against null capsuleer fleets. This would be more likely to entice hisec players to venture to null for combat and would introduce many new players to those areas. How achievable this would be I'm not sure but giving people the choice to participate in null combat from hisec bases would be more likely to encourage people to move down than forcing them by slowly crippling the economy of the higher security system

A bit rambling...but whatever...i'm bored in work :D

And how does SCC learn about your fees incuring activities if you are in W-space, where the subspace beacons who relay that kind of information in K-space are not reachable?

I agree with the changes in S&I, always have. I am fine with null being viable for S&I too, never said anything otherwise and I actually thought it already was. My view and firm belief is that the game would benefit from the areas of space having different focus and resources to promote interaction between them and give players greater choice. I questioned *why* null should have the best of everything (and that isn't to say I am assuming these changes in summer will provide that).

I'm pretty much consistent in all of my posts in the various threads that more choice is a good thing, player mobility is an even better thing, and changes to the game that promote wither and or both of these are very definitely good things.

The casual player base use hisec because it suits the amount of time they can dedicate to the game. The activities they perform are not exclusive in the sense that anybody in hisec can do them. The hisec player has no advantage over the losec or nullsec player here as those from other areas can more likely afford an alt in hisec to compete with the dedicated hisec players (what with the higher reward that comes from living in lower sec regions).

Hisec should have industry as its focus, this makes sense as stability breeds business. losec should be better for moon mining and reactions maybe, null for raw resource amounts, ratting, exploration (to a degree) and WH's for gas and T3. This would give people more choice about where they play, more reason to move system to system, better rewards for actually interacting with more systems (or people from them). A player group with fingers in all regions would have the most advantages by virtue of being divers rather than by heavily controlling a large region of on security level. If you truly want a level playing field then make all resources available in all areas but to varying degrees to maintain a good reaason to have a presence in each region.

I object to one area of the player base being defined as second class or somehow worse players because they don't live in null. In the risk vs reward scenario the hisec traders who are making billions are maximising the risk reward balance in their favour and doing so in a way that *anyone* can compete if they take the time to build their capital. The condesnding view and patronization of those who choose to play in hisec is only bad for the game as it will turn people off to Eve. Existing players may well leave (yet to be seen but anecdotally likely), new players will be put off.

As for who plays the game better how can that be measured? By PvP skills? How can they be compared to station trader skills? Or exploration skills? Or how do you define how well a player does in Eve who's goal is to plex their account and not pay subscription themselves?

For a full and vibrant game economy every area should have an edge in something, a reason to exist and be frequented.

If we are going to open up S&I in null beacause it isn't viable there, then we should open up moon goo and gas in hisec, moon goo in WH's too at the appropriate reward to risk level. That will truly level the paying field. Otherwise the clear and meaningful differences between the security regions should be maintained. and enhanced to encourage players to move, to train for new skills, to try new careers.

I said the opposite, that people should have incentive to use *every* region for different reasons. I specifically stated I was fine for industry to made viable in null as I already thought it was. I also always argue against players being forced into anything whether by means of restrictions or economic coercion .

In my view a player or group of players who can operate in many regions should have an advantage over players or groups who are concentrated into one region only. Co-operation should bring rewards alongside diverse capabilities.

To be clear my home is in hi sec for convenience and safety there is a matter of using cheap fits and carrying low value of goods, otherwise you must take the correct precautions to avoid being killed. That is simply a case of adapting to the area you live in and applies to any region of space. I am also optimizing my activities to provide me with an income to support future ventures. Again this applies in any region, just with different activities being more or less profitable. I could choose to rent a moon or system in null for billions which by definition means the return on investment must be billions more to be a viable proposition. However I currently prefer my hisec/losec activities but in all likelihood I'll migrate to WH's at some point.

I have no prejudice for or against any area in space, I want *all* regions to be mutually viable for different reasons.

So, when do T2 BPOs get removed from the game, so that Invention will finally be the only way to make any T2 ship or module?

Welcome to Eve.

Also, more DevBlogs!

Very true, but I can't see anyone wanting to build meta 1-3 items. the ability to build meta 4's would be interesting, but would confirm that looting rats (with the exception of faction, officer, and overseer wrecks) is even more a waste of time.

I'm guessing that POS bonuses changing will improve the POS speed for copying and production to offset the increased cost of running one compared to just using stations...unless this is a cunning plan to stop people using POS's whilst the code is replaced. I look forward to playing around with a POS though...even if I just tear it down after a month it'll be worth the learning,

Why do they need to be removed? Before you answer that, read the pages and pages and pages (x10^eleventy-one) of stuff Akita T has posted over the years explaining why they don't need to be.