EVE General Discussion

"Nobody mines in null" is true, but it also begs to question, if it's how things should be. People used to mine in null when t2 lotteries were around and hulk was "just out", it was 2006-2007. Since then couple things have happened. 1) Missions in empire have been steadily nerfed (faction loot drops removed, meta 0 item drops removed) 2) More players have arrived in Eve. In theory, the increase of player arriving should also increase demand for mineral products, however for some reason from this majority of new players significant % have not ventured into 0.0 and instead have stayed in empire running lvl 4's. This certainly is lvl 4's fault and not null sec alliances that wont recruit and protect their new guys, right? LTP, GTFO, massive renter fees etc surely have not had any effect on the situation. Then again it might be good thing, but it's akin to lo-sec pirates crying they're lonely and as soon as someone goes there and tries to live everyone from 5 jump radius jumps in. Or tries to have good "solo fights" and meets mr carrier sitting at docking range. There is reason why you shouldnt saw the branch you're perched on or at least not blame others when you fall face down on the ground from there.

As for 0.0 mining income vs. lvl 4 mission income, we need to remember to compare activity to similar activity. While lvl 4 in empire bring out minerals the majority of isk/h comes from bounties+lp.

But some comparison, these assume total freedom, no cloaked reds in system or such shenigans;
Mining in empire, 8-15 mil/h, total safety. Mining in null, 35 mil/h average for ABC, safety reqs group effort, cashing out reqs group effort. Payout ratio ~1:2
Lvl4 in empire, 50-70 mil/h maxed out, total safety. Ratting in null, 80-110 mil/h, doesnt scale (belts get ratted out), safety reqs group effort. Payout ratio ~1.3 :2
Pi... tbh I havent done enough maths with this, but empire has the lower output and npc taxes, null has group effort for cashing in and 0 % tax. If you have idea of aprox isk/h feel free to chime in.
Moon goo. Empire 0, low/null "as much as peeps pay for it", player effort to keep going.
Incursions, again another I'm not willing to put any numbers down. But site size difference varies from empire to null, otherwise same group effort etc.

The question is, does the moon goo income still give null sec advantage over empire, or is incursion akin to moon goo isk gain. Imho not, altho I would like to see more incursions happening in null. And before you complain that isk from moon goo goes to alliance/whatnot, it's again players choice. Group effort pays in null, how that group effort income is divided is up to the players. Sure, single player might have hard time in big alliance trying to get moon goo money but that's the beauty of current system. If you have hard time doing solo in null, you can roll to empire and solo there. If you have effective group available, it will gain isk faster in null then in empire.



In this we agree. Imho there should be small increase in null income but it has to be in a form that provides commodity that is also provided in empire and it has to require group effort. Multiplied incursion amount for lo/null is. Sov based income is. Each income increase to null also nerfs empire income if they compete.

Also, sweet mercy fix your forums CCP, I've had hard time posting as your forums keep eating my typing.

so are you asking to look at players wallets and see where they are --- like a snapshot -- and see where the wealth is at any given moment?

Or would you say looking at corp wallets and where their HQ is? -- because HQ's are many times far away from where the corp actually operates...

I think I understand what you're wanting, but how much of a 0.0's alliance wealth is sitting with an industrial alt based in empire?

Not as much miss it but wanted someone else to point it out how badly chosen "buffs" to null sec can lead to more trouble then was expected.



I generally dont want to get into how people run corporations but the whole "corpmates will shank you" plays so heavily in my pocket about non friendly environment where personal gain is valued before common/corp/alliance good. I've been chain ratting on and off since 08 during that time have never seen any form of serious mining op in null sec belts. I've seen Ark roids larger then carriers and tbh everyone in 0.0 knows how the belts are so thick the roids have bounced off the grid. So even if 20 guys went directly after ABC they couldnt clear one system in week.

As for pimped BS, yes, cost ends up being in the 1-2bil mark, for carrier that hugs pos you dont need to pimp faction/officer mods where to achieve the 70 mil mark with lvl 4's you're required to do it, hence pushing the cost up. I would rather not bring whole "smart market dealing" into this discussion as it's same for everyone regardless of your actual location. You can setup alt with 4 mil sp and compete with the best of them if you have bit of luck and enough know-how. Unless you mean selling the products that you've gathered where it reqs JF from null and just freighting in empire.

We both know its BS that moon goo just pays sov and keeping itself up(ships/posses/whatnot replaced while keeping it up.) It's isk gain in the end unless someone keeps reinforcing the towers and you're too lazy to defend it. The numbers vary month to month depending how heavily ship replacement sinks its teeth into it but we also need to remember the whole ship replacement is *isk gain* for the pvp wanting pilot. If empire bear wants to roll out and pvp, he has to do it with insurance and grind lvl 4's to get back up, in null moon goo covers most pvp losses. The Alliance/corp pilots benefit from it even when their wallets dont get any fatter, they are receiving service (pvp action/fun/whatever) that is not similarly available for bear. Remaining profits go for coffins.



Comparing one moon type to whole high sec incursion is not fair imho, more correct look should have all moons that generate at least 300 mil/month profit and we know that is majority of them. Even if after all the costs, replacing ships, fueling, paying for pilots to empty hangars etc every moon provided just 100 mil/month they would top the high sec incursion income. If the income left doesnt reach common grunts pockets then reflecting is in order. Is receiving replacement ships enough, or is ISK/h what he worships? As for common grunt isk print, well, null was all about group effort etc, what bigger group effor then holding sov and getting moon goo. Again I dont view guy and his alt doing plexes as group effort. If alliance benefits and can invest to supercaps then imho the group has received higher income, it might not show to invidual player but that's what empire is for, null is team effort, payout is team payout.



Highsec will only set the commodity price because alliances havent been willing to compete in the matter. T2 prices were cept artificially high for ages due to proper alliance control on goo prices and T2 bpo grabbing. Also imho alliances havent been active enough using all their resources, lack of mining imho proves it. Give any empire mining corp access to null, ability to toss their own pos up to store their mins+PI, perhaps offer to buy their stuff for your capital builds and you'll have dedicated human bots grinding the "lolbelts" away. Sure, you might need to have couple guys hold the bears hands and then couple more to defend the system to ensure timezone coverage, but even with 50:50 payout spread both sides would benefit. Well except that having renters looks bad and herding them takes effort. Still it's income the alliance otherwise wouldnt have had. Sure, belt bears invite cloaked neutrals en masse but that's price to pay for them providing isk. If alliance opts for safety then again, it's choise and there's cost associated aka the lost income that could have been had from mining/incursions/whatnot. I also know how... interesting... incursions in null make the belt ratting and moving.

I hope I dont come across "high sec should provide most isk", that is not my intention. In fact I would gain from simple grunt null isk boost. I just dont have any form of trust over CCP's "balancing" actions especially when looking at their track record with them. I'm also not happy how lazy I've/we've become in null. I'm willing to admit there's serious problem when our alliance sends it's fleet to grind empire incursions in form of isk gathering to fund caps.

CCP has created bad situation, 4's were main deal in empire, they wanted peeps to take up incursions, hence they need to grind out more isk. If CCP nerfs empire incursions by even 10%, peeps will start to question why teamwork doesnt receive bigger rewards in addition to risk. It's far easier to boost specific areas in null to give the 20 mil/h isk increase to there, altho it's already achievable by player actions (see recruiting "lolminerbears.")

Oh and unless I manage to squeeze reply, Merry Christmas, I enjoyed this debate thus far, too bad it wont receive attention from powers that be.

indeed merry christmas to you all