EVE General Discussion

That might not be a bad thing for ship destruction.
J-space can be pretty dangerous.

In anycase, this is already possible as is.

Id prefer options which either expand LS, or increase LS capacity to intercept freight (either directly through sector mechanics, or indirectly by changing hauler stats/behavior)

I dont think anyone can disagree there is too much material moving around with too little attrition.

I dont have any silver bullet solution.
I just know this is a glaring problem in EVE that needs addressing inorder to improve the health of the game.
This underlying problems feeds into so many other aspects of EVE.
Its a rotting of the very foundation stones of EVE, and skews everything built upon it, leading to an imbalanced overall structure.

So limit all players to one account? I'm fine with that. I still have 2 empty slots to use.
Less alts, destruction of assets, more player interaction.

But wont this just make transit even easier, faster and safer?

I imagine not since every pirate in hisec will be camping those gates instead of just Jita and a couple of 0.5's. Could go either way to be honest depending on the finer mechanics of said gates and the rules regarding engagement there.

Well **** i typed out a bunch of stuff but my phone crashed and it won't load my draft now. Have to retype some of it.
Not really sure about player made jumogates. Only recently tried npc nullsec. Not familiar with them and haven't seen one before.
But I was going to include null sec and low sec as the entrances to this system and it would web out a little bit more in high sec to the different hubs and general popular areas I guess.

But if you had a good Corp or escorts you would be able to use these in null/low sec with less of a risk or use the conventional system to system "undeground roads" to move without attracting all the attention of coming to this big highway gate. A lone ship using it at the very edge of nullsec/low sec to try and hop on quickly and move to high sec would get destroyed but for a coordinated group that could defend their freighters and secure the next intergate area it would open up a huge simple shipping lane that could move lots of stuff in or out, encourages people working together and for corporations to have battles and try to disrupt each other from moving large shipments and not just a few alts or one guy jumping but that's still an option. Nothing would change as it currently is and you could just ignore the mechanic altogether.
You could camp them in areas where they might drop off for a few systems to be broken up or have forks in the road and it would be a big gate essentially that any freighter would be jumping out of into the same spot which would be easy predictable prey without an escort. The gates could even signal it a few seconds ahead of time that something's coming through. The travel system would exist in the same plane as our current system to system travel but functionally it would seem like a highway that overpasses our current "low road" systems. I just don't know how to accurately explain it without using elevation as a metaphor.

Other idea would be a radical overhaul or new system of travel and it would need a need ship class or alteration to interceptor ships.
Basically a long continuous warp stream you could enter via new gates and retain control of your ship in but you could be caught up with warp by interceptors and such and they could bubble you and drop you right out of the stream in whatever system you happened to be passing through. If you were flying around in this big warp tunnel you would have to follow the flow of it in the direction it's going but you would still have limited control over whether your yawing left or right and be able to lock and shoot people but your all going in one direction in predetermined gate paths (like a subway system, you get to pull on or off at terminals and everything between is lawless) it could even be -1.0 by default since it could be considered a continous wormhole tunnel even in high sec with a warning for new players before they use one.
Crude example but sort of like the wrath of khan remake a few years back where the big ass black ship warps right in behind Chrisi pine, matches speed and starts blasting them. It's not a fully thought out thing or something I want, just a random idea.

The general spirit of it is just to cut down the number of jumps for slightly longer warps.
Going to amarr apart from jita it's several jumps. It's too easy if it's direct to jita from amarr.
But I could go from jita, to perimeter, highway across some useless systems to kaputeenen or whatever its called, jump to niarja, and highway to amarr. Niarja would still be a gank zone with ships dropping in and out at niarja. Just cuts 8-9 jumps to 2-3 longer jumps and a normal jump in niarja and saves you a few minutes maybe if it's a really slow ship.

yea this showed up somewhere in page 1 or 2.

The easiest way to make JF hunting easier is to introduce more choke points. If you were a captain of a german u-boat trying to destroy allied transport ships in the Atlantic what would you do? Go off into the middle of the Atlantic hoping for a chance encounter, or sit in New York / London because you know they are most likely going to appear there?

Making the submarines more powerful means nothing if the only place an encounter can happen are the ports.

One way of doing this is to force more ships thru wormhole chains (difficult but doable) or reducing jump range in an attempt to minimize routes, or removing possible jump locations somehow (maybe a plethora of null incursions lol).

Dispersing the markets would make it even easier to dodge attackers, since they now have to babysit even more HS drop off points, which means even more High-Low gates that could be used, etc.

We would need a low sec version of CODE that employs a large amount of Nyx pilots alpha-ing every JF they see in their space.

Chribba's one man alliance for several years

This point is obvious.
But it is not representative of OPs post.

OP is asking for discussion and views on the issue, not insisting on one at the exclusion of all others.

He hasnt, anywhere, claimed he sees "one obvious answer".

He has, on his part, painted a theoretical goal which he finds might have merit in finding a way to achieve.
Nothing wrong with that. It provides framework to the discussion.

---

As to answers which may have not yet been found, that is simply because we havent found them yet (if they exist).
The means to find them, is by discussing and exploring the issue.
That's exactly what OP and this thread is trying to do.

However, there comes a point, when you have explored most of the issue, that it can be deduced that the chance of finding a silver bullet solution becomes commensurately unlikely, and you are left with what is available at hand.

For example: We cant say with 100% certainty, that unicorns do not exist, or have never existed. But we can say it with a valid degree of certainty, considering how much of the issue has been explored, that the probability of a unicorn existing is very very small.

Fortunately, we are not anywhere near that yet on this topic. We've only begun to scratch the surface.

---

Lets please return to the topic, and continue discussion/exploration of the issues.

1) Smaller groups wax/wane, depends on the circumstances of their neighbors and their own actions.
Same applies to larger groups, in scaling proportion.

2) You dont need to blue up or rent, but its safer that way.

3) I dont agree that NS is "dependent" on HS trade hubs. They merely utilize them because it is so safe and commensurately lucrative to do so. They farm isk and some degree of resources in the most rich sector of EVE, and leverage that in convenient established HS hubs, rather than locally.

4) I envisage the same, of vibrant local markets, rather than the insane monolithic status of Jita and The Forge overall, which utterly eclipses the rest of New Eden, by orders of magnitude.

5) NS entities dont "need" to go to HS markets. They do so because it is so safe and lucrative, so why bother doing it locally. Furthermore they dont even bother with the HS trade hubs closest geographically, they just arrange for it to be moved further to Forge production, and then/or straight to Jita, whilst using also their NS isk to purchase what they need locally from there, for the return trip.

6) I dont think increasing resource/isk yields in NS will incentivise local NS markets, or stopping to trade in the closest HS hub geographically. It will just result in even more NS sourced resources and isk invariably flooding into Jita.

The irony here, is that NS isk and resource profits are so lucrative, that there should heuristically be developed local markets.
Prices would be higher locally than at Jita, but they can sustain it with both higher isk income, and more abundant resources.
Thus, the "standard of living" would be higher, but so commensurately are the earned rewards locally.
If people earn more locally, it follows that prices are proportionately higher in that locality.

The reason this doesnt happen, is cos its so safe, cheap and easy to move it all, all the way to Jita or Forge production, and back again.

7) NS "trade hubs" currently are rather just logistics warehouses to facilitate easier centralization of materials for transfer to and from Jita. "Trade" in NS, is largely between haulers and their clients. They bring their material to the haulers to transport for them, and purchase what they need from Jita on an alt, and consign those to the haulers to bring back.

8) As in your OP, the issue is the ease and safety of material transport, along the entire chain, with Jita (and the Forge) being so safe and lucrative at its other end, that why bother trading/producing locally.

At its other end in NS, since isk and resource generation in NS is higher, all they need to do is farm it, and leverage it in Jita/Forge on alts. They not only benefit from isk/resource generation beyond other sectors, they benefit from safe, easy, cheap transport of those goods to a universal market in which they get the best universal prices vs their own greater isk/resource generation base.

9) Its clear, that NS trades in Jita, and produces in the Forge. All sectors of space, trade in Jita, but NS is the richest of all.
Consider the hypothetical, if suddenly it was impossible to transit between HS and NS.
We can only conjecture how much the trade volume of Jita and production in the Forge would drop, but I think we can agree it would be measured in 10s of %. Id estimate a conservative 35% just on resources/production purely from NS, taken even higher if you include NS based market trading alts in trade value, or translating that into production of materials bought from Jita for alt manufacture in the Forge for resale in Jita.

10) Ergo, the safe, easy and cheap transfer of NS materials and isk, to and from Jita/Forge, obviates the need for local NS markets, and by extension, any HS hub except Jita/Forge. NS, as the richest sector of space, has no incentive for local trade, nor at any other HS hub, except Jita/Forge. Instead, they focus on farming time, whilst hauling out what they want to sell to Jita, buying and hauling back in what they need from Jita on alts, and leverage their greater resources through HS Forge, and greater isk through Jita.

Its more complicated than this.

The hauler would be the one actually paying the cost.

Thus haulers would raise their rates proportionately to the % value of the cargo x number of jumps.

This creates an interesting situation where the cost of the trip may exceed conventional collateral, or atleast limit the number of jumps before the contractor starts seriously losing their margins for the cost of bringing their goods to sale in a distant market.

A) Hauling currently is, we all know, extremely cheap. Haulers take the risk of collateral for such cheap rates, because they are confident their risk of destruction is almost vanishingly small, and thus have to compete with many other haulers that recognize the same.

B) Now read this VERY VERY carefully:
-IF each jump is taxed as a % of cargo value, you will be unable to carry the cost to the buyer, the further you are from your target market. Each jump will reduce your margins.
-Local providers/producer closer to that market, will be able to out price you, the further you are from that sale point, than they are.
-This would unequivocally make local trading a real thing, overnight.

Do you see what I mean?

---

C) As much as I think this is a great idea that TRULY, systemically would localize markets, as a silver bullet.
There is one serious problem that arises.

What about non-hauling ships? Should combat vessels pay cargo tax on their ammo, probes etc for each jump?

D) This could perhaps be reconciled, if it is possible technically, such that only delivery contracts are charged cargo tax.
Meaning, if you are moving YOUR OWN cargo, not cargo packaged as a delivery, you pay no cargo tax.

E) This creates an interesting, potentially content creating gap in many ways.
-To avoid cargo tax on your shipment, as cost to the hauler that they carry to you, per jump x % value of cargo, you could give the cargo to the hauler, entrusting them to contract it back to you on delivery. (at great risk, based on trust)
-Or you can move your own cargo yourself, at your own risk.

F) To make it even more interesting and potentially content creating, WH-J-space would be excluded from cargo tax.

G) But what about jump freighters? Perhaps they dont need a change anymore, since subsequent cargo transit in HS to the final destination would have to pass through gates at cargo tax penalty, nonetheless.

H) Furthermore, I think it is fair that NS gates not be subject to cargo tax.
The purpose is not to punish NS, but to diversify/localize markets.
NS should be free to transfer material within NS, against the threat of no restrictions engagement, as is characteristic of NS.
Furthermore, this lack of cargo tax in NS, as opposed to costs in HS, will incentivize local NS markets.

The more I think about this, the more I like it.

-It doesnt hurt haulers, at all. They simply will run shorter contracts, faster, allowing for more of them, as a factor of what their contractors are prepared to pay for longer distances on more valuable cargo. Or use smaller vessels to transport cheaper goods over longer distances. They may lose some market share to more players choosing to carry their own cargo, but this should be offset by quicker, shorter contracts, flown in cheaper ships.
-It doesnt hurt player autonomy, as you can instead fly the cargo yourself, at no cost.
-Markets would localize overnight.
-Interhub trading would explode exponentially, as players take their own risk to haul goods to a better market, at no cargo tax.
-Particularly as an advantage to new players in HS, whom can and will take the risk upon themselves to spend time moving material between hubs for a small profit, thus helping interaction between localised markets.
-NPC delivery missions can be exempt from cargo tax, under the assumption the NPC entities have already covered those costs as part of the mission.