These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Why a high sec nerf is good for industrialists.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#41 - 2012-10-22 19:25:52 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Silk daShocka wrote:
I would like someone to explain to me why people keep pulling the risk/reward card on this topic.

The risk to mine in low/null is a guaranteed 100% ship loss. I mean is a guarantee considered a risk these days?

Sure you can hire a fleet to protect you, or join a corp that exploits your need for protection, but then the risk is entirely gone. Even if a fleet warped in to fight in your mining belt, they would probably be more concerned with shooting the combat ships you hired than with shotting your mining barge which is of no threat. There's no reason why you wouldn't just warp off with your mining barge while the combat ships are fighting each other. Shouldn't this just be considered an expense and not a risk?

Seems to me the argument of rewards for industrialists should be Expense vs Reward. Also known as profit.



It has nothing to do with either risk or expense.

It has everything to do with "Why should I play here". There is nothing I can say to a high sec industrialist that is a worthwhile reason to come play in null.

"Why should I play here" trumps all.


Because I truelly believe in this stuff, and really do think that this would be fair and benefit both high and null:

Decreasing high sec refine rates would put more value on low end ores that come out of low and null.
You can't "just make up" the mined minerals, and yes it would increse the cost of those minerals in high sec. I believe this is a good thing, both for the game and especially for null miners. Again, increased costs would be a benefit to every miner, your minerals would carry more value.

A 20% reduction in refine rate would require one new miner for every five in high sec to make up for the loss in refining. Increased miiners would result in more systems getting mined.

A large enough increase in low end profit from mining low ends in null would encourage more mining in null, and hopefully more people mining more systems.

While it would nerf high sec mining, it would have benefits, and hopefully those benefits would spill into null sec industry.

Increasing manufacturing costs in high sec would increase the cost of finished goods, hopefully. Increased costs wouldn't hurt the industrialists, there's plenty of ISK out there, enough so that you can charge considerably more than you currently do for goods.

There is no real "reason" to build in null. It seems a little silly to create a bunch of crap that can only be built in null. How would you justify that? If you have to build it in null, it would stand to reason that you can only use it there as well. That doesn't really help the industrialist, especially when these things are such massive pains in the asses to build anyways.

The only way to make it "worthwhile" to build in null is to make it more affordable to do so than in high sec. That would require there to be drastic price differences between manufacturing in a high sec NPC station or a null player controlled one. The only benefit that you could really give the null industrialist is being able to build cheaper.

Reducing manufacturing slots would hopefully pread people out more in high sec, and create more small and medium trade hubs. I would think that this would be a good thing.

Invention in null should come with a boost in success chance. Maybe give corps the ability to install different grade research fascilities with scalling costs. There's no real incentive to come to null to invent stuff. This would hopefully encourage more people to come down to null to do invention.

Research slots could use a bump in numbers in null.


Dude... did you just copypaste your previous post?
But I definatley agree that there should be more (and maybe better) lab- and manufacturing slots in low- and nullsec.
Not sure about that mining and refining thing, though. Higher fees are unfun. Unfun drives players from the game instead of motivating them to get more involved.
Positive incentives to go to null would be far superior in my opinion.

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#42 - 2012-10-22 19:30:19 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Quote:


Alright, but that doens't mean the alliances are the ones building the drakes, if anything it would indicate the opposite since the alliances can't maintain their own production to meet their demand.

I could be mistaken here.

Its far cheaper to build them in empire than out in null sec evven when you factor in the transport costs. There are simply too few slots out in null.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#43 - 2012-10-22 19:38:59 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Quote:


Alright, but that doens't mean the alliances are the ones building the drakes, if anything it would indicate the opposite since the alliances can't maintain their own production to meet their demand.

I could be mistaken here.

Its far cheaper to build them in empire than out in null sec evven when you factor in the transport costs. There are simply too few slots out in null.


So add a metric ass tons of slots in Null and raise the cost of using the ones in high sec? High sec stays easyer on logistics but lower margins and null stays harder on logistics but better margins?

It might kill small scale industrialist...

It also add some value to having control over a null sec system where there are production slots.
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#44 - 2012-10-22 19:40:58 UTC
Silk daShocka wrote:
I could be mistaken here.


Not completely, nor do I have total reason. It's a very complicated situation but think about it like this: why would you build something in null when buying at lowest jita market price (buy offers or your alt corporation production) you make more profits from your rhea cargo than you would if you build that stuff in null?

You would build there if you had no personal logistics, when you do there's no interest building stuff in null, that easy and simple to figure out the first time you try to build a single Drake with max research bpo.
Doesn't means you can't or that some don't, it's just not profitable at all to do it there because you make absolutely no profits, selling those minerals to local capital builders will bring you at least some profits, but you still need the dam drake for fleet...

See the thing?

brb
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#45 - 2012-10-22 19:44:43 UTC
Zimmy Zeta wrote:


Dude... did you just copypaste your previous post?
But I definatley agree that there should be more (and maybe better) lab- and manufacturing slots in low- and nullsec.
Not sure about that mining and refining thing, though. Higher fees are unfun. Unfun drives players from the game instead of motivating them to get more involved.
Positive incentives to go to null would be far superior in my opinion.


I did. People get all wrapped up in just argueing "nerf" and "buff" that very few people ever actually consider resonable ways of suggesting how to improve things.

Reducing refine rates would be like nerf, but mostly to the people who can't get around the fact that MORE doesn't always mean better. If you're getting less ore from mining tomorrow, minerals will obviously go up.

Increased costs won't hurt high sec industrialists because that increases will reflect on what things sell for, and that's fine; there's more than enough ISK out there to support higher costs.

Inccreased taxes won't hurt the high sec industrialists either, they already make a killing; considerably more than you can make in null.


It's the "cheap" part that makes it difficult to just say, buff null. How can buff null when the cost of manufacturing in high sec is already insignificant?

I'm actually apposed to increasing the amount of ore available, anywhere; so putting more low ends in null isn't something I would want. I'd rather reduce the output in high, increase the price of minerals, and therefore make what is coming out of null more valuable.

I see a problem with VALUE not quantitty. Increasing the amount of low ends in null doesn't give it more value. Sinse null competes with an area of EVE that is all about volume, both in what is consumed as well as what is made available. We need more people coming to null to do things like mine. Putting more trit in null isn't encouraging more people to come to null and mine, but making the value of what is mined higher would.


There's no reason to be afraid to mine in null, if you're in a corp that has even slightest idea what they're doing.
I think that if people had a better reason, than more people would come here and do it. Not everyone in high sec that mines does so because they're risk averse.

Silk daShocka
Greasy Hair Club
#46 - 2012-10-22 19:50:06 UTC
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:
Silk daShocka wrote:
I could be mistaken here.


Not completely, nor do I have total reason. It's a very complicated situation but think about it like this: why would you build something in null when buying at lowest jita market price (buy offers or your alt corporation production) you make more profits from your rhea cargo than you would if you build that stuff in null?

You would build there if you had no personal logistics, when you do there's no interest building stuff in null, that easy and simple to figure out the first time you try to build a single Drake with max research bpo.
Doesn't means you can't or that some don't, it's just not profitable at all to do it there because you make absolutely no profits, selling those minerals to local capital builders will bring you at least some profits, but you still need the dam drake for fleet...

See the thing?


Yeah i definately understand that. For certain items I would definately believe that null alliances are building more than hi sec manufacturers.

But let's say for an item like a Mackinaw, are null sec alliances really the majority when it comes to producing these? I could present other examples but I think we can all come up with our own of items that aren't in huge demand in null like drakes etc.
Evei Shard
Shard Industries
#47 - 2012-10-22 19:51:17 UTC
Why not create more industry PvP and just reduce the availability of all high-sec minerals by 5% or so?
Systems that have stations would be stripped out a lot faster, and corps would need to increase their membership in order to accommodate mining setups that allow for higher yield in systems with no stations (boost orca, hauling orca, mining ships, etc.).
This wouldn't necessarily drive them into low-sec, but it would spread things out a bit more, and make high-sec industry require a little more planning.

Profit favors the prepared
Minmatar Gandhi
The Stoney Path
#48 - 2012-10-22 19:55:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Minmatar Gandhi
Zimmy Zeta wrote:
Tell you a secret: We manufacturers sell T1 hulls slightly below raw mineral value and we know it.
T1 hulls are not there to make you a profit or grant you a living in luxury.
But for every hull that is bought, the customer also needs modules, ammo and rigs.

My Great Grandfather, Mahatma, spoke to me of many things. Among them the subject of wealth.

A loud wealthy man is despised among men. He is called greedy.

The quiet wealthy man is called rich and wise. He is still greedy, but no one knows.

Go in Peace
-oo-

The stoney path upon which you walk will have two directions. The direction you choose is yours.
Lord Calus
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#49 - 2012-10-22 19:57:58 UTC
Asteroids in highsec only respawn once per week, not every downtime. BOOM HEADSHOT!
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#50 - 2012-10-22 20:00:16 UTC
Silk daShocka wrote:
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:
Silk daShocka wrote:
I could be mistaken here.


Not completely, nor do I have total reason. It's a very complicated situation but think about it like this: why would you build something in null when buying at lowest jita market price (buy offers or your alt corporation production) you make more profits from your rhea cargo than you would if you build that stuff in null?

You would build there if you had no personal logistics, when you do there's no interest building stuff in null, that easy and simple to figure out the first time you try to build a single Drake with max research bpo.
Doesn't means you can't or that some don't, it's just not profitable at all to do it there because you make absolutely no profits, selling those minerals to local capital builders will bring you at least some profits, but you still need the dam drake for fleet...

See the thing?


Yeah i definately understand that. For certain items I would definately believe that null alliances are building more than hi sec manufacturers.

But let's say for an item like a Mackinaw, are null sec alliances really the majority when it comes to producing these? I could present other examples but I think we can all come up with our own of items that aren't in huge demand in null like drakes etc.



Indeed some items/ships are not that interesting to build for null sec alt industrial corporations, I might as well be wrong on this but they might actually get more profits selling tech and end ores needed to build those than build them themselves, and this might as well happen for a lot of items not fielding their current fleet doctrines. But this is only an assumption from me, when discussing with other null sec friends about production and clearly reshaping the world to fit to our dreams (yep total nerds).

brb
Robert De'Arneth
#51 - 2012-10-22 20:01:24 UTC
Evei Shard wrote:
Why not create more industry PvP and just reduce the availability of all high-sec minerals by 5% or so?
Systems that have stations would be stripped out a lot faster, and corps would need to increase their membership in order to accommodate mining setups that allow for higher yield in systems with no stations (boost orca, hauling orca, mining ships, etc.).
This wouldn't necessarily drive them into low-sec, but it would spread things out a bit more, and make high-sec industry require a little more planning.


Have you polled every player who plays this game? I keep seeing people say high sec is broken, yet a clear fact says that over 60% of the paying customers like to play in high sec, no one who has ever said nerf high sec has proven it is broken to all of those people. CCP made the sandbox, 60% of the player base plays in that part of the game. You may not like what they do, but I am betting the majority of players in the game will say they are fine with high sec.

I'm a nerd, you can check my stats!! Skilling Int/Mem at 45 sp per minute is how I mack!     I'm like a lapdog, all bark no bite. 
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#52 - 2012-10-22 20:02:33 UTC
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:
Silk daShocka wrote:
I could be mistaken here.


Not completely, nor do I have total reason. It's a very complicated situation but think about it like this: why would you build something in null when buying at lowest jita market price (buy offers or your alt corporation production) you make more profits from your rhea cargo than you would if you build that stuff in null?

You would build there if you had no personal logistics, when you do there's no interest building stuff in null, that easy and simple to figure out the first time you try to build a single Drake with max research bpo.
Doesn't means you can't or that some don't, it's just not profitable at all to do it there because you make absolutely no profits, selling those minerals to local capital builders will bring you at least some profits, but you still need the dam drake for fleet...

See the thing?


Lots of people do build and sell in null, and we make plenty of profit doing so.

The affordability of manufacturing in high makes it better to mass produce. You may sell at very low margins, but you sell considerably more.

PvP is obviously not good enough a reason to play in null, especially for a group of people who don't actually do pvp.


Not making a profit on things like drakes and rifters has nothing to do with "null sucks". It's the same reason you make nothing on those things in high, everyone an there mother is trying to sell them. However, in high sec you'll might sell 100 a day, in null you may sell 10.

If I only make 10k ISK profit off an item, do I sell it in null or do I sell it in high? If I'm going to sell it in high, it's simply easier to build it there as well.

It's just as affordable to build a drake in null as it is in high if your corp has the slots set up for it, and I would hope that any corp that runs a station is set up so that that sort of manufacturing is readily available. Large drake purchases in jita are more likely for the purpose of ship reimursement and those corps that aren't running stations and aren't set up to replace large quantitites of ships.

Any drake you built in high sec, can not copete with the bottom line that went into building my drakes. I only build them on zero cost production lines, and with cheaper minerals. That goes for pretty much every ship I sell, as well as mods and rigs.

It's not enough of a difference to attract people to build in null, and there is a severe shortage of slots available that are cheaper than high sec.
Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#53 - 2012-10-22 20:05:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Zimmy Zeta
@ Natsett

I do not mine, I was more talking from the manufacturer's point of view.

You are absolutely right in everything you said, but you are just focusing on the economic aspects while I was talking about the psychological aspect.
Just increasing fees or reducing some fixed numbers make players helpless and frustrated. That's why ECM is so widely hated. If some mechanic just takes away your ability to act, you get annoyed and frustrated. Unfun. It is not about nerfing highsec output- it is about introducing new game mechanics that might be considered unfun and harassment.
Things like these drive players away.

You could, for example, nerf highsec mineral production by increasing belt-rat spawns-- and give them Sensor dampeners (yeah, right...basically beltrats would electronically bump the miners out of range). This would at least add some kind of gameplay element to the nerf that players could try to circumvent by clever gameplay (and not mining afk).

But before you should even consider nerfing HS industry output, you should buff the nullsec side enough so that null could quickly step in for the loss in industrial capacity in highsec.

Just my 2 cents. (since I sell frig hulls at a loss, maybe just 1 cent)

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#54 - 2012-10-22 20:05:50 UTC
Robert De'Arneth wrote:
Evei Shard wrote:
Why not create more industry PvP and just reduce the availability of all high-sec minerals by 5% or so?
Systems that have stations would be stripped out a lot faster, and corps would need to increase their membership in order to accommodate mining setups that allow for higher yield in systems with no stations (boost orca, hauling orca, mining ships, etc.).
This wouldn't necessarily drive them into low-sec, but it would spread things out a bit more, and make high-sec industry require a little more planning.


Have you polled every player who plays this game? I keep seeing people say high sec is broken, yet a clear fact says that over 60% of the paying customers like to play in high sec, no one who has ever said nerf high sec has proven it is broken to all of those people. CCP made the sandbox, 60% of the player base plays in that part of the game. You may not like what they do, but I am betting the majority of players in the game will say they are fine with high sec.


A great bulk of that 60% are nullsec and lowsec alts.
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#55 - 2012-10-22 20:06:22 UTC
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
Geligdio Khan wrote:

If high sec were nerfed and miners and manufacturers moved to low and null ................



I had to just quit reading here at this point.

Same debate for a Decade. Same crap. And they will not move to Low and Null. They will move to Minecraft.


Not really or just the minority. Major huge high sec production/mining corporations are already null sec alliances alt corporations.



So you are saying these players are already in Null.

My statement still stands true.

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#56 - 2012-10-22 20:09:28 UTC
Lord Calus wrote:
Asteroids in highsec only respawn once per week, not every downtime. BOOM HEADSHOT!



Then I guess I should file a bug report on the system in which I mine out some of the belts 3 times a week and they re-spawn the next day every single time. Something must be wrong !

Petition is away !!!!!

Roll

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#57 - 2012-10-22 20:12:25 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Robert De'Arneth wrote:
Evei Shard wrote:
Why not create more industry PvP and just reduce the availability of all high-sec minerals by 5% or so?
Systems that have stations would be stripped out a lot faster, and corps would need to increase their membership in order to accommodate mining setups that allow for higher yield in systems with no stations (boost orca, hauling orca, mining ships, etc.).
This wouldn't necessarily drive them into low-sec, but it would spread things out a bit more, and make high-sec industry require a little more planning.


Have you polled every player who plays this game? I keep seeing people say high sec is broken, yet a clear fact says that over 60% of the paying customers like to play in high sec, no one who has ever said nerf high sec has proven it is broken to all of those people. CCP made the sandbox, 60% of the player base plays in that part of the game. You may not like what they do, but I am betting the majority of players in the game will say they are fine with high sec.


A great bulk of that 60% are nullsec and lowsec alts.




BOOOOM HEADSHOT !!

Get the road Jack and don't come back no more!

brb
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#58 - 2012-10-22 20:13:18 UTC
Zimmy Zeta wrote:
I do not mine, I was more talking from the manufacturer's point of view.

You are absolutely right in everything you said, but you are just focusing on the economic aspects while I was talking about the psychological aspect.
Just increasing fees or reducing some fixed numbers make players helpless and frustrated. That's why ECM is so widely hated. If some mechanic just takes away your ability to act, you get annoyed and frustrated. Unfun. It is not about nerfing highsec output- it is about introducing new game mechanics that might be considered unfun and harassment.
Things like this drive players away.

You could, for example, nerf highsec mineral production by increasing belt-rat spawns-- and give them Sensor dampeners (yeah, right...basically beltrats would electronically bump the miners out of range). This would at least add some kind of gameplay element to the nerf that players could try to circumvent by clever gameplay (and not mining afk).

But before you should even consider nerfing HS industry output, you should buff the nullsec side enough so that null could quickly step in for the loss in industrial capacity in highsec.

Just my 2 cents. (since I sell frig hulls at a loss, maybe just 1 cent)

Industry is all about economics though.

Are there people that do industry because mining fun, or because manufacturing is fun? For me at least it's fun because I like to make money. As a dedicated industrialsits it's not like I'm doing much. I mean it's fun to provide the things that goonies need on a daily basis, but again that's mostly because they give me ISK.

Mining is ******* boring. The process of science and industry is ******* painful. click. click. click. click. click. click. click. click. click. click. click. click. click. click. click. click. click. click...


That "fee incease" would be ofset by high sec industrialists actually making MORE MONEY.
Everything I would do to improve null sec, and encourage more peopel to come do industry here, would literally involve high sec making more money. It sounds so insane doesn't it?

A healthy high sec leads to a healthy null sec. I really believe this, truely.

The side effect of what I suggest would hopefully ENCOURAGE more people to come to null.
Minmatar Gandhi
The Stoney Path
#59 - 2012-10-22 20:15:58 UTC
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
Lord Calus wrote:
Asteroids in highsec only respawn once per week, not every downtime. BOOM HEADSHOT!



Then I guess I should file a bug report on the system in which I mine out some of the belts 3 times a week and they re-spawn the next day every single time. Something must be wrong !

Petition is away !!!!!

Roll

It is sad that you lack the insight offered.

He speaks of what could be, not of what is.

Go in Peace
-oo-

The stoney path upon which you walk will have two directions. The direction you choose is yours.
Silk daShocka
Greasy Hair Club
#60 - 2012-10-22 20:18:03 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Robert De'Arneth wrote:
Evei Shard wrote:
Why not create more industry PvP and just reduce the availability of all high-sec minerals by 5% or so?
Systems that have stations would be stripped out a lot faster, and corps would need to increase their membership in order to accommodate mining setups that allow for higher yield in systems with no stations (boost orca, hauling orca, mining ships, etc.).
This wouldn't necessarily drive them into low-sec, but it would spread things out a bit more, and make high-sec industry require a little more planning.


Have you polled every player who plays this game? I keep seeing people say high sec is broken, yet a clear fact says that over 60% of the paying customers like to play in high sec, no one who has ever said nerf high sec has proven it is broken to all of those people. CCP made the sandbox, 60% of the player base plays in that part of the game. You may not like what they do, but I am betting the majority of players in the game will say they are fine with high sec.


A great bulk of that 60% are nullsec and lowsec alts.


A great bulk of your statement is 60% assumption based on personal opinion or anecdotal evidence.

Not saying your wrong, just saying that your not presenting an actual statistic, although you seem to think you are.