These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Fix Null > Nerf Hi

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#81 - 2013-02-22 18:17:14 UTC
Takseen wrote:
Ty for the correction.
Yes I say Natsett's post just after I made that one. I can see where he's coming from. He wants to combine the dangers of nullsec with the fun of building an industrial empire, and can't really do that at the moment, it seems.
I understand that more than "man, I wish we had more people to shoot at". Because there's other probably better ways to do that.


The whole farms and fields idea is to allow people to live (as in make money, make industrial empires, etc) where they play/work (PvP). This is better for the people living there (no need to have a bunch of HS alts making money) and their enemies (populated space to roam through, targets that allow you to disrupt your enemies industrial backbone, what?).

Nobody's saying "oh, just put a bunch of Freighters in belts so we can have a turkey shoot."

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#82 - 2013-02-22 18:24:18 UTC
My alt is a member of FNA.

I work out of a station in high sec that is owned by Lai Dai. I don't work for Lai dai, and my standing with them is only like 1.38 or something.

Yet I can build in Lai Dai's station, using that corporations productin facilities, cheaper then I can in null with the corporation I am actually a member of.

That doesn't even make sense. However, I see repeatedly people saying things about how it should be cheaper to build in high sec.


Stupid real world anaology.

I work for a little tire company, building tires. We buildt a factory, a warehouse, and a storefront. But by law we can't build more than 10 tires a day, and we have to pay more in utilities to run our factory, warehouse, and storefront.

So we fly to the other side of the country and build our tires in a Goodyear plant.


But it's null sec! We're supposed to be the 3rd world counterpart to high sec.
But wait! That doesn't really make sense either.

We don't build **** in the US, we build in 3rd world or emergent countries. Like China, where they intentially control their economy to keep the value of their currency and inflation down, so that they are the prefered place to produce goods.

Sov holders should have the ability to act like China. They can either make thier space the prefered place to build, or they can develop along another line, like an emphasis on PvE.

Takseen
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#83 - 2013-02-22 18:25:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Takseen
Tippia wrote:
Takseen wrote:
Here's what I'm wondering about.
If nullsec industry is buffed to the point where its moderately more profitable than highsec industry, then it'll attract more industry people. Who may then attract targets, which will likely drive down profitability to the point they're better off going back to null.
I assume you meant “back to high”…

Anyway, no. jBecause if you do it right, moving back to high doesn't offer any advantages. Yes, you'll be safer when you few without escorts or intel, but the price and inconvenience of that security (and lack of production capability — read: lower throughput and thus lower profits) would not be worth it.

If you attract targets when the industrials move out, then great! It means the combat pilots will have fun things to do. It means that roaming around in your own space would yield viable and valuable targets to attack. You have a border to protect. It means the fights come to you, at home, where it's nice and close and comfy, rather than having to hunt for them aaaall the way over there.

Quote:
Now if there's actual industrialists who are in favour of nerfing highsec instead of people looking for targets, then I'd be more interested in what they ahd to say.
(apologies if you are actually an industrialist, perhaps that is how you acquire your lollipops)
Pretty much all of us are. It's just the bears that have something against it, since they have problems seeing outside their bubble and imagine all the good it would do.


Yes, that's what I meant, sorry.
So are you saying that pilots in nullsec would prey on industrials within their own space, or am I misunderstanding? I assumed they'd just be raiding the other sides industrials. Or you mean Alliance A gets to fight the raiders from Alliance B that have come to attack Alliance A's industrials? That'd be fun.
Its just that from my perspective simply looking at the Star Map kill stats, null is the quietest, while high and low have way more activity. Low especially has about the same population as null, but quite a few more kills despite not having any real industrial base to speak of. And in highsec its kind of difficult to have wars fighting over industrials when you can't deny access to resources, but they still manage to have fights anyway.

Edit : Lots of well thought out posts went out while I was typing this monstrosity. I am going to retire in defeat from this thread, go to one of the aforementioned pubs, then possibly to an also mentioned nightclub, possibly followed by a drunken Eve session causing an expensive ship to explode.
o7
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#84 - 2013-02-22 18:34:43 UTC
Takseen wrote:


Yes, that's what I meant, sorry.
So are you saying that pilots in nullsec would prey on industrials within their own space, or am I misunderstanding? I assumed they'd just be raiding the other sides industrials. Or you mean Alliance A gets to fight the raiders from Alliance B that have come to attack Alliance A's industrials? That'd be fun.
Its just that from my perspective simply looking at the Star Map kill stats, null is the quietest, while high and low have way more activity. Low especially has about the same population as null, but quite a few more kills despite not having any real industrial base to speak of. And in highsec its kind of difficult to have wars fighting over industrials when you can't deny access to resources, but they still manage to have fights anyway.


Not good comparisons.

If there's no war, then most of your guys aren't going to be in your space, they'll either be roaming somewhere else, in NPC null, in low sec, or in high sec; earning isk.

Low sec is designed as a warfront. It's intended to be a place of constant PvP, the four factions are fighting a war with each other in those arteas.

The very vast majority of people are mining in high sec, including your enemies who are also attempting to move large quantities of goods from high to null. You dont' wait for them to get home with the goods, you go to where they're attempting to export from to stop them; that means high sec.

Getting more people playing in the space they own requires far more then just fixing the industrial issues between high and null, it also means giving corporations the ability to provide content in thier space that actually supports the people in there space. There isn't enough content in a single region to support the size of the most of the corps in null. 10 years ago it made sense to funnell everyone in null to specific systems, NPC null, to drive conflicts; there were far fewer people in null.

Today there are entirely to many people in null for the content that CCP provides, and it isn't neccessary to funnell anyone into NPC null systems to drive conflict. People want to go into other peoples space, and see them there. CCP created a situation that makes those systems largely empty; not the players.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#85 - 2013-02-22 18:49:51 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
Takseen wrote:
I understand that more than "man, I wish we had more people to shoot at".

Nobody said that. Or at least, nobody gave that as a reason for nerfing highsec. Because that's really not the goal.
The goal is to make nullsec industry a lot more viable than it currently is.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
celebro
Ember Inc.
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#86 - 2013-02-22 19:00:25 UTC
I live in high sec, and they should nerf the hell out of it. I will stay, i'm here for the journey and if it's worth while to move to null I will. There will probably be less players in the game, if that's the case I would have less competition, so all good to me.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#87 - 2013-02-22 19:03:00 UTC
Takseen wrote:
So are you saying that pilots in nullsec would prey on industrials within their own space, or am I misunderstanding?
No, I mean that they'd go and try to disrupt the activities of the guy next-door, which will be (kind of) possible if he's doing all his work there rather than in NPC-corps through alts in highsec. In trying to do so, he'll have to punch through the perimeter of bored combat pilots itching for something to go and blow up. So you go and do that, and glorious battles are had, and then you go after the industrialists. Yes, many of them will just log off or dock up (if they're close enough to home), but statistics + sheer numbers means that there will be some left to shoot at, so you try to do that before the perimeter guys get new ships and call in some hotdrop reinforcements… and more glorious battles are had by all.

But why are the industrialist there? Because it lets the alliance leaders say "ok, so we're getting attacked in about 10 hours — the nasty ebil enemy is posting their CTA as we speak. I want 4000 battleship (and fittings) in Station X in 8! Hop to it! Use every slot in the station! All non-essential builds are cancelled.”… and they can do that, and win the battle because the it takes the other guy a week to import all that stuff from Jita (that silly cow). Expense isn't really a factor — immediacy is. Availability is. The ability to out-produce and immediately counter the enemy is.

…and there will be glorious battles… Twisted
Tesal
#88 - 2013-02-22 19:15:55 UTC
I love these threads. They are hilarious.
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
#89 - 2013-02-22 19:18:19 UTC
admiral root wrote:
Nullsec can't be fixed in isolation to the rest of the game. OP is clueless enough that he could be Trebor's alt and out of touch with reality, implying he's Ripard. Could you post with your main next time, please?


Becuase we all know Newbie Q&A is filled with ALTS Roll Talking about effing clueless posters: you take the prize.
An' then Chicken@little.com, he come scramblin outta the    Terminal room screaming "The system's crashing! The system's    crashing!" -Uncle RAMus, 'Tales for Cyberpsychotic Children'
Tesal
#90 - 2013-02-22 20:10:50 UTC
Tippia wrote:


…and there will be glorious battles… Twisted


Or they get blobbed by a super coalition of 15,000 people and get kicked out of null and all their industrial slots go to the enemy. That's been more the case in recent history.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#91 - 2013-02-22 20:15:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
Tesal wrote:
Tippia wrote:


…and there will be glorious battles… Twisted


Or they get blobbed by a super coalition of 15,000 people and get kicked out of null and all their industrial slots go to the enemy. That's been more the case in recent history.

Bigger your coalition is, the bigger your reliance on industrialists and their output is.
So outsourcing the security and support of said industrialists to NPCs is very convenient, if you're in a super coalition.
What do you think is a better size limiter for coalitions, how many industrialists you can defend spread across regions or how many jump freighters you can buy?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#92 - 2013-02-22 20:20:17 UTC
Tesal wrote:
Or they get blobbed by a super coalition of 15,000 people and get kicked out of null and all their industrial slots go to the enemy. That's been more the case in recent history.
No, it really hasn't. If nothing else because there are no industrial slots…

At least with a proper null backbone, there would be something easy to target to break that coalition apart. Right now, there's very little that can be done along those lines.
Tesal
#93 - 2013-02-22 20:30:18 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Tesal wrote:
Or they get blobbed by a super coalition of 15,000 people and get kicked out of null and all their industrial slots go to the enemy. That's been more the case in recent history.
No, it really hasn't. If nothing else because there are no industrial slots…

At least with a proper null backbone, there would be something easy to target to break that coalition apart. Right now, there's very little that can be done along those lines.


The only way to beat a super coalition is with another super coalition. A Goon or Test industrial backbone would be extremely difficult to harass or pick apart. You are willfully ignoring the problem.
Buzzy Warstl
Quantum Flux Foundry
#94 - 2013-02-22 20:32:21 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:

We don't build **** in the US, we build in 3rd world or emergent countries. Like China, where they intentially control their economy to keep the value of their currency and inflation down, so that they are the prefered place to produce goods.

Sov holders should have the ability to act like China. They can either make thier space the prefered place to build, or they can develop along another line, like an emphasis on PvE.


http://en.mercopress.com/2011/03/15/china-became-world-s-top-manufacturing-nation-ending-110-year-us-leadership

So "not building crap in the US" means that China's total manufacturing (including for internal consumption) only passed US manufacturing in the last couple of years.

Of course, it isn't like China hasn't been a relatively stable country (with brief interruptions) for thousands of years now, so China would be a better analog for highsec than even the US.

Perhaps more appropriate to the point you wish to make would be to compare the manufacturing capacity of a region like Africa or Central America that has been subject to more political upheaval recently to the stable economies of China, North America, and Europe?

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#95 - 2013-02-22 20:32:49 UTC
Tesal wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Tesal wrote:
Or they get blobbed by a super coalition of 15,000 people and get kicked out of null and all their industrial slots go to the enemy. That's been more the case in recent history.
No, it really hasn't. If nothing else because there are no industrial slots…

At least with a proper null backbone, there would be something easy to target to break that coalition apart. Right now, there's very little that can be done along those lines.


The only way to beat a super coalition is with another super coalition. A Goon or Test industrial backbone would be extremely difficult to harass or pick apart.


As opposed to the Goon and TEST industrial backbone in high sec that is protected by CONCORD?

Quote:

You are willfully ignoring the problem.


You're willfully ignoring reality.
EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#96 - 2013-02-22 20:34:03 UTC
TEST INDUSTRIAL BACKBONE

ahahahahahaahahhaa
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#97 - 2013-02-22 20:35:10 UTC
Tesal wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Tesal wrote:
Or they get blobbed by a super coalition of 15,000 people and get kicked out of null and all their industrial slots go to the enemy. That's been more the case in recent history.
No, it really hasn't. If nothing else because there are no industrial slots…

At least with a proper null backbone, there would be something easy to target to break that coalition apart. Right now, there's very little that can be done along those lines.


The only way to beat a super coalition is with another super coalition. A Goon or Test industrial backbone would be extremely difficult to harass or pick apart. You are willfully ignoring the problem.


It might be "extremely difficult" to pick apart a Goon or TEST industrial backbone in their space, but it would be a damb sight easier than doing it right now, because that backbone is safe in hisec.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#98 - 2013-02-22 20:39:15 UTC
Tesal wrote:
The only way to beat a super coalition is with another super coalition.
That's because the current flawed implementation only gives you one thing to attack: the fleet of that coalition. You're facing military power head-on so of course you're going to need massive military power to do so.

If they are given strong incentives to do more than stock their ships out there, you are at the same given more things to disrupt to ensure that their military power loses its staying-power. It might be difficult to harass or pick apart, but that's a vast improvement over being impossible to harass or pick apart, which is what we have at the moment.

So which do you prefer? Super coalitions that can only be attacked head on because all other ways are rendered mechanically impossible, or super coalitions that can be attacked through a number of means, many of which will require a whole lot less in terms of direct striking power…?
Tesal
#99 - 2013-02-22 20:39:41 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:


You're willfully ignoring reality.


The point was made by Tippia that industry in null would lead to more pvp. My point is that it won't, it would be a source of strength for the big guys, not a weakness to be exploited.
EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#100 - 2013-02-22 20:41:07 UTC
It doesn't matter how strong your industry backbone is in war. You need to have people enter the ships in the first place, and they're not going to do that if they lose day after day after day.