These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Science & Industry

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

CCP’s latest strong arm attempt to populate null and low sec

Author
Selene Nask
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#61 - 2013-04-29 15:47:39 UTC



As someone who does have mining alt I really do not get the people who think the changes are somehow 'forcing' people like me to go to null.

It's not like all of sudden when the expansion drops there will be no need or demand for ore or ice mined in highsec.

Are people somehow thinking that null is all of sudden going to be supplying all of the demand for HS or something?

Yeah sure there will be some prices changes and maybe I won't make quite as much mining per hour in HS but even if the estimations some are putting out it hardly means zero not worth the time income.

None of the changes are anyway forcing me to go to null. All it means is that if I do ever decide to head off to null the rewards of mining there are more aligned to the risk you take mining there. Yeah I suppose if I did go to null I could now make more isk then in HS but it's hardly easy like HS mining is. And it's questionable how much more it would really be if I had to join an alliance for protection and like deal with more isk lost due to ship pew pew. Stuff I really have little interest in participating in while mining right now.

However in the future if I ever decide that alliance and more pvp play while mining and experiencing null life in general is something I'd like to do at least now 'well the mining sucks so much out there compared to HS' won't be a reason to not do it.



I think the adjustments are fine. If anything they're opening up more choice to players.
Ginger Barbarella
#62 - 2013-04-29 20:36:13 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Come to think of it, the only reason I can see why an ice-miner would cry about these changes are if they are botters. Ice prices are going to go up, after all.

Anyone complaining confirmed for a botter.


How is your head healing????

You've evidently been dropped on it a few times lately.

"Blow it all on Quafe and strippers." --- Sorlac

Danni stark
#63 - 2013-04-29 21:02:40 UTC
Ginger Barbarella wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Come to think of it, the only reason I can see why an ice-miner would cry about these changes are if they are botters. Ice prices are going to go up, after all.

Anyone complaining confirmed for a botter.


How is your head healing????

You've evidently been dropped on it a few times lately.


considering these changes make mining a higher isk/hour activity over all, then yes botters are the only one with cause to complain.
Ishaki
Caldari Prime Investments
#64 - 2013-04-29 21:15:59 UTC
Igor Slovensky wrote:
The latest proposed industry changes in the new expansion appear once more to try and encourage a greater player presence in low and null sec areas of the eve universe.

That will not happen, not now, not ever. The reason should be obvious, it is not in the nature of a high sec player to even consider low or null sec as a viable opportunity.


I know plenty of people who would go to null if the politics weren't what they are today, that has nothing to do with being afraid of pew pew.
Clansworth
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#65 - 2013-04-29 21:52:02 UTC
As someone who over many years has played many different styles (mostly carebearish) in both high, null, and w-space - I have always wished there was a stronger INCENTIVE for industrialists to live in null. Here's the thing - I like building, managing, rationing, etc. It is so much less rewarding, play-style wise, to do this in null, and really has been for a long time. The early days of building the player outposts were neat, but then that turned into just a grind, and their permanent nature as caused the need for new outposts to diminish. Ships like the Rorqual and even the Orca should have made things easier for null-sec industrialists - but they both missed the mark. Null sec is so sparsely populated compared to the empires, that the production should also be less dense. It doesn't make sense to have massive highly optimized production schemes when you don't have the demand density. Null sec production should have always been based around a nomadic, build it as the alliance needs it style of play.

In my mind, no one is going to 'prefer' to build in null, until this is changed. My long time thought on HOW this should be changed has always been through manufacturing modules for industrial ships. The mechanics have been there for a while, with the Rorqual's compression lines. It's just a matter of expanding the concept.

Until it makes sense to go from rock to ore to mineral to product to blasting holes with it in the enemies hull all within a player run empire, it will never be as rewarding as doing most of those steps within the NPC run empires.

Will this ice change kill any particular part of the game? no... but it will unnecessarily shake things up, without achieving the intended result.
Minmatar Citizen160812
The LGBT Last Supper
#66 - 2013-04-29 23:21:44 UTC
Igor Slovensky wrote:


Nor is it in the nature of a low or null sec pvp player to suddenly want to become an industrialist.



...then why have I been reading up on indy things I would have never considered before? If it's a good money maker I'm interested.
xPredat0rz
Project.Nova
The Initiative.
#67 - 2013-04-29 23:27:22 UTC
Minmatar Citizen160812 wrote:
Igor Slovensky wrote:


Nor is it in the nature of a low or null sec pvp player to suddenly want to become an industrialist.



...then why have I been reading up on indy things I would have never considered before? If it's a good money maker I'm interested.


I have mining accounts right now that are unsubbed because it wasnt worth my effort to plex them. Now knowing the isk increases i am likely to see I am considering not only resubbing them but actually moving them out to null to mine.(Scary)


PvPers want a way yo generate isk with little work while they continue to explode things.

Carniflex
StarHunt
Mordus Angels
#68 - 2013-04-30 13:34:33 UTC
Danni stark wrote:

considering these changes make mining a higher isk/hour activity over all, then yes botters are the only one with cause to complain.


I do not think this affects significantly isk/h in mining. There will be some turbulence during the transit period and some mineral prices will change, however, I would expect mining isk/h to stabilize in the same region isk/h per account wise as it is today.

What will change, probably is hi sec mining isk/h but after the drone poo shock it might have been a bit out of the line anyway. But I would not expect even that change to be particularly large. It is more scordite nerf - in my opinion - than a general hi sec mining nerf.

I'm sure some people will be significantly affected, if they have limited playtime window and happen to be with that window in the timezone where ice belts are between respawns. For example, assuming each belt is mined out in 1h in hi sec - DT ends at 11, ice gone at 12 - new belt spawns 16, gone by 17, EU timezone comes on at 18 and if your playtime is 2h you will never see ice, ice spawns at 21, gone by 22 then respawns at 02 evetime, and be gone by 3 evetime, etc.

Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... THWONK! GOT the bastard.

Danni stark
#69 - 2013-04-30 14:13:32 UTC
Carniflex wrote:
Danni stark wrote:

considering these changes make mining a higher isk/hour activity over all, then yes botters are the only one with cause to complain.


I do not think this affects significantly isk/h in mining. There will be some turbulence during the transit period and some mineral prices will change, however, I would expect mining isk/h to stabilize in the same region isk/h per account wise as it is today.

What will change, probably is hi sec mining isk/h but after the drone poo shock it might have been a bit out of the line anyway. But I would not expect even that change to be particularly large. It is more scordite nerf - in my opinion - than a general hi sec mining nerf.

I'm sure some people will be significantly affected, if they have limited playtime window and happen to be with that window in the timezone where ice belts are between respawns. For example, assuming each belt is mined out in 1h in hi sec - DT ends at 11, ice gone at 12 - new belt spawns 16, gone by 17, EU timezone comes on at 18 and if your playtime is 2h you will never see ice, ice spawns at 21, gone by 22 then respawns at 02 evetime, and be gone by 3 evetime, etc.


what the hell are you babbling about?
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#70 - 2013-04-30 14:14:55 UTC  |  Edited by: March rabbit
Dave Stark wrote:
Oliver G wrote:
All the people who want to be there are already there.


incorrect.
i want to be in null, however i make more isk in high sec so i am there.

there's no incentive for me to go in to null, currently.

those who WANT look for opportunities
those who DON"T WANT look for reasons

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"

Zedutchman
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#71 - 2013-04-30 18:00:53 UTC
I agree with CCP.

It's pointless to have 5000+ systems when everything between 0.0 and 0.5 is virtually abandoned. Honestly sneaking around in low-sec an trying not to get podded is much more interesting, than semi-AFKing in Empire. It's just not worth the effort, when mining buckets of veldspar is more profitable.

I'd be more than willing to give it a shot. Just strap on some Warp stabilizers and have at it.
Centurion Dorn
Superluminal Industries
#72 - 2013-04-30 18:58:58 UTC
I have to say, I like the changes. I've never really been an ice miner, so it doesn't affect me.

Gimping the fuel costs for jumping material out to low/null, increasing production lines, and adding the lower end minerals to ABC ore will go a long way to pushing more industry out to null and making this a more strategic game, but it's not a cure-all.

As I see it, the biggest thing stopping industry out in null are the players themselves. Alot of the null corps see PvP/CTA's as being needed by everyone in order to contribute. They don't see the indy guys pumping out ships and modules for them as a contribution. It is, but you can't convince them otherwise.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#73 - 2013-04-30 19:05:51 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Oliver G wrote:
All the people who want to be there are already there.


incorrect.
i want to be in null, however i make more isk in high sec so i am there.

there's no incentive for me to go in to null, currently.

those who WANT look for opportunities
those who DON"T WANT look for reasons



So under the current mechanics, for the people who WANT to produce things for a profit and WANT to do it in Nullsec, what exactly are these magical "opportunities"?

The Sov fuel discount doesn't cover the increased cost of transport, Local nullsec does not have the population to support the volume that a single industrialists with a single large POS can put out, transport's an expensive nuisance (it cost me 14m to have people move ~8b ISK/5m m3 worth of minerals from Jita to my build site this morning. To move it instead to Todi in LS would have cost me ~500m in fuel alone using a 1 mid JF route, well over a bil factoring in market prices for LS JF services), your station (if you're lucky enough to have one with free office and manufacturing slots in a system you can put a POS up) can be attacked and taken locking down your assets.

What "opportunity" does nullsec currently offer to someone who wants to build things that HS or LS doesn't do far better?*

Far better from any rational standpoint to simply run a HS manufacturing operation on an alt and shoot things in your preferred area of space with your main.


*Aside from supers, which are only built in null because there's quite literally no alternative.

"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

Zedutchman
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#74 - 2013-04-30 19:46:26 UTC
I'm not sure It's a full fledged push to move profitable industry into NULL . I think it's mostly just adding convenience for those who choose to do it anyway, even though it's inefficient. Keep in mind this is only the first step in what sounds like a extended plan to tempt pilots out of High-sec.

I think the changes in Odyssey will mostly effect mining and resource gathering rather than manufacturing. Although I Hope eventually it might even out more .
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#75 - 2013-04-30 23:34:22 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
Zedutchman wrote:
I'm not sure It's a full fledged push to move profitable industry into NULL . I think it's mostly just adding convenience for those who choose to do it anyway, even though it's inefficient. Keep in mind this is only the first step in what sounds like a extended plan to tempt pilots out of High-sec.

I think the changes in Odyssey will mostly effect mining and resource gathering rather than manufacturing. Although I Hope eventually it might even out more .



The increase in production slots in refining stations makes local production of ship hulls from compressed (and locally sourced) minerals far more reasonable.
The increase in Ice prices makes that more enticing, as you can fit something along the lines of 140 battleships worth of compressed minerals in a JF instead of just 7 battleship hulls (or like 4-5 battleships worth of uncompressed minerals? I don't know, Compression is Lord, raw minerals suck).

But yeah, proper "I'm going to make a living off this" industry in Nullsec's some ways off.

"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