These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

What would happen if CCP finally nerfed hisec?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#441 - 2014-01-12 12:32:39 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Dear Baltec 1, forgive me for going off topic for a moment, but you might want to read this article.

http://themittani.com/features/not-dead-yet-subcaps-are-fine-htfu

Oh, and all credit to The Ego.com for posting it.


Whats that rage article about carrier fleets got to do with bots?
Dave Stark
#442 - 2014-01-12 12:34:33 UTC
Kimmi Chan wrote:
It still says what it said the first time I read it. That bots "have" to play the game. They do not "have" to play the game.


yes they do. it's a program that is explicitly designed to play the game. you turn it on and that's exactly what it does, that's all it does. it's not like you turn it on and it goes "nah, don't want to do missions today, going to play some skyrim instead".

so yes, they do have to play the game because that's their single purpose.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#443 - 2014-01-12 12:35:04 UTC
Kimmi Chan wrote:


as a challenge. It really isn't. It is more an agreement between us that bots are ******* stupid. In the second paragraph of my reply, in fact, I say as much. Admittedly, with much more subtle language.

Literally no one "has to" or is required to play this game. The fact that they do but while playing the game they don't play the game and instead have the bots play their game for them is just madness.


Sadly, there are some who do need the bots to play as it makes them RL money.
Josef Djugashvilis
#444 - 2014-01-12 12:35:57 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Dear Baltec 1, forgive me for going off topic for a moment, but you might want to read this article.

http://themittani.com/features/not-dead-yet-subcaps-are-fine-htfu

Oh, and all credit to The Ego.com for posting it.


Whats that rage article about carrier fleets got to do with bots?


Absolutely nothing my dear chap, which is why I started off with, "...forgive me for going off topic for a moment..."

This is not a signature.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#445 - 2014-01-12 12:36:55 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Dear Baltec 1, forgive me for going off topic for a moment, but you might want to read this article.

http://themittani.com/features/not-dead-yet-subcaps-are-fine-htfu

Oh, and all credit to The Ego.com for posting it.


Whats that rage article about carrier fleets got to do with bots?


Absolutely nothing my dear chap, which is why I started off with, "...forgive me for going off topic for a moment..."



I see.
Kimmi Chan
Tastes Like Purple
#446 - 2014-01-12 12:38:57 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Kimmi Chan wrote:
It still says what it said the first time I read it. That bots "have" to play the game. They do not "have" to play the game.


yes they do. it's a program that is explicitly designed to play the game. you turn it on and that's exactly what it does, that's all it does. it's not like you turn it on and it goes "nah, don't want to do missions today, going to play some skyrim instead".

so yes, they do have to play the game because that's their single purpose.


Thank you Dave. I appreciate that clarification.

I did misread the original post then. When you used the term "bot", I took that to be synonymous with the flesh and blood player engaged in the botting and not strictly the software developed for the purpose of botting. Hence my confusion.

"Grr Kimmi  Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide

www.eve-radio.com  Join Eve Radio channel in game!
Kimmi Chan
Tastes Like Purple
#447 - 2014-01-12 12:43:37 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Kimmi Chan wrote:


as a challenge. It really isn't. It is more an agreement between us that bots are ******* stupid. In the second paragraph of my reply, in fact, I say as much. Admittedly, with much more subtle language.

Literally no one "has to" or is required to play this game. The fact that they do but while playing the game they don't play the game and instead have the bots play their game for them is just madness.


Sadly, there are some who do need the bots to play as it makes them RL money.


That's what jobs are for. I suppose it's easier to not play a game than it is to go out and get a job but what kind of life is that?

"Grr Kimmi  Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide

www.eve-radio.com  Join Eve Radio channel in game!
Josef Djugashvilis
#448 - 2014-01-12 12:53:07 UTC
Assuming null-sec folk do not think the fact that most botting seems to take place in hi-sec is not a game imbalance or a hi-sec conspiracy against null, I think any conversation about botting is moot.

Botting is wrong.

This is not a signature.
TharOkha
0asis Group
#449 - 2014-01-12 12:53:39 UTC  |  Edited by: TharOkha
baltec1 wrote:

So we should keep the current situation where people who enjoy industry are limited to just 1/5 of total space in EVE?


What i am trying to say is that industry in null will never complete the one in hisec as far as you dont have good supply chain management in you ali. That means a lot of miners who would supply you with minerals as far as you give them reasonable buy orders at the same time (so they wouldn't have the need to haul it to jita). There would be first advantage living in null. Null have rare minerals so that means price for rare minerals should be cheaper than in jita (if everything would be done right)

im looking at the eve central right now and at your main trade hub in VFK. No such thing is happening there.

So that means its entirely on to you and your alliance and aliance management.

Yes manufacuring slots in hisec should be higher than in null. But you can nerf hisec industry as much as you can, as far as you dont have good supplied market in null..... it will always be ineffective.

Hisec is also successful because there are thousands of individual and neutral players who supply the market. Most of the Nullsec is limited because neutrals cannot dock into your stations. If someone mines in your region you shoot him. Also majority of your player base simply hate mining and miners.

Those are main reasons why null industry suck so bad. Successful economy means to have every aspect covered and managed.

Hire more miners. Give them reason to live there, buy minerals from them, protect them. Then you will have plenty of minerals (with price tag and quantity as good as in hisec, even maybe better). Then you can start mass industry in null.

Until then, you need to deal with the fact that your alliance main income comes from rental programs.

CODE. Venture hunt contest in a nutshell
Dave Stark
#450 - 2014-01-12 12:56:32 UTC
Kimmi Chan wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Kimmi Chan wrote:
It still says what it said the first time I read it. That bots "have" to play the game. They do not "have" to play the game.


yes they do. it's a program that is explicitly designed to play the game. you turn it on and that's exactly what it does, that's all it does. it's not like you turn it on and it goes "nah, don't want to do missions today, going to play some skyrim instead".

so yes, they do have to play the game because that's their single purpose.


Thank you Dave. I appreciate that clarification.

I did misread the original post then. When you used the term "bot", I took that to be synonymous with the flesh and blood player engaged in the botting and not strictly the software developed for the purpose of botting. Hence my confusion.


anyway my point was; if both the player, or the bot, has to actually engage in the game and do whatever activity it is that has been chosen to generate revenue then obviously there's balance issue when the majority of both of them are choosing to carry out their activities in high sec.

it's not like all the high sec players are doing l4s in high sec taking mediocre isk/hour to avoid the risk of null sec (or maybe it is, and that's the actual issue. the risk/reward balance is way off), when all of the bots are doing the same. clearly the earning potential in high sec is higher, this is a balance issue.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#451 - 2014-01-12 12:57:27 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Assuming null-sec folk do not think the fact that most botting seems to take place in hi-sec is not a game imbalance or a hi-sec conspiracy against null, I think any conversation about botting is moot.

Botting is wrong.



Everyone can agree that botting is wrong and all involved deserve to die in a fire (in game). While we do point out that the bots have left null due to higher earning in high sec I have to say that not one of us miss them.
Dave Stark
#452 - 2014-01-12 12:59:25 UTC
TharOkha wrote:
Hire more miners. Give them reason to live there, buy minerals from them, protect them. Then you will have plenty of minerals (with price tag and quantity as good as in hisec, even maybe better). Then you can start mass industry in null.


I'm going to wager, if you did the maths, it'd be cheaper to import from high sec than to bother protecting miners who contribute nothing but mineral sell orders.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#453 - 2014-01-12 13:09:02 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
TharOkha wrote:
Hire more miners. Give them reason to live there, buy minerals from them, protect them. Then you will have plenty of minerals (with price tag and quantity as good as in hisec, even maybe better). Then you can start mass industry in null.


I'm going to wager, if you did the maths, it'd be cheaper to import from high sec than to bother protecting miners who contribute nothing but mineral sell orders.


Protecting them isn't an issue.

Its the fact that the industry part would still work out as more expensive than just importing directly from Jita.
Shirley Serious
Gutter Press
#454 - 2014-01-12 13:10:56 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
High sec Industry. Put up buy orders or mine minerals needed, reprocess in system for near no cost, Set away production for near no cost, transport to null (cyno fuel, JF freighter fuel from nearest high sec jumpoff)

Null sec production:

Mine resources, transport to refinery (cyno fuel, JF/Rorqual fuel), refine (our refineries are less efficient), Transport to production outpost (Cyno fuel, JF fuel), build product, Transport finished product to market (Cyno Fuel, JF fuel).

Without counting the trillions we need to spend on outposts and system upgrades we can see that transport costs are at the very least three times higher. That cost goes higher still when we add in the fact that we will need to operate our manufacturing out of a POS or many POSs


Curious to know, what is the maximum refining rate available to POS refineries or player-built outposts in nullsec ? (do the handful of conquerable non-player-built stations have a different refining rate?)




Just the facts.
Kimmi Chan
Tastes Like Purple
#455 - 2014-01-12 13:28:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Kimmi Chan
Dave Stark wrote:
it's not like all the high sec players are doing l4s in high sec taking mediocre isk/hour to avoid the risk of null sec (or maybe it is, and that's the actual issue. the risk/reward balance is way off), when all of the bots are doing the same. clearly the earning potential in high sec is higher, this is a balance issue.


Confirming that I am a highsec mission runner running L4s not for the ISK but because I have no real interest in NullSec asshattery. I don't want to generalize but the general perception of NullBloc alliances and their membership is hardly an endorsement of fun to me. I could, of course, be mistaken and the actions or words of a few is not indicative of the whole.

I also think it's not as simple as drawing a straight line from bots in highsec as evidence of imbalance. Evidence of stupid ****wits in space is not evidence of imbalance. It is only evidence of ****wits in space.

"Grr Kimmi  Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide

www.eve-radio.com  Join Eve Radio channel in game!
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#456 - 2014-01-12 13:31:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Nevyn Auscent
Shirley Serious wrote:

Curious to know, what is the maximum refining rate available to POS refineries or player-built outposts in nullsec ? (do the handful of conquerable non-player-built stations have a different refining rate?)

POS's suck. 30% if I have the right information in front of me. But that is universal, high sec pos's don't have a magic improvement, they suck also.
Null sec outposts are 30% for 3, 50% for one. Which is silly making an entire outpost about refining. The factory outpost should be 40% at least (which allows 100% with perfect skills I believe) and they can find another bonus for the current 50% one to make it valuable.

Of course, Baltec1 like normal is also talking rubbish about costs.
Since high sec costs for any materials from null sec include all those JF costs with longer routes. And you also don't have to JF to your refinery, since you mine in your refinery system, or maybe right next door and use orca's & ore haulers to move it if you really can't mine in your refinery system for some reason..... except Null Ore Anomalies are infinite, if you mine one out a new one respawns instantly.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#457 - 2014-01-12 13:34:20 UTC
baltec1 wrote:


Everyone can agree that botting is wrong and all involved deserve to die in a fire (in game). While we do point out that the bots have left null due to higher earning in high sec I have to say that not one of us miss them.

Unless you are a botter, I highly doubt you know a thing about botter motivations, since higher earning in high sec is complete rubbish. You just keep trotting it out and it keeps getting destroyed.
Risk vs Reward is a possible argument, but that is a personal one that you have a level of risk for a given reward you will accept, beyond that you won't.
Absolute income however, Null wins. Stop being delusional in thinking we are idiots and don't know that.
Dave Stark
#458 - 2014-01-12 13:37:25 UTC
Kimmi Chan wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
it's not like all the high sec players are doing l4s in high sec taking mediocre isk/hour to avoid the risk of null sec (or maybe it is, and that's the actual issue. the risk/reward balance is way off), when all of the bots are doing the same. clearly the earning potential in high sec is higher, this is a balance issue.


Confirming that I am a highsec mission runner running L4s not for the ISK but because I have no real interest in NullSec asshattery. I don't want to generalize but the general perception of NullBloc alliances and their membership is hardly an endorsement of fun to me. I could, of course, be mistaken and the actions or words of a few is not indicative of the whole.

I also think it's not as simple as drawing a straight line from bots in highsec as evidence of imbalance. Evidence of stupid ****wits in space is not evidence of imbalance. It is only evidence of ****wits in space.


i, too, spend most of my time in high sec. however it's because nullsec is just **** space. i can earn more shooting red crosses in high sec than null sec, and i can do it when i want rather than when random roaming gangs have gone somewhere else.

null sec has reasons to go there, that are exclusive to null sec, however there are many more reasons not to want to go anywhere near it with a barge pole and those reasons are not limited to the population that resides there.

when the majority of both players, and botters shun an area of space, i think that's a very big indicator that there are issues with a given area of space.
Dave Stark
#459 - 2014-01-12 13:40:45 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
baltec1 wrote:


Everyone can agree that botting is wrong and all involved deserve to die in a fire (in game). While we do point out that the bots have left null due to higher earning in high sec I have to say that not one of us miss them.

Unless you are a botter, I highly doubt you know a thing about botter motivations, since higher earning in high sec is complete rubbish. You just keep trotting it out and it keeps getting destroyed.
Risk vs Reward is a possible argument, but that is a personal one that you have a level of risk for a given reward you will accept, beyond that you won't.
Absolute income however, Null wins. Stop being delusional in thinking we are idiots and don't know that.


humour me; how much could i earn in null sec if i were to give it another try?
Yonis Kador
KADORCORP
#460 - 2014-01-12 13:41:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Yonis Kador
baltec1 wrote:

CCP have stated that they want us to be almost self sufficient. We would still import faction items/ships and whatever we are short of but the bulk of our needs would be serviced by the industry within our empire.

Now I must ask, why do you hate industry players?


I'd be interested to learn which CCP dev made this statement so I can call him/her out on it. I do not agree that any area of this game should be self-sufficient and am unable to comprehend how/why anyone at CCP would believe otherwise.

Nothing affects pgc generation more than player interaction so having any area of the game bubbled off or virtually self-sufficient would be counterproductive to the overall health of pgc. The various areas need to be dependent on one another. Everything depends on it.

Success in this game cannot be allowed to be defined as divorce from everyone else. That kind of thinking shares a lot of similarities with afk mining.

You know, I don't write about what should happen to null because I don't write about things I know little about. But this statement has game-wide ramifications. It can't just be ignored. No sec space should have everything it needs. If CCP's position is that areas of the game should be self-sufficient, I want someone to explain to me how they justify this.

YK