These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Insights into 2013 production and destruction

First post
Author
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
#81 - 2014-02-10 06:11:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Benny Ohu
Skalle Pande wrote:
But why do you want to change hi sec if the problems are in null? (btw, couldn't you set up POS'ses to make more slots? Is that impossible in null? I honestly don't know). Right now, I fill a niche and contribute to the game - why will you take that away?

i'm going to give you the short version

unviable manufacturing in pos and outposts has nothing to do with security problems or location or anything like that. i see some in this thread making guesswork with ~guys in real life economy~ analogies but they're ignorant and wrong

manufacturing or refining in highsec is simple as 'train a skill > get some standings (for refining) > find a slot' and you have perfect free refining and perfect might-as-well-be-free manufacturing/research

there's no point conquering two solar systems, building and upgrading two enormously expensive outposts and paying expensive sovereignty bills for two those systems to do what any scmhuck can do in highsec for free. especially when you can only build one outpost per system and you could be building a gallente outpost instead

same with pos. why invest and face ongoing costs for a structure others can destroy when you can refine and build in a highsec station for free?

the only thing starbases and outposts offer is decreased manufacturing time which does not make up for the ongoing costs and logistics issues

there is no way to improve other refining and manufacturing services (without nerfing highsec) without increasing refine rates past 100% or decreasing the mineral cost of manufacturing in those locations. which effectively lets outpost or starbase owners to print minerals

so we have the resulting problems

1) a person who wants to build ships or mine is forced into highsec npc stations because those stations make everything else unviable
2) there's only one degree of success for producers - a highsec station. there's no point trying to advance from that or challenge yourself
3) there's really no point in working together
4) outposts and starbases cannot be improved beyond highsec npc stations without breaking the game

a game should be designed around fun and an mmo like eve should create reasons and opportunity to succeed to a greater degree in whatever type of gameplay a person wishes to pursue. in eve this is supposed to involve exposing yourself to other players which creates emergent gameplay

(a starbase is easily managable by one person because in highsec you never need to defend it but that's another problem)
(actually in lowsec a research pos is likely to be ignored too)

what's absolutely imperative in my view is to improve the industrial game and extend it into starbases and outposts while making sure highsec npc manufacturing remains viable for casuals and newbies. if someone for whatever reason does not want to play with others (whyStraight) or expand beyond npc services, they can stay there, but they can't expect to succeed as well as the people who have the motivation and ability to take risks and win
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
#82 - 2014-02-10 06:13:47 UTC
****, top post
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
#83 - 2014-02-10 06:29:45 UTC
Skalle Pande wrote:
Actually, I find that somewhat alarming. I thought your point was to change the balance between industry in hisec and null. But now it seems to me that what you really are aiming at is changing the balance within highsec.

i think it's more like expanding industry to create many degrees of success ranging from highsec npc stations to nullsec starbases and outposts to drive real gameplay

Skalle Pande wrote:
Besides, you would have to trust your blueprints, your materials and your products to someone you don't know - would you do that yourself, as a new player? There would have to be very strong game mechanic guarantees that once you pay the fee and submit your job, your stuff is safe and you cannot be shut out from the facility etc. Trusting strangers is generally risky in this little sandbox, is it not?

yes there needs to be a degree of security and viable npc facilities to fall back on
Skalle Pande
Teknisk Forlag
#84 - 2014-02-10 09:25:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Skalle Pande
Benny Ohu wrote:
Unviable manufacturing in pos and outposts has nothing to do with security problems or location or anything like that. i see some in this thread making guesswork with ~guys in real life economy~ analogies but they're ignorant and wrong

But there is - you say so yourself: Costs for a structure others can destroy, ongoing costs and logistics issues. If that is not security and location issues, I don't know what is. I think the application of RL economic concepts to Eve makes a lot of sense quite often.

Quote:
Manufacturing or refining in highsec is simple as 'train a skill > get some standings (for refining) > find a slot' and you have perfect free refining and perfect might-as-well-be-free manufacturing/research
True for refining and manufacturing, but certainly not for research. At least I don't think waiting 2 months for a research slot to become available is anyway near "perfect". That said, you have a good point - there really ought to be more steps on the improvement ladder. Perhaps not in refining - it makes sense that you can extract only so much from a given piece of rock (maybe the null sec ore sites could be richer in 10% variants, would achieve the same). But hi sec manufacturing could shoulder a bit more of empire expenses, and in particular the actual standing towards the corp could mean something.

Quote:
There's no point conquering two solar systems, building and upgrading two enormously expensive outposts and paying expensive sovereignty bills for two those systems to do what any scmhuck can do in highsec for free. especially when you can only build one outpost per system and you could be building a gallente outpost instead
No point - EXCEPT if you simply enjoy possessing two solar systems, complete with outposts, sov bills and all that jazz. A lot of people do, it seems. But they did not go there because they wanted to produce ordinary stuff. Their motives and preferences are, I presume, different. Regarding the limit of one outpost per system - now that is a restriction I don't understand. To me it seems nonsensical and artificial and I can't see why it should be a balance issue, except if the point is to spread people out in as many systems as possible. By all means dump it. But that is probably just me being ignorant.

Quote:
So we have the resulting problems

1) a person who wants to build ships or mine is forced into highsec npc stations because those stations make everything else unviable
2) there's only one degree of success for producers - a highsec station. there's no point trying to advance from that or challenge yourself
3) there's really no point in working together
4) outposts and starbases cannot be improved beyond highsec npc stations without breaking the game

ad 1) Wrong. Nobody is forced to do anything, and viable is a very relative term. Suboptimal can still be very viable - you may have slightly higher production costs for many different reasons, but your customers will be willing to pay a markup, if that can save them a 10-jump trip to a cheaper offer. Even within hisec prices vary very much across time and place.
ad 2) There is only one degree of success for producers - ISK
ad 3) Wrong. It is definitely both much easier and more efficient, and also much more fun, if you cooperate. In hisec, as well as in low or null.
ad 4) as said, I agree with you that something might need tweaking here. On the other hand, there are a number of industrial activities that definitely is best or only done in null. And we should be talking margins here, economically. In the greater picture, I don't think those margins are too important - the real problem still is the added burden of maintaining security and logistics, when you produce in null. And that is part of the deal, that is the price of living in null. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Quote:
What's absolutely imperative in my view is to improve the industrial game and extend it into starbases and outposts while making sure highsec npc manufacturing remains viable for casuals and newbies. if someone for whatever reason does not want to play with others (whyStraight) or expand beyond npc services, they can stay there, but they can't expect to succeed as well as the people who have the motivation and ability to take risks and win
On this we agree, and I think almost everone do. Which is why I find myself ever more often in low sec, working with a few other guys on setting up a POS and planning (timidly, but still) to go exploring in null. Now, who would have thought that - the incentives actually do work :-D
Josef Djugashvilis
#85 - 2014-02-10 09:36:20 UTC
Stuff gets made, stuff gets unmade, this is the cycle of life for Eve Online.

This is not a signature.

Reinforced Metal Scrap
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#86 - 2014-02-10 09:51:35 UTC
CCP Quant wrote:
Skalle Pande wrote:
CCP Quant wrote:
Just to keep this thread in sync with reddit

I've made a few forks of the graph on JSFiddle by requests... I see where this is going so I think I'll make due with these for now Big smile

EVE Online destruction 2014 to date

EVE Online ships destroyed 2014 to date

EVE Online ships destroyed in 2013
Just noticed, and it intrigues me a bit: What happened to the 11 Tril ISK blown up in B-R5RB? The chart says 7 Tril now.... why the difference? Exaggerated stats for headline purposes in the first place?




No nothing juicy like that Big smile The thing is that this data is based on killmails. Many of the killmails around the fight, especially titan killmails had 0 value. I added the raw mineral production cost of titans to the mix since they have no market value to put on the killmail, so a lot is missing, I put a disclaimer about this somewhere. A lot of the rare officer mods didn't have a killmail value either. To put things in perspective, with this the largest titan killmail is at ~70B, whereas in reality most of them are above 120B and one was at 220B

Would it be possible to use the mineral cost for titans by default to make killmails more accurate?

Dedicated forum alt. Ingredients: 99.9% Pure Tritanium. May contain traces of peanuts.

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
#87 - 2014-02-10 10:24:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Benny Ohu
Skalle Pande wrote:
But there is - you say so yourself: Costs for a structure others can destroy, ongoing costs and logistics issues. If that is not security and location issues, I don't know what is. I think the application of RL economic concepts to Eve makes a lot of sense quite often.

no, the point of anything in eve online, including money, is to serve the players. comparing it to real life via ~well nullsec is like somalia and so should be poor~ or ~there's less industry in warzones~ analogies is stupid. eve can't be like reality because reality isn't an entertaining and worthwhile game

Skalle Pande wrote:
True for refining and manufacturing, but certainly not for research. At least I don't think waiting 2 months for a research slot to become available is anyway near "perfect". That said, you have a good point - there really ought to be more steps on the improvement ladder. Perhaps not in refining - it makes sense that you can extract only so much from a given piece of rock (maybe the null sec ore sites could be richer in 10% variants, would achieve the same). But hi sec manufacturing could shoulder a bit more of empire expenses, and in particular the actual standing towards the corp could mean something.

yeh research is in a different place but it's still not actually driving gameplay. noone drops caldari stations afaik and next to noone drops research pos anywhere but highsec. even there it doesn't drive gameplay since your average research starbase is a solo-and-my-alts affair that gets pulled down in the 24-period of a wardec

the only reason i want to see raised manufacturing prices in highsec is to make other methods of manufacturing viable, never for lore reasons. lore is a lower priority compared to gameplay. refining should be better in starbases because player owned should trump npc owned. i liked mara's 'make refining into slots and rent it out' thing.

might also be interesting to see a mobile refinery you can stick in a belt, better than station but worse than starbase

Skalle Pande wrote:
No point - EXCEPT if you simply enjoy possessing two solar systems, complete with outposts, sov bills and all that jazz. A lot of people do, it seems. But they did not go there because they wanted to produce ordinary stuff. Their motives and preferences are, I presume, different.

i'm talking mechanics as gameplay drivers. and people don't go out there to produce because highsec npc services make it pointless


Skalle Pande wrote:
ad 1) Wrong. Nobody is forced to do anything, and viable is a very relative term. Suboptimal can still be very viable - you may have slightly higher production costs for many different reasons, but your customers will be willing to pay a markup, if that can save them a 10-jump trip to a cheaper offer. Even within hisec prices vary very much across time and place.
ad 2) There is only one degree of success for producers - ISK
ad 3) Wrong. It is definitely both much easier and more efficient, and also much more fun, if you cooperate. In hisec, as well as in low or null.
ad 4) as said, I agree with you that something might need tweaking here. On the other hand, there are a number of industrial activities that definitely is best or only done in null. And we should be talking margins here, economically. In the greater picture, I don't think those margins are too important - the real problem still is the added burden of maintaining security and logistics, when you produce in null. And that is part of the deal, that is the price of living in null. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

no 'suboptimal plus inconvenient' is very much unviable in this game and never a reasonable option
people will do 'suboptimal plus convenient' or 'optimal and inconvenient'
and anything sold at a markup in lowsec or nullsec was invariably hauled there, not produced there
why are you going on about isk=success i assumed you'd know this
when i said 'no point working together' i was talking about the uselessness of manufacturing starbases/defending research pos/building in nullsec please remember context
yes there are other industrial activities that are fine in low/null but that doesn't mean you shouldn't have viable local mining manufacture or research
and the margin for owning and working a starbase/working in low/working in null should be made high enough over npc to warrant the risk because the game should serve the players and drive gameplay


Skalle Pande wrote:
On this we agree, and I think almost everone do. Which is why I find myself ever more often in low sec, working with a few other guys on setting up a POS and planning (timidly, but still) to go exploring in null. Now, who would have thought that - the incentives actually do work :-D

exploration sites are mostly fine yes but industry is not
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#88 - 2014-02-10 13:39:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Pinky Hops
Benny Ohu wrote:
1) a person who wants to build ships or mine is forced into highsec npc stations because those stations make everything else unviable


This is not true. For certain items, it's more efficient to use PoS slots than station slots as they have a faster time multiplier. Eg, depending on what you are making, you can make more isk per hour using PoS slots than station slots - yes, even after subtracting fuel costs.

Benny Ohu wrote:
2 there's only one degree of success for producers - a highsec station. there's no point trying to advance from that or challenge yourself


Not true. See above. Also highsec stations are completely insufficient for lab slots due to crowding issues.

Benny Ohu wrote:
3) there's really no point in working together


You could use the same argument for ratting or many income sources. For instance: why make friends and rat in groups when you can just multibox and keep it all for yourself?

But there are very tangible benefits to working together - namely that you get more time zone coverage and more efficient use of your lab slots that are inevitable on a PoS and NOT a station Blink

A lot of jobs run on weird schedules, requiring you to be awake at nearly all timezones if you want to do it all by yourself while having no downtime....

Benny Ohu wrote:
4) outposts and starbases cannot be improved beyond highsec npc stations without breaking the game


Not sure what this has to do with anything, considering even the ones that are heavily upgraded are not used much -- which brings me back to my original point.

If slots were the constraint, you would not see free/unused slots literally everywhere in low/null. A lack of slots is not why people don't manufacture in null.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#89 - 2014-02-10 14:16:58 UTC
Pinky Hops wrote:
stuff


So, why doesn't any of what you say actually happen? I mean, if it's all that simple, null sec should be chocked full of production, right?

People follow the path of least resistance. That path is almost always high sec. and as long as it's so easy to do in high sec and so easy to move stuff around, it will always be like that.

It's bad though, it makes the game "small" and centralized and snuffs out a lot of the game play that you'd get by having the game be about "multiple localities".
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#90 - 2014-02-10 14:38:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Pinky Hops
Jenn aSide wrote:
Pinky Hops wrote:
stuff


So, why doesn't any of what you say actually happen?


I have no idea what you are referencing specifically with this statement.

Jenn aSide wrote:
I mean, if it's all that simple, null sec should be chocked full of production, right?


If it were as simple as slot availability, then yes. Null would be chock full of production.

However, as I explained multiple times earlier in the thread, a lack of slots are not why people don't manufacture in null. I guess you didn't read the "stuff" I posted.

Jenn aSide wrote:
People follow the path of least resistance. That path is almost always high sec. and as long as it's so easy to do in high sec and so easy to move stuff around, it will always be like that.


See, this is where people get fuzzy.

The ability to use jump freighters is a distinct advantage over highsec. Why does it remain that it's "easier" to move goods in highsec?

It turns out it's just because the trade hubs are in highsec.

So until you can find some magical wand to wave that moves a trade hub into nullsec, it's always going to be like this.

Jenn aSide wrote:
It's bad though, it makes the game "small" and centralized and snuffs out a lot of the game play that you'd get by having the game be about "multiple localities".


There are multiple localities. Most of the trade localities are in highsec, but there are still scattered staging posts and communities where heavy import traffic from highsec comes, leading to more localities.

I don't see it anywhere near as extreme as you make it out to be. You act like there's only one place to trade and that being Jita. Not true.

Ironically, if you nerfed hauling in general (freighters, jump freighters, and perhaps titans as well) you might see more localities in null.

People import so much to null because JF fuel isn't really all that expensive compared to the time/effort involved in manufacturing. It basically makes importing the only option because given the choice of making it completely from scratch or just importing....People will import. It's the path of least resistance Blink

If you want to see a lot of production in null then you'd have to nerf importation. It's that simple.
Varo Jan
Caravanserai Consulting
#91 - 2014-02-10 15:21:23 UTC
CCP Phantom wrote:
Read all about the production and destruction in EVE Online in 2013

Very nice. Thank you.

Any chance of similar graphs for mining and moon mining?
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#92 - 2014-02-10 18:32:39 UTC
I think what we choose to do for money-making in nulsec has a lot to do with our time available to play Eve. If you have lots of time sure you can grind isk ratting for hours on end.

Or, if like me, you only have a few hours a week, (perhaps more on weekends), and want to do more interesting things than shooting little red crosses, you can throw together a local manufacturing business in nulsec.

We always had manufacturing slots available. The biggest lack for me was finding blueprint research and copy lines. Our corp had multiple POSes operating just for BPO/C research/copying.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY

CCP Quant
C C P
C C P Alliance
#93 - 2014-02-10 22:31:06 UTC
Reinforced Metal Scrap wrote:
CCP Quant wrote:
Skalle Pande wrote:
CCP Quant wrote:
Just to keep this thread in sync with reddit

I've made a few forks of the graph on JSFiddle by requests... I see where this is going so I think I'll make due with these for now Big smile

EVE Online destruction 2014 to date

EVE Online ships destroyed 2014 to date

EVE Online ships destroyed in 2013
Just noticed, and it intrigues me a bit: What happened to the 11 Tril ISK blown up in B-R5RB? The chart says 7 Tril now.... why the difference? Exaggerated stats for headline purposes in the first place?




No nothing juicy like that Big smile The thing is that this data is based on killmails. Many of the killmails around the fight, especially titan killmails had 0 value. I added the raw mineral production cost of titans to the mix since they have no market value to put on the killmail, so a lot is missing, I put a disclaimer about this somewhere. A lot of the rare officer mods didn't have a killmail value either. To put things in perspective, with this the largest titan killmail is at ~70B, whereas in reality most of them are above 120B and one was at 220B

Would it be possible to use the mineral cost for titans by default to make killmails more accurate?


That would actually be nice, I'll check Big smile

Varo Jan wrote:
CCP Phantom wrote:
Read all about the production and destruction in EVE Online in 2013

Very nice. Thank you.

Any chance of similar graphs for mining and moon mining?


We might do similar graphs for mining, trading and moon mining yes, there will be fewer system labels though Bear
Abla Tive
#94 - 2014-02-11 05:39:19 UTC
CCP Quant wrote:

We might do similar graphs for mining, trading and moon mining yes, there will be fewer system labels though Bear


And CCP again values some players security of information over others.

CCP should not divulge the aggregated activities of some players
when other players doing the same activity are protected.

It is simply unfair.

If 100% of my activities are disclosed, then 100% of others should be too.

And no, just because some people have more zeros in their net assets doesn't make their privacy more valuable.
Kusum Fawn
Perkone
Caldari State
#95 - 2014-02-11 18:37:57 UTC
Is ther eany way to get total numbers by security also listed somewhere?
Ie : Security Level - # of systems at that level - Isk produced - # of minerals used
1.0 sec - 35 - 899 billion isk - 19 trillion materials used

Something of that nature to help really describe the manufacturing by game play area,
For the most part it wouldn't disclose anyones secret nullsec manufacturing hub but it would give a better indication of manufacturing in null vs low vs hisec

Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.

Dracenhof
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#96 - 2014-02-12 12:30:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracenhof
I agree with some comments, if we want to boost production/industry in low/null what I believe we should do is following:

- refining in station has to take time, maybe more time than in POS, make refining in POSes with loss on yield attractive, even more if we introduce timers on refining operation, queues in NPC station will show up, this will cause even worse time factor issue and new mini professions will show up, corporation that refine for living, traders that know less crowded npc station in low sec and etc

- refining in npc station without loss should be heavy skill related, for example only training omber processing to level 5 yields perfect yield while in pos it should be level 3

- refining in npc station should be never for free, with perfect standing it still should be lets say 5% loss on yield, it is just to offset of risk, effort and cost of running pos


And to boost production I see two simple solutions:

- increase production time, by lets say 15%, but not flat 15% across the board, items that are instant (like rigs) make manufacturing of them 5 times more time consuming, while items that already are being cooking for 2 weeks unaffected, goal is to stress system up in NPC stations, that your own factory is the only alternative if you want to have reliable production

- increase rent of factory in NPC station by some factor, maybe make NPC station viable only for business moguls, for example installation fee of production run will be 100 millions of isks, if you want to have your own low batch production business go small pos in 0.5, or go big with proper investments, or other way around just double/triple fee for production line rent per hour or something in between

Things to achieve with this changes:
- production in NPC stations has to be more expensive and time consuming, this will make effective production much harder to achieve and thus it won't be effortless any more
- queues will cause market hiccups (hopefully) with occasional shortages of given module/ship and it will add some extra market volatility
- extra isk sink

Disclaimer:
My text is pure speculation I do not have any data to back it up. But I used to refine/manufacture and more importantly trade a lot in the past.

Also sorry if I broke some grammar or common sense, I typed this text in rush. ;)
Skalle Pande
Teknisk Forlag
#97 - 2014-02-12 14:44:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Skalle Pande
Dracenhof, I agree with most of what you suggest, except this:
Dracenhof wrote:
- increase rent of factory in NPC station by some factor, maybe make NPC station viable only for business moguls, for example installation fee of production run will be 100 millions of isks, if you want to have your own low batch production business go small pos in 0.5, or go big with proper investments, or other way around just double/triple fee for production line rent per hour or something in between

Remember, High sec is where people start - a rookie must be able to set up industrial production in small scale, and millions of ISK just for rent is not available to a rookie. A modest increase in fees, perhaps, and less than perfect yield from refining and production, more likely, but keep the rookie in the game. And the carebear, who prefers to live in High, too.

Jenn aSide wrote:
People follow the path of least resistance. That path is almost always high sec. and as long as it's so easy to do in high sec and so easy to move stuff around, it will always be like that.

Now, this was exactly my point. So maybe there is common ground to be found. Tell me, when people move to null, what is their main motivation? Is it to become successful mass producers of ordinary commodities? I don't think so. There are many things more exciting to do and many efforts more lucrative. Those are the upsides motivating people when they leave high. There are downsides, too, like less safety (which by many will be viewed as a plus), and an important one being that supplies are harder to get. It is not in any way impossible to set up production, as Soldarius shows, but most people find other activities more rewarding.

Pinky Hops wrote:
The ability to use jump freighters is a distinct advantage over highsec. Why does it remain that it's "easier" to move goods in highsec?

It turns out it's just because the trade hubs are in highsec.

So until you can find some magical wand to wave that moves a trade hub into nullsec, it's always going to be like this.

Ironically, if you nerfed hauling in general (freighters, jump freighters, and perhaps titans as well) you might see more localities in null.

People import so much to null because JF fuel isn't really all that expensive compared to the time/effort involved in manufacturing. It basically makes importing the only option because given the choice of making it completely from scratch or just importing....People will import. It's the path of least resistance.Blink

Important point. I honestly don't know if there are trade hubs as such anywhere in null, but I would guess that at most there is intra-corp or intra-alliance hubs. Any open shopping mall would be ringed with pirates, and visiting one with goods in your cargo, either coming or going, would probably be quite suicidal. Security IS an issue.

In null, I would suppose that the primary reason for setting up production would be to keep you yourself and maybe your corp supplied. And, of course, to produce commodities that are best or only produced in null, which you would then haul to high in order to sell. In high, your will buy what you need but don't produce yourself. If that turns out to be almost anything, then so be it. Frontier economy. To make bulk, marketoriented industry easier to do in null, you would have to improve market security. But then it wouldn't be null anymore, would it? And if your goal is to become entirely self-sufficient - then what became of player interaction as a design principle? I don't think CCP are developing towards the ability to be self-sufficient in this game, on the contrary.

Quote:
If you want to see a lot of production in null then you'd have to nerf importation. It's that simple.

This is true, but I would hate to see that as a suggestion. It would make everybody's life more miserable, high, low and null. The objective here is not to spread out production in a mathematically exact proportion to population, area or sector or whatever. It is to make people able to play in the way they prefer, with all that entails of upsides and downsides. This is the balance CCP must maintain, the balance between upsides and downsides in all sectors. It is not to the goal to "force" everybody out to live in null - that is not "better" or the end objective in the game, as there really is no "end objective". Therefore when some things are better done in high, such as bulk industry, that is exactly as it should be. Other things are better done in low or null or sov-null - fine, I must accept that as one of the downsides of my playing style that I cannot do that. You can't have your cake and eat it too. If you want to be an industrialist in null, you can be - it is "viable" in the sense that you can produce and get your products to markets, but it is definitely a challenge, and you can probably make more ISK/hour in other activities. But ISK is only an in-game currency - what the game really is about is setting your RL self some challenges and striving to succeed, is it not?