These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

No More High Sec Manufacturing?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#1 - 2014-04-15 16:37:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Medalyn Isis
After reading the Dev Blog, just considering what will this actually mean, and I am thinking perhaps this is partly to try and make high sec manufacturing extremely uneconomical. It all depends on what CCP will set for the cost and how much it increases based upon the number of people wanting to use the station. Any chance you can give us the formula CCP as right now the repercussion are a little hazy?

So, is this now going to make high sec manufacturing now not so desirable? After all, this could be a big buff to low sec if all industrialists will have to relocate out there to get good a decent profit margin.

Also - "Allow Starbases to be anchored anywhere in high-security space and without standing requirements"

This is going to be interesting.

Devblog - Building Better Worlds
Carmen Electra
AlcoDOTTE
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#2 - 2014-04-15 16:38:42 UTC
Well, I'll still be manufacturing any LP items in hisec vOv

Bacon makes us stronger
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#3 - 2014-04-15 16:39:14 UTC
if i was them, i'd be going for 'doable in highsec, done better in lowsec'
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#4 - 2014-04-15 16:48:00 UTC
Medalyn Isis wrote:
After reading the Dev Blog, just considering what will this actually mean, and I am thinking perhaps this is partly to try and make high sec manufacturing extremely uneconomical. It all depends on what CCP will set for the cost and how much it increases based upon the number of people wanting to use the station. Any chance you can give us the formula CCP as right now the repercussion are a little hazy?

So, is this now going to make high sec manufacturing now not so desirable? After all, this could be a big buff to low sec if all industrialists will have to relocate out there to get good a decent profit margin.

Also - "Allow Starbases to be anchored anywhere in high-security space and without standing requirements"

This is going to be interesting.




I'm sure it's not that simple.

And any arbitrary "force people into someone's gate camp" changes are going to be met with unsubs.

Nullsec has been very due for a boost in production capability for a long time.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#5 - 2014-04-15 16:53:10 UTC
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Medalyn Isis wrote:
After reading the Dev Blog, just considering what will this actually mean, and I am thinking perhaps this is partly to try and make high sec manufacturing extremely uneconomical. It all depends on what CCP will set for the cost and how much it increases based upon the number of people wanting to use the station. Any chance you can give us the formula CCP as right now the repercussion are a little hazy?

So, is this now going to make high sec manufacturing now not so desirable? After all, this could be a big buff to low sec if all industrialists will have to relocate out there to get good a decent profit margin.

Also - "Allow Starbases to be anchored anywhere in high-security space and without standing requirements"

This is going to be interesting.




I'm sure it's not that simple.

And any arbitrary "force people into someone's gate camp" changes are going to be met with unsubs.

Nullsec has been very due for a boost in production capability for a long time.

Well, Industrialists will probably be proliferating low sec systems one jump from high sec with jump freighters transporting stuff to take advantage of the lower costs. But then, this all depends on the formula CCP are going to be using for working out station cost.
CETA Elitist
The Prometheus Society
#6 - 2014-04-15 16:53:58 UTC
Medalyn Isis wrote:


Also - "Allow Starbases to be anchored anywhere in high-security space and without standing requirements"


oh my GERD

space city, here i come!!! \o/
Nolen Cadmar
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#7 - 2014-04-15 16:59:39 UTC
CETA Elitist wrote:
Medalyn Isis wrote:


Also - "Allow Starbases to be anchored anywhere in high-security space and without standing requirements"


oh my GERD

space city, here i come!!! \o/

Are they talking about anchoring a POS NOT at a moon? I interpreted "anywhere" to mean that the sec status would not effect the required standings for anchoring.

Nolen's Spreadsheet Guru Services

Pre-made spreadsheets available covering market, manufacturing and more!

Custom requests welcome!

Sheet Screenshots
Kitty Bear
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#8 - 2014-04-15 17:00:01 UTC
CETA Elitist wrote:
Medalyn Isis wrote:


Also - "Allow Starbases to be anchored anywhere in high-security space and without standing requirements"


oh my GERD

space city, here i come!!! \o/


just means you won't need to grind standings to X amount anymore
doesn't mean there will be an overnight POS explosion

but there may well be more explosions

and it's 'almost' anywhere
Nam Dnilb
Universal Frog
#9 - 2014-04-15 17:08:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Nam Dnilb
The first thing that'll happen is a break up of the absolute concentration of production around Jita as evidenced by this graph.

There is a lot of barely used slots next to the other trade hubs, so this may be a big buff to the other hubs. Interesting times ahead, anyway.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#10 - 2014-04-15 17:10:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
No, it will make it a lot more economical since you have more options available to you.

Yes, if you refuse to relocate away from one of the industrial hubs near a trade hubs, you'll soon price yourself out of the market. That's kind of the point: to give you a reason to relocate away from those hubs.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#11 - 2014-04-15 17:11:34 UTC
Inb4Dinsdale?

Twisted
Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#12 - 2014-04-15 17:11:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Antisocial Malkavian
Medalyn Isis wrote:
After reading the Dev Blog, just considering what will this actually mean, and I am thinking perhaps this is partly to try and make high sec manufacturing extremely uneconomical. It all depends on what CCP will set for the cost and how much it increases based upon the number of people wanting to use the station. Any chance you can give us the formula CCP as right now the repercussion are a little hazy?

So, is this now going to make high sec manufacturing now not so desirable? After all, this could be a big buff to low sec if all industrialists will have to relocate out there to get good a decent profit margin.

Also - "Allow Starbases to be anchored anywhere in high-security space and without standing requirements"

This is going to be interesting.


I didnt know it WAS desirable NOW

Plus, insert "must get ppl to 0.0"

And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

Caviar Liberta
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2014-04-15 17:13:15 UTC
Medalyn Isis wrote:
After reading the Dev Blog, just considering what will this actually mean, and I am thinking perhaps this is partly to try and make high sec manufacturing extremely uneconomical. It all depends on what CCP will set for the cost and how much it increases based upon the number of people wanting to use the station. Any chance you can give us the formula CCP as right now the repercussion are a little hazy?

So, is this now going to make high sec manufacturing now not so desirable? After all, this could be a big buff to low sec if all industrialists will have to relocate out there to get good a decent profit margin.

Also - "Allow Starbases to be anchored anywhere in high-security space and without standing requirements"

This is going to be interesting.


Link said blog please.
Barbara Nichole
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#14 - 2014-04-15 17:22:48 UTC
I'll be watching; if they nerf high sec too much I will have no choice but to quietly slip away, saving myself a subscription fee.

  - remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not  "afk" cloaking -

[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]
Nolen Cadmar
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#15 - 2014-04-15 17:23:08 UTC
http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/building-better-worlds/

Nolen's Spreadsheet Guru Services

Pre-made spreadsheets available covering market, manufacturing and more!

Custom requests welcome!

Sheet Screenshots
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#16 - 2014-04-15 17:27:13 UTC
Barbara Nichole wrote:
I'll be watching; if they nerf high sec too much I will have no choice but to quietly slip away, saving myself a subscription fee.

This is hardly a highsec nerf, though. It's a universal industry buff that, at most and as it has been described so far, hits nullseccers who have to rely on POSes more than anyone.
Nolen Cadmar
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#17 - 2014-04-15 17:29:57 UTC
There still may be some sort of buff related to sec status though. Reprocessing in NullSec yeilds the most. I wouldn't be surprised if manufacturing there was the best also. It should be. But I'd prefer if POS's(in Low/Null) had the best stats, b/c they're destructible. Outposts are not.

Nolen's Spreadsheet Guru Services

Pre-made spreadsheets available covering market, manufacturing and more!

Custom requests welcome!

Sheet Screenshots
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#18 - 2014-04-15 17:37:32 UTC
Tippia wrote:
No, it will make it a lot more economical since you have more options available to you.

Yes, if you refuse to relocate away from one of the industrial hubs near a trade hubs, you'll soon price yourself out of the market. That's kind of the point: to give you a reason to relocate away from those hubs.

Given that current players who manufacture around market hubs will relocate further away more evenly spreading the distribution of manufacturing across high sec, I am wondering whether this will mean the profit margins are going to be now finally higher in low sec, and if so, then by how much.

Guess we need to wait to see the formula for this though.
Felicity Love
Doomheim
#19 - 2014-04-15 17:38:03 UTC
Kitty Bear wrote:
[
just means you won't need to grind standings to X amount anymore
doesn't mean there will be an overnight POS explosion

but there may well be more explosions

and it's 'almost' anywhere


Given how many inactive POS there are out there right now, ie. "anchored" with or without structures and not burning fuel, any sudden rush to throw up a POS will still be faced with the same COST issues of actually running it.

Either way, things will change all over again when CCP finally has no choice but to completely revamp POS's due to the prehistoric code involved.

Fun times.


"EVE is dying." -- The Four Forum Trolls of the Apocalypse.   ( Pick four, any four. They all smell.  )
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#20 - 2014-04-15 17:54:15 UTC
Medalyn Isis wrote:
Given that current players who manufacture around market hubs will relocate further away more evenly spreading the distribution of manufacturing across high sec, I am wondering whether this will mean the profit margins are going to be now finally higher in low sec, and if so, then by how much.

Guess we need to wait to see the formula for this though.

Probably. It'll depend on how the market adjusts to the industrialists' adjustments too. Let's say that they're a stubborn lot and all the industry prices spike by the 14% I keep seeing mentioned as the highest congestion charge. Will that then be the new baseline that everyone sets their price at (because why cut into your own profit margin)? In that case, a lowsec station without that surcharge would obviously inherently give you a 12% margin, which is very compelling.
123Next pageLast page