These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Should everything be better in Null-sec?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jaxon Grylls
Institute of Archaeology
#61 - 2014-04-23 07:47:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Jaxon Grylls
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:
Buff null sec, buff low sec, leave high sec as is.

The rewards should scale with the risk.

Yes, but judging from the remarks about the "blue doughnut" how much risk is there in null-sec?

Also, isn't null-sec supposed to be the frontier, where things are being built and it's not finished?

That's like saying that the pioneers of the Old West should have arrived at their destination in their covered wagons to find six lane motorways and five star hotels.

You can't have it both ways. Either a fully developed infrastructure but a lot of competition or "do-it-yourself" with greater opportunities but less support.

Quick addendum:

How much risk does the average Goon face anyway?

Apart from on GD of course.
Solecist Project
#62 - 2014-04-23 07:51:11 UTC
*sips tea*

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Skurja Volpar
T.R.I.A.D
Ushra'Khan
#63 - 2014-04-23 07:54:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Skurja Volpar
Seraph Essael wrote:
Risk is relative... For example a Goonswarm ratting in his ship in the deep reaches of Goonswarm space is a lot safer than an enemy of the Goons ratting in the deep reaches of Goonswarm space, no? (Just using Goons as an example here...)


Careless Goon Ishtars mysteriously vanish from the anomalies of Deklein on a daily basis.

And the idea that nullsec is some kind of primitive frontier is kind of laughable, and more endemic of the lack of actual concept work and development that has gone into it since 2003. The level of organization and behind the scenes work involved in the average alliance is pretty amazing (not to mention depressing lol ******* nerds PPP) and they should probably get some form of advantage for it.

10 years ago when the first people ventured to null to mine bisto or w/e that might have been true, but 10 years of empire building has happened since then, and some progress must be made so that mittens, molle, montolio, mactep, makalu etc. can finally wrap up this ridiculous game of human master of orion and go to bed.
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
#64 - 2014-04-23 08:02:01 UTC
Problem in null-sec is that any threat to sovereignty is blocked by a huge structure grind and timers which limits the decision of who wins by who can blob the most first. That and auto payment settings. It's too static and not enough targets you need to cover.

On another note, the one thing I dislike about the sci&ind lines change is that they removed a characteristic that could be used to individualize, stations, regions, corporations and sovereignty.

Sovereignty and Population

New Mining Mechanics
Salvos Rhoska
#65 - 2014-04-23 08:05:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
All this talk of increasing reward..
The upcoming expansion gives the refining/manufacture edge to Null.
Ores, rats, anomalies/sigs are already better.
From my reading of the changes, Null will categorically be more profitable.
Fair enough

(My only grievance is the effect on reprocessor players, but I understand that is the price for removing extra materials and paving the way for an eventual Modualcide, and it was a marginal profession to begin with amyways)

But how about some talk about increasing the risk too commensurately?

Like adjusting mails, removing automatic appearance in local and Sov adjustments.

The existance of the doughnut is quite compelling evidence that Null is infact, too safe.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Aivo Dresden
State War Academy
Caldari State
#66 - 2014-04-23 08:14:04 UTC
Are these the same people that will then start bitching about cloakers in their systems, or get their carriers and supers blown up by inty gangs? Comedy that.
Prince Kobol
#67 - 2014-04-23 08:25:42 UTC
For me null sec / Wh space should have the POTENTIAL to be better the HS.

If players want to spend the time and effort then yes, null should have the potential be able to give better rewards across the whole spectrum.
embrel
BamBam Inc.
#68 - 2014-04-23 09:14:30 UTC
Organic Lager wrote:

We out source most of our production to mexico and china to avoid expensive inefficient industry practices such as high taxes and pesky workers rights.


Neither is the reason why stuff is being outsourced. There are basically two. First and foremost: labour costs

And second, some industries want their suppliers to have a local manufacturing presence.

You won't go to Mexico and China because of taxes.

back to topic: lawless zones are not prone to have industry. However, Null should have higher returns if the investment can be kept safe.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#69 - 2014-04-23 11:20:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Nevyn Auscent
Tauranon wrote:


How exactly did you put an example up with less profit by any real measure then ?

Seriously the last thing I want to do is buy 10% more minerals for the same absolute profit. Increasing the order size actually (due to finite supplier sizes, and other participants not allowing you to build everything), actually causes on average your orders to take more than 10% longer to fill, and you have 10% more stuff to cart, and 10% more buyers to find, and will likely close up the margins in the category you are in.

Because I was speaking with regards to isk cost.
If building 'ship' costs you '1' isk per hour and takes 100 hours in highsec, it has cost you '100' isk. (Figures chosen for nice simplicity, not actual costs)
You can also build '100' ships a month. For a profit of '100'

If in Nullsec, you get a 10% time discount, but a 10% isk cost per hour increase on your line.
This ship now costs you '1.1' her hour, but only takes 90 hours. Costing you '99' isk. So despite 'higher' costs, you actually end up with a cheaper ship.
You additionally get '110' ships per month for a profit of '110*(99/100)'.
So you make extra profit as well.

Now obviously if we are talking some niche item where there is barely any market you may over saturate your market. But relative to any individual producer most items deal in significantly larger volumes than any individual will ever touch, so you will make that additional profit exactly as listed. Trying to make up excuses as to why you won't scale profit is silly.

If instead you only pay 90% per hour as well as 90% time. That ship instead costs you '81' isk. Meaning you have a massive margin compared to any highsec builder, as well as getting to build more ships in the same time, meaning you can undercut highsec to the point they have no profit, and still make a large profit yourself. Thus, multiplicative effects where everything is better give massive advantage.

This is why not everything needs to be better in null in order for an overall profession to be better. Certain things are staple to professions and should be 'potentially' equal in all space, though some area's may require more individual effort to get there (i.e. Highsec skills) while other area's may require more collective effort but not as much individual effort. (I.E. Nullsec Sov). But the end potential on certain basic things should be equal, certain niche things can be better in high sec, so that if you only care about 'cost per hour' you might go to highsec using this example. But overall, more risk should be more reward when looking at an entire profession. No arguments there.


Note, this was simply an example, numbers are all being changed in summer, and I know isk is only a small portion of manufacturing costs 'right now' and doesn't matter. It's an illustrative point though.
Aralyn Cormallen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#70 - 2014-04-23 11:28:33 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:

But how about some talk about increasing the risk too commensurately?


To be fair, as a recent change, the Interceptor buffs went a big way towards increasing Null-sec risk.

I know I am biased by dint of my ticker, but a lot of the folks who say Nullsec has no risk for those of us in the heart of the "doughnut" haven't tried it, and really just don't know what they are talking about. I don't rat, I don't mine, I get most of my money for shooting ships, so it could be argued my "proffession" is the least risky imaginable, as mine is one where losses are expected, and factored in to the cost/reward (due to reimbursement). That said, I personally, have to take a LOT of precautions when going about my buisness, that my two Highsec alts just don't need to take.

Lets have a really simple example.

If I wanted to bring myself a ship from Jita, I am looking at a dozen jumps from Jita to Torrinos, and a total of five jumps in Nullsec (two of those by Jump Bridge) to get my goods to VFK. My hauler alt can afk all the way to Torrinos, no hassle - my hauler alt has never suffered a single loss on the Jita-Torrinos run, despite the fact that any enemy could easily tell a neutral hauler coming in to Torrinos would likely be a CFC member in disguise. From there, the EC gate is a crap-shoot, and 2/3rds of the time I want to pass through it, it is held by hostiles (which I can only know from a real player giving real-time intel from the other side), meaning I either have to fleet-up (requiring more people) and corral a response to chase the hostiles off, or log off, and come back later. How many high-sec haulers would tolerate being told to log off because they can't go through a gate, and come back tomorrow? Given the bitching about the Jita cap, not a lot. For me, its a fact of life.

Then I need to be watching for reported neutrals in the Jump Bridge systems - which involves finding out if there are any gangs within a system or two that they might be eyes for, find out if anyone has seen the ship they are flying (are they a likely cyno ship, an interceptor that can more three systems in the time I can move one, or just a pod cruising home that is no threat?), or if they are a known AFKer, and make a judgement call on whether its worth risking the jump, or yet again, take the safe option, and log off and come back later. And at any time, I could be screwed by bad luck by a guy jumping in at the gate I am in warp to who went unreported, as there was no-one in the adjacent system to indicate he was there. All the way through the second half of the route (which is half the length of the first half), I am having to pay attention, assess the information available to me, and calculate the risk.
Salvos Rhoska
#71 - 2014-04-23 11:40:06 UTC
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:

But how about some talk about increasing the risk too commensurately?


To be fair


I get your point, really, I do.

But also, to be fair, the risks you describe are centrally involved and related to your practice of exploiting high-secs riches, by means of leveraging them in null.

It is not null, or high, specifically, that is introducing risk into your activities, it is your attempt to leverage the advantage of both in your own interest.

If your activities where exclusively in either high, or null, you would not suffer this risk.
In high sec, the NPC system protects you.
In null sec, the player system you belong to protects you.
It is when you try to exploit the rewards of both, that you introduce an extraordinary risk.

Do you get what I mean?

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Aralyn Cormallen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#72 - 2014-04-23 12:21:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Aralyn Cormallen
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:

But how about some talk about increasing the risk too commensurately?


To be fair


I get your point, really, I do.

...

Do you get what I mean?


I know what you are saying, and my example probably wasn't the best, as you are right, I should suffer extra risk for trying to leverage the benefits of High and Null. That said, the vast majority of my points apply even if you take out the High-sec component.

Its a hard discussion to have, since at the moment, we don't know the hard numbers on people who can "comfortably" use a single station under the coming change, but I can bet it will have the same effect out in Null of having to spread everyone out. And where in High, being moved two jumps out of the trade hub might be "inconvenient", being moved two jumps out in Null is downright hazardous. We wont be seeing the whole of the CFC able to use VFK - I sincerely doubt even the whole of Goonwaffe could use VFK without ratchetting it up to the full 14% cost increase (and I sincerely expect to see VFK moved in to an alt corp and restricted to their use, so it can be used for critical infrastructure construction, not every numptys Rifter construction). VFK can only have the one Jump Bridge, and anyone who can google probably knows which system it leads to - any non-capital transit outside of those systems then has to accept the full amount of caution and attention that my example suggests.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#73 - 2014-04-23 12:52:18 UTC
Lido Seahawk wrote:
Why can't high-sec have some little treasure of its own that makes it most groovy in its own special way?
It should have it's only special treasure, and it does, it has an automated security system. High sec income is way too high for the relatively low level of risk afforded to the players, which means that many people can just grind away without a care in the world. there's no way id just sit alt tabbed in null sec occasionally swinging back to click a few buttons then go back to doing other stuff, yet in high sec I can do just that.

Even if they put in higher risk, you can learn to avoid that risk and just rinse repeat. Whatever system they put in place can be gamed to provide high reward at low risk unless that risk comes from an unpredictable source, such as players. So I think in essence, the only way to provide a specialty to high sec that rewards great income would come at the cost of the high sec part of the equation.

So for that I think reward should be tiered on mechanical safety, broken out across the number and size of the players involved. High security should be the lowest reward for both groups and solo play. Null should have the largest group and capital ship reward, while wormhole space should have the highest solo and small gang reward. Low sec should be the balancing force in the middle with moderate rewards for solo, small gang, large gang and capital play.

I get that a lot of people like high sec, and want to play in high sec, but there has to be a drawback for having that level of safety.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
KnowUsByTheDead
Sunlight...Through The Blight.
#74 - 2014-04-23 13:04:31 UTC
This point is moot.

Until they fix sov so it isn't just structure, F1, structure, F1, structure, F1...etc....you aren't gonna move people out to null.

Alternatively, Teg: Attorney At Law could possibly get you banned if you don't move out to null.

So there's always that.

Big smileBlinkPirate

Once you realize what a joke everything is, being the comedian is the only thing that makes sense.
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
#75 - 2014-04-23 13:17:22 UTC
High-sec income should be far and above anything null-sec can come by but it should depend on imports from null-sec on any and all production materials with some kind of rarity attached, creating a interdependency between the two regions: High-sec needs null-sec resources and null-sec needs high-sec ISK.

Right now everything seems to go that null-sec could stand alone easily and surpass any other security region in every way and that would just lead to a really boring game.

Sovereignty and Population

New Mining Mechanics
KnowUsByTheDead
Sunlight...Through The Blight.
#76 - 2014-04-23 13:19:06 UTC
Abrazzar wrote:
High-sec income should be far and above anything null-sec can come by but it should depend on imports from null-sec on any and all production materials with some kind of rarity attached, creating a interdependency between the two regions: High-sec needs null-sec resources and null-sec needs high-sec ISK.

Right now everything seems to go that null-sec could stand alone easily and surpass any other security region in every way and that would just lead to a really boring game.


Indeed.

Once you realize what a joke everything is, being the comedian is the only thing that makes sense.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#77 - 2014-04-23 13:28:55 UTC
Lido Seahawk wrote:
On the Jester's Trek blog everyone's favorite CSM member said:

"So, YES, null-sec should have better income for EVERYTHING than high-sec. It should be better for EVERYTHING than high-sec."


Even a stopped clock is right twice a day

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Proletariat Tingtango
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#78 - 2014-04-23 13:32:22 UTC
Not EVERYTHING should be better. It should be safer in hi-sec. Safety is a big deal. You know what it's like to stop making money because one, two people are in system? It's hard stuff please feel bad for me.
KnowUsByTheDead
Sunlight...Through The Blight.
#79 - 2014-04-23 13:33:34 UTC
Andski wrote:
Lido Seahawk wrote:
On the Jester's Trek blog everyone's favorite CSM member said:

"So, YES, null-sec should have better income for EVERYTHING than high-sec. It should be better for EVERYTHING than high-sec."


Even a stopped clock is right twice a day


Choked on my coffee, lol.

Once you realize what a joke everything is, being the comedian is the only thing that makes sense.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#80 - 2014-04-23 13:38:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Andski
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
But how about some talk about increasing the risk too commensurately?

Like adjusting mails, removing automatic appearance in local and Sov adjustments.

The existance of the doughnut is quite compelling evidence that Null is infact, too safe.


Structure mails still require you to scout the structure to find out when it comes out of reinforced. During hostilities, towers have to have their stront levels adjusted regularly to ensure that it exits reinforced at a favorable time. The idea that coalitions rake in trillions from moons without even paying attention to them is nonsense spewed by those ignorant of the realities of 0.0 logistics (hi Dinsdale!) Changing local in 0.0 without a replacement intelligence tool renders those who play there deaf and blind, while the game literally broadcasts to the entire galaxy "PEOPLE ACTIVELY RAT/MINE IN THIS SYSTEM. CAMP IT!" - a source of free, zero effort intelligence that those who desire the removal of local conveniently ignore (because adjusting /that/ wouldn't be conducive to their goal of making ratter hunting a game of shooting fish in a barrel)

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar