Originally by: Nyphur

---

Another idea I had was the possibility of taxing NPC kills in a system rather than just those within a corp. It's an idea just to support the NRDS people that can't reap taxes from the people that use their space. Perhaps they could set their hub to collect a 10% tax off NPCers in their system automatically. Maybe even make it an upgrade?

---

Originally by: cok cola

---

give more reasons for bears to come out to 0.0 so i can shoot them.

---

Originally by: CCP Chronotis

---

We want the sites to scale so each site needs a group and has appropriate rewards however we face some issues as the older sites were from simpler times before lots of ship balancing and have stupid NPCs for example which turn group content into solo content in difficulty (ironically the greatest flaw in the lvl 4 missions).

---

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

---

Just to make it clear, time day holding system count towards the strategic upgrades, not the financial ones. You have to take a system, get your guys ratting and then install upgrades.

We are looking at the system upkeep and upgrades, but you can be sure the upgrades themselves will be affordable.

---

Originally by: blog

---

The Costs of Resource Upgrades

Resource upgrades cost a relatively small amount of ISK (we are looking at a range of 50-500 million ISK) to purchase and require a certain existing appropriate activity level.

---

Originally by: CCP Chronotis

---

The system we have is very expandable and easily so from this point on. Adding additional upgrades and content those upgrades might unlock can be done as soon as the content is ready and even attached to existing upgrades.

---

Originally by: Groperson

---

"Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.

[ ] Yes
[ ] No

CHECK ONE"

Serious question, no troll zone.

---

Originally by: Groperson

---

"Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.

[ ] Yes
[ ] No

CHECK ONE"

Serious question, no troll zone.

---

Originally by: cok cola

---

add planetary spawns.

---

Originally by: DaiTengu

---

Also, with the nerf to moon mining income, an alliance isn't going to be able to afford these upgrades. The only reason we can afford POS fuel now, or the logistics to fuel the towers is because of the R64 income. The towers aren't going to go away like you say they are. You still need bridges, jammers, and beacons. You still will have moon mining POSes as long as they can eek out a bit of passive income without too much :effort:. So what you're adding here is enough stuff to effectively double the cost of running space, while cutting the alliance-level income.

---

Originally by: Groperson

---

"Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.

[x] Yes
[x] No

CHECK ONE"

Serious question, no troll zone.

---

Originally by: Pringlescan

---

While that is much better how about addressing the issue that even with the new changes you make more money without any risk running l4 missions then doing ratting/mining in 0.0
More risk means MORE reward, increase all 0.0 rat bounties by 25-50%

---

Originally by: Pringlescan

---

As someone unfortunate enough to buy a black ops bs when they came out I know fully well that will take two years before its finally working as intended.

---

Originally by: Batolemaeus

---

Originally by: CCP Chronotis

---

The system we have is very expandable and easily so from this point on. Adding additional upgrades and content those upgrades might unlock can be done as soon as the content is ready and even attached to existing upgrades.

---

You said the same for just about any new mechanic you introduced but rarely followed up on it, so excuse me if i am highly sceptical.

You said it for exploration in revelation, yet the actual sites that have been worthless since the start haven't seen any update at all. You still haven't used the exploration mechanic to its full potential.

Chances are high that CCP will just focus on something else instead of fixing broken concepts that are already in the game. Cosmos, arcsal/hacking/mining sites and eaf are good examples of cool concepts being abandoned in favour of shelling out new game mechanics.

---

Originally by: CCP Chronotis

---

You pretty much nailed it in general direction though the final implementation might differ. The goal is content which you can upgrade and unlock which is both unique and rewarding enough in income and general enjoyment terms whilst perhaps also opening up new professions and activities.

The system we have is very expandable and easily so from this point on. Adding additional upgrades and content those upgrades might unlock can be done as soon as the content is ready and even attached to existing upgrades.

---

Originally by: CCP Chronotis

---

Originally by: Tomas Russell

---

Edited by: Tomas Russell on 07/11/2009 20:04:33

Originally by: CCP Chronotis

---

Originally by: Nyphur

---

5) Why is 0.0 not more profitable than level 4 missions, even after the upgrades?

---

Always because the jump between 0 and 1 is the largest in cost and effort of each activity beyond that. We are acutely aware of this issue and the related issue of agents in sovereign space. Ideally we will tackle both issues with brand new content specifically designed for social groups and adequately rewarding.

---

Do you realise that this is not even close to being an answer to his question? And that it reads like a cross between the autistic kid that eats glue in grade 3b and a marketing executive?

"Gnargle gnarf blurf, square root of seventy three, incentivize the synergy of your human resource, burble".
No offense meant, if you are actually the autistic kid who eats glue in grade 3b, or a CCP marketing executive. Or both.

---

Plain text answer for those who don't get the reference (sorry).

- The jump between no risk and any risk is the most significant step, the same as no cost and some cost. The difference in mathematical terms is small but economically large. In short, it takes a disproportionate amount of reward to offset a smaller amount of risk or additional effort.

- We are looking at introducing social group content as Soundwave mentions of sufficient reward to compel you either as someone who runs missions in empire to fund their pvp in null sec or as an empire dweller looking to make the leap to join up with others and seek to upgrade your solar systems to unlock these sites. These will act to both minimise the number of signatures as a whole within the solar system and to let you play together than alone.

- yes we are very aware of the 'level four missions' issue in relative activity income potentials to everything else.

---

Originally by: Sidus Sarmiang

---

You damn well better make sure that the content in 0.0 is fun and rewarding immediately after the patch. Don't feed us the "just wait, it'll be fun later! We can expand it!" crap this time, because what you're pulling is very different from your normal half-done implementation. Most of the time you add a new system, and while it's far from perfect, it's forgivable because it's something new. This time you're taking away the sense of economic balance for both the alliance and the individual in 0.0 when it's barely feasible to be there to begin with. You can't expect tens of thousands of your customers to be left hanging while you try to decide when to make good on a promise to fix things that you didn't have to break in the first place.

Remember, when NGE hit, tons of players left very quickly. Promises mean jack to the majority of the people playing your game and if you don't learn that now, you'll learn it very quickly to the detriment of the game.

---

Originally by: Sally Bestonge

---

Originally by: Sidus Sarmiang

---

You damn well better make sure that the content in 0.0 is fun and rewarding immediately after the patch. Don't feed us the "just wait, it'll be fun later! We can expand it!" crap this time, because what you're pulling is very different from your normal half-done implementation. Most of the time you add a new system, and while it's far from perfect, it's forgivable because it's something new. This time you're taking away the sense of economic balance for both the alliance and the individual in 0.0 when it's barely feasible to be there to begin with. You can't expect tens of thousands of your customers to be left hanging while you try to decide when to make good on a promise to fix things that you didn't have to break in the first place.

Remember, when NGE hit, tons of players left very quickly. Promises mean jack to the majority of the people playing your game and if you don't learn that now, you'll learn it very quickly to the detriment of the game.

---

I think it comes down to CCP not wanting my money anymore. My money which pays for my 3 accounts isn't good enough. I'll let it do the talking once my subscriptions expire.

---

Originally by: Calduin

---

Add a upgrade that gives 10%/20%/30%/40%/50% upgrade to rat bounty in that system.

given that lvl 5 anomaly upgrade will = lvl 4 missions this will in combination with the anomaly upgrade make those lvl 5 anomaly better than lvl 4 missions.

now you got a reason to move to 0.0 space.

---