Making null interact with hi-sec may be by design... and moving stuff around leads to destruction of goods which is a necessary part of EVE.

As high sec carebear, I'd say.... of course null industry should be better than high sec.

I would not mind seeing low sec rocks produce 2x the mins of high and null rocks produce 4x high. I would no mind seeing the cost of high sec production lines increased. I would not mind seeing high sec POS tower sizes limited to small.

The biggest buff null industry is some form of defense against the AFK cloaky. Maybe something like a cloak jammer, or maybe just probes that can scan out a cloaked ship.


If those things were to accompany things I really want, like 25 hours between GT vs 24 hr, so every timezone gets equal treatment...

Heck, I may even consider leaving high sec again. Maybe.

Not hardly. Have you heard of the cov ops cyno, that is not jammed even by a system cyno jammer?

This was bad when I was last in null a year or so ago, and has only gotten worse with recent buffs to black ops jump range and jump portal range. There is no effective defense against an afk cloaky with a cov ops cyno.

What?

Are you suggesting i mine in a rifter? That I attempt to haul the million m3 of minerals that it takes to build one large ship, in a rifter? That I attempt to run a haven in a rifter?

Exactly what is it that you think I'm going to be doing in a rifter that makes null more profitable than high sec?

Again, I don't understand.

The afk cloaky returns from 8 hours at work to find some mining barges in a belt. He gathers his corp in cov ops or black ops ships, lights the cyno, and suddenly 20+ ships surround my mining fleet. In seconds, they blow up everything in sight, and fleet warp to a safe, activating cloaks while in warp. When they land, they open black ops portals back out.


How does having a single rifter hanging out in the belt with me stop this?

But it so much more fun when its secret. Then all the little goonies come out and play..

Good god, how many more frickin NERF HIGH SEC threads do we need. The fat isk rich blobs in null already have the best of everything while their mining/ ratting remains on par risk wise to high sec and ganking.

Face up to the fact you have everything. The real point behind all of these kind of threads is the same. The poor null bears are bored ratting, mining slurping moon goo and want force all high seccers un-willingly into "there territory" so they have something else to do.... "Shoot things" because they are so fck-in lame that they wont go shooting rivals all because they want to protect the fat isk machine.

Null Sec today is far safer than low-sec and that's not what was intended. So all the risk adverse alliances larding it up in null, carry on making it safer and more boring but you can't expect Hi Sec population to be punished for that.

There are even comments saying how Null and Hi should be balanced accordingly. I agree, High Seccers want tech moons (yielding less tech over time than null moons do) and the ability to use and build up to, not exceeding carriers, possibly supers . Eventually both populations get what they want. More risk avoiding production of caps and in time Hi Sec Entities will be more tempted to launch attacks on null for space on epic proportions.

How about that ?

No ?

Well HSFU with Hi Sec nerfage / Null buffing

Sov null inherently can be made safe(r). Effort or not the result is that it becomes safe(r).

NPC null cannot do that, so it's riskier. I have been in both, the risk can't even be vaguely compared.

Except the "exact same tools" such as limiting station access, cyno jammers, jump bridges to let you get ahead of invaders, clone services, repair services, access to market, etc.

Not to mention that any given Caldari highsec system on any given day probably has more people in space than whatever nullsec region you want to look at.

Sure, I recall how secure it was to go to, dock and then undock off the central hub in the 2 NPC null sec regions I have been. It "just" involved having to always bring 20 carriers and supporting fleet and removing the double bubbles people every time.

I also recall how secure it was to fly L4 missions 2 jumps away, there were just 40 neutrals or reds off several warring alliances in local at any given hour of the day.

When I was in sov null sec (once as owner, once as renter) intel chat and a scout were the maximum needed to roam for 5-6 systems, the danger would eventually come from WHs not from the nearby null sec systems.


Keep trying convincing easily impressed randoms who read this forum, it does not work with me.

Null industry has the potential to be as good as, or better, than high sec right now. No changes are needed.

The problem is not with the mechanics. It's with the people who choose to live there. They are just not the type that want to settle in and actually set up an industrial base. They want to shoot stuff.

If they insist on whining that it is somehow easier in high sec then they should move there and stop flooding the forum with tears. For a bunch of elite PVP Gods, they sure spend a lot of time crying over having to make something of themselves in the area of the game that does nothing to hold their hands.

Null is what you make it guys. If you can't make it, then move back to high sec and stop your bellyaching.

Mr Epeen

Low sec comes with as many slots as high sec, as many stations. It even got harvestable moons (some good ones) and high ends in some systems. As Baltec1 said for the similar NPC nullsec players with the usual sniffy remark: "Just because you sucked at securing your NPC space doesn't mean my corp and many others didn't manage it." so basing to his statement, those low sec players have no excuse due to their inability to claim sov.

But guess what? Low sec is still an utter desert industry speaking.

tl;dr don't nerf high sec or see eve die?

No, you're wrong. It is possible to make null competitive with HS. Nothing is stopping you from building the production facilities using POS's. Null has better resources. Null has better everything. What it doesn't have is safe travel with the ability to move large amounts of material relatively risk free. And because nullsec alliances suffer from meglomania and everyone else there is so bored they'd shoot their mother, it's never going to be that kind of place which is aka hisec.

But you COULD gauge out your eye on POS costs, therefore the easy and nearly-free slots in highsec are A-OK.

Checkmate, null zealot.

Who says they aren't?

Because, for any serious manufacturer, costs are irrelevant.

Yes they are but the ability to dock, reprocess, store massive amounts ect... are part of their bonuses. That is why it worries me about upgrading a structure so heavily in the industry side while it being cheap over time and cheap to install.

As an Outpost uses no fuel. But having said that I do feel that having an isk sink equal to the cost per slot of a POS would be a fair exchange.

No. I would be fine with High sec stations charging slightly more.

The objective is to allow Null Outposts and POSs to be the more than the NPC stations.

Outposts cost money, POSs cost money. Both attract risk to that money.

So therefore they should have abilities that are better and cheaper than NPC stations.

Fair enough, it would remain cheaper and easier to produce inn high sec. As there are no bubbles and concord is there to protect you and your assets. This is not about forcing anyone to do anything.

It is about allowing those who risk or go out of their way to have higher faction standings or higher skilling to have more alternatives, while at the same time not destroying the game play of those in high sec, be they full time or casual industrialists.

As at the moment the only choice worth taking is Hi sec NPC stations.

So I see no problem I in your want to remain in hi sec. This is of course your choice.

Well as the objective of this from my perspective is for player structures to be better than NPC ones. So the cost to use a slot would be more than that of a player owned one.

For the costs of the facilities you would need to ask CCP as that is a lore thingy.

But on a case of balancing, I can see the need for making an Outpost good with a slot usage isk sink involved but as to the number of slots.



So an Advanced upgraded Outpost would have 350 slots of each type (Industry Type having 400).

That is a lot of slots
NPC stations have normally 50 manufacturing slots, 10 copy slots. 20 Invention slots. 20 material research slots and 20 time efficiency research slots.

Frankly I thought my position (as you can only have one per system) of 50% of what you are requesting, with 75% as an out side was frankly a bit unbalanced towards outposts given the extra risk involved in an Outpost. but the fact that you will not take less than what is a massive number of slots is frankly a bit naive as you would frankly be lucky to get 50% of what was asked for.

So yeah I do feel that would be unbalanced and having gone over the numbers like this I would be more inclined to say 5-10% of the amount you want would be balanced.

Just wondering did you appear earlier in this thread as a pro-hi sec advocate. Your style of ridiculous comments seems similar.

But to make it easier for you I was referring to the total number of slots in non industry based stations with industry stations naturally having more. As I said earlier in this thread the cost of an out post is not that great when compared to the running costs of a POS

But I can understand your confusion after this comment
"Yet having five high sec systems that out produce all of nullsec combined is perfectly fine. Even with 400 slots high sec would out produce null. What exactly is unbalanced about tippias idea?"

Owk in simple:
7
Null is less safe then empire?
Null has less inhabitants then empire?
Null has less miners then empire?

Answer to all 3 is yes , enlighten me why null should have more industry focus then empire?Industry concentrates on volumes bought/safetyness of building/close to it's resources.

I get it you want null to be far more better because you think of your own pockets like 99% of eve unfortunatly but i see no reason why null should have equal or more industry options then eve.I DO agree it needs more though , but still less then empire.

Better minerals/ratting etc is what null should have that i agree on.

That's your answer ?

There is nothing actually stopping people from doing T1 production in nullsec at levels much higher than they currently do, but there are higher priority things for industrialists to do. Advanced industry, primarily represented by supercap production, but also in the form of regular capital ship production, moon mining, and drug manufacturing.

These are all industry, and they are all better than highsec.

Obviously people aren't satisfied with that, but that doesn't mean that anything is at all out of balance here.

I think null-sec should be given all the industrial facilities they want, and then some.

Fixed.

I'm all for some buffs to 0.0 Industry, but it won't bring any additional industrialists to 0.0.
But you can always make more alts right?

so it would seem :)
don't feel too bad, i have cloaking trained to V.

you think i mine in a hulk, that's cute.

Its ok I am sure he has trillions so can afford to look foolish

As by his logic, some people in Hi-sec have trillions so therefore everyone has trillions

Many of the issues regarding null industry could be eliminated with updating POSs. Really that should be more of a priority then fixing Dominion at this point. Since it could allow corps/alliances in npc null/WH to build up in preparation for sov null. Also I feel POSs are in worse shape then Sov is.

If you want to break it down that far sure.

Though I would like to hear what you would want, since any idea you seem to shoot down as not good enough.

With that ability the whole system would just collapse and we would have exactly what we have now but favouring outpost owners instead of NPC facility users.

In comparison to the expense of POS facilities?

Double the numbers of slots in Null... maybe even buff the slot's production speed, too.... less "red tape", fewer "middle management"... call it what you will, just frikkin' do it.

March Break, best break... ciao.

Are you SERIOUSLY trying to lead anyone to believe that the lack of industrial players/corps in null sec is due to lack of industrial opportunities?

You don't, that's why if you're doing it in nullsec, you're doing supercapitals.

"Should Null industry > High sec industry?"

No of course not. What kind of re..cursive thinker believes that industry in a war zone should be more profitable than industry in a Non-war zone?

Lockhead Martin doesn't, and they have been building stuff for the war machine for quite some time now. They must be morons who don't recognize how Risk vs Reward should work.
Hummer didn't build Hummers in Bosnia, never did, never will till it becomes a peaceful place where employees can commute to work safely because it would be cost prohibitive to provide an armored hummer to each employee just so they could arrive at work alive...and no guarantee even then with land mines and all.

Boeing (bunch of ***** carebears) thinks it would be insane to build an aircraft factory in Afghanistan (null sec). Suppose a regime (SOV) change occurred in the middle of a run of Bombers ( Ok, no one is building dreads or carriers in HS :P ...insert relevant Eve product)...that would be a HUGE loss to a RL (EVE) corporation, even one that size.

There are no tank manufacturers building tanks in war zones...yet think of the shipping costs they would save with all that heavy product...the Retards!!! Oh wait...they sell their products to Military Reps in Safe Land, and the Military hauls their new shineys to the war zone themselves in C5 Galaxies (Jump Freighters) designed especially for that purpose... Just like in EVE.


Someone way way back in this thread mentioned that the Null sec industry whine is based on a false premise.
"Risk should equal Reward" is insane, or everyone would be doing it, and it would not be risky.

One would definitely not want to mention the forts set up on the frontiers by the roman legions either.

sorry I did mix that up/ NULL SEC should have worse logistics & industry likethe wild west for the most part had ( except for some good precious ore refining )

"You people" aren't just asking for enough slots to build ammo, you are also asking for hi-sec industry to be nuked.

Ok, as soon as all the nullsec ore and PvE content is put into highsec. Plus I want to build and fight with Titans in highsec too.

PUNISHED!? Are you in pain?

How about all the crying blue donut children abandon nullsec and leave it for the adults to manage.

posting in null vs high thread...

1st on page 51...


\o/

Build a pos then douche. Your argument is like arguing against starving people dont eat much food anyway so why give them any to begin with.

Without going in to playerbase #s and all that, out of curiosity.. what can NOT be built in nullsec? Don't tell me about availability, we all know slots are taken up. But I'm curious as to what that 1% non efficiency is.

If null is "supposed" to be 99% efficient, what CAN'T be built there?

If it's something inane like a t3 ship you can go to hell btw, because a t3 is not "required" to be self sufficient.

Better prices is not relevant to autonomy though. That's the crux I think.

Are you willing to give up sov null for that though? Meh, probably even null period come to think of it. Because it just sounds like you're wanting the baby without having the labor pains (not to be confrontational but I am calling it as I see it).

I agree. T1 stuff is normally built where we are (i.e. ammo, ships, rigs) but everything else gets imported. Building anything T2 or above becomes a chore in null as the amount of components required for manufacture are a) often not available and b) high in price therefore it becomes a neccassity to import t2 stuff due to cost alone.

Does anybody really expect change?


Sins of a Solar Spymaster #88: Mittani's Maxims GÇô On Management