|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
13532
   |
Posted - 2014.01.11 09:41:00 -
[1] - Quote
Wrecking hi-sec won't fix nullsec.
Hi-sec needs some rebalancing in areas like industry, but the aim of any change to a game should be to make it better not worse.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
13536
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 11:27:00 -
[2] - Quote
TharOkha wrote:Malcanis wrote:Wrecking hi-sec won't fix nullsec.
Hi-sec needs some rebalancing in areas like industry, but the aim of any change to a game should be to make it better not worse. And whats wrong with hisec industry.? i though that nullsec industry is borked and need serious buff..
tl;dr: hi-sec industry takes place in free, invulnerable facilities that are superior in quality of sov stations and come with free CONCORD protection. To give Sov 0.0 industrialists a level playing field, CCP would literally have to pay them to make stuff in 0.0. Hi sec can't have free facilities AND invulnerable facilities AND best access to markets AND best access to materials (it's a lot easier to move the Zyd & Mega to hi-sec to build a ship than it is to move the trit and pyer to 0.0 to build that same ship, AND CONCORD protection AND stations with more slots AND multiple stations AND R&D agents AND you get 24 hours notice before anyone can even tough your research POS AND... and so on.
Thus 0.0 players are forced (to use a popular term) to conduct their production operations in hi-sec.
Essentially hi-sec industry has all the conceivable advantages. There are just far too many "AND"s. Some of those advantages have to be ceded to non-hi-sec areas. (The bad alternative is to simply forbid production of certain classes of items, eg: T2 in hi-sec. But that doesn't make making T2 items in 0.0 any less awful, so it won't fix the problem and it won't even make 0.0 players happy)
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
13541
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 15:07:00 -
[3] - Quote
Kimmi Chan wrote:I remember this discussion from a year ago that essentially started this same way, with the same arguments made, by some of the same people. The same discussion a year ago.There were times it would get derailed. But there were some people that I believe were genuinely interested in seeing nullsec not suck anymore. I took a break shortly after the conclusion of this thread and before I came back several months later I watched the Fanfest 2013 keynote, where I believe it was CCP Seagull or CCP Soundwave mentioned they were working to un**** null industry. It sounds like there is still work to do then?
Very much so. Only the first small baby steps have been taken (relaxing the restrictions on office slots, adding some more build slots, making outpost upgrades slightly less worthless). The core issues remain. It will take a long time, and CCP are deliberately moving slowly on this.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
13541
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 15:08:00 -
[4] - Quote
Blue Binary wrote:On the subject of nerfing highsec production slots. People will just start throwing up production POS's in highsec (or as close to highsec) to meet demand, I know I would. At the moment it's convenient to store all my resources in a station hangar and switch production with relative ease. Logistics is the only real time consuming part. It's efficient as should most economies be in an ideal world.
If you nerf the highsec slots you drastically increase the amount of logistics involved in production...
But still not sufficiently - by your own account - to make it worth producing in 0.0
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
13542
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 16:49:00 -
[5] - Quote
Deunan Tenephais wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Josef Djugashvilis wrote:Nice to see that some one from null-sec has a sense of humour. It's not humor, it's the truth. The significantly greater amount of organization, work, resources, and time we have to put in to make industry work in nullsec entitles us to better than what you can get for nothing in highsec. This is only true if you are counting person per person, due to difference in numbers. Frankly, perhaps part of the problem is high sec industry but it goes beyond that, to make highsec the sole culprit is misleading. Considering the attractiveness in having one's own infrastructures, nullsec industry should have dwarfed the empires' ones years ago, yet it does not.
One might suppose that this would indicate to you a flaw in your analysis about just how attractive nullsec industry is.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
13549
|
Posted - 2014.01.12 09:04:00 -
[6] - Quote
TharOkha wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:TharOkha wrote:EXACTLY. Nullsec industry WILL NEVER BE SO EASY AS IN HISEC as far as hisec will be main trade hub. You can buff nullsec and nerf hisec as much as you want. This will never change. Hisec is industrial superpower. Deal with it. HS has an excess supply of free, perfect, risk free slots. It is quite literally impossible to compete with that. If the result of various industry changes is that Nullsec industry is harder or more risky than HS, but pays better, BINGO, mission accomplished. I agree. And if you read my previous posts carefully, i support the idea that hi sec slots should be significantly more expensive as those in low/null. And that sov outposts should be superior to hisec stations. My reaction is mainly against the complains that hisec industry is much easier in logistic and haul than in null. Which cannot be changed as far as hisec is well supplied EVE trade hub.
I'm not aware of any suggestion that it should be, only that it be taken into account when the balancing calculations are made.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
13555
|
Posted - 2014.01.12 20:24:00 -
[7] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Pinky Hops wrote:you know what would really happen if CCP nerfed highsec? a threadnaught of epic proportions. this monstrosity of a thread is already up to page 26 -- and it's only just asking about the POSSIBILITY. edit: ****, somebody beat me to it a few posts above  Just wait until teircide hits T3s.
And the all the T3s will have the ranged effectiveness of the Tengu, the EHP of the Proteus and the resists of the Legion & Loki!
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
13617
|
Posted - 2014.02.02 19:08:00 -
[8] - Quote
Basil Pupkin wrote:EI Digin wrote:Anslo wrote:The kill mails say otherwise. The amount of people who are suicide ganked per day is so low STOP. Right here. Heimatar alone shows a grand total of more than 100 suicide ganks PER DAY..
Gosh 100 ship losses a day
such slaughter
how do you survive those killing fields?
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
13618
|
Posted - 2014.02.02 19:31:00 -
[9] - Quote
Basil Pupkin wrote:Malcanis wrote:Basil Pupkin wrote:EI Digin wrote:Anslo wrote:The kill mails say otherwise. The amount of people who are suicide ganked per day is so low STOP. Right here. Heimatar alone shows a grand total of more than 100 suicide ganks PER DAY.. Gosh 100 ship losses a day such slaughter how do you survive those killing fields? That is more than a certain constellation up north had in last 2 years. With the same amount of jumps as Rens, I might add.
So the deadliest region in empire has more ship losses than the quietest nullsec constellation you say?
Well then.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
13795
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 22:41:00 -
[10] - Quote
Anyway CCP aren't going to nerf hi-sec so the discussion is moot.
Sorry, I meant to mention this ~130 pages ago but it slipped my mind. I've been busy and all that.
Now those assholes in lowsec, they're going to get a kick in the meat & 2 veg. And not before time, I think we can all agree.
1 Kings 12:11
|
|
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
13798
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 23:11:00 -
[11] - Quote
Kimmi Chan wrote:Malcanis wrote:Anyway CCP aren't going to nerf hi-sec so the discussion is moot.
Sorry, I meant to mention this ~130 pages ago but it slipped my mind. I've been busy and all that.
Now those assholes in lowsec, they're going to get a kick in the meat & 2 veg. And not before time, I think we can all agree. It's still a good discussion so long as people are civil and not just spewing vitriol.
Well I've long ago said that people in hi-sec should be able to have access to high end gameplay, just the same as anywhere else. As soon as we stop thinking about hi-sec as a place to primarily provide safety, and instead make it a place to provide convenience (with safety as a secondary and consequential effect), then we can unshackle it from the bad design decisions of a decade ago.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
13798
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 23:12:00 -
[12] - Quote
Kimmi Chan wrote:Tippia wrote:GǪor some such. For all their kvetching whenever their current activity gets adjusted, high-end PvEers are a surprisingly malleable crowd when it comes to figuring out equally (or better) high-paying income streams.
I wonder if there may be a misconceived generalization among non-highsec players about highsec players in that if some people are making 110m ISK/hr running high sec missions then all people are making 110m ISK/hr running high sec missions.
Much like the popular forum talking point that has all 0.0 players owning a few dozen R64s? 
1 Kings 12:11
|
|
|
| |
|