It would turn into the stagnant joke that is null. Look at the 24 hour kill stats on the map, more ships go pop in high sec than low. Only real difference between low 0.0 and high is you get to say that 0.0 is yours

Do you have source on this Baltec1? Tres interesting statment if its true.

To go all StarShip Troopers, I would like to know more.

The biggest fleets of bots i've ever seen were in null. The total lack of so-called bot hunters there points to the disingenous nature of the pinheads who want to hit non-combat ships in hisec.
Mining and belt ratting bots are and will be safe from your terrible ideas. All of them.

Oh sure. I was meaning those comments are relevant to the whole isk faucets are causing inflation arguments people like to spout off about. When the latest comments he made actually show the average player has less isk, not more.

So what ?

Regular hi-sec players can hardly be blamed for those who are cheating CPP and indeed the rest of us.

That most botting happens in hi-sec does not mean that it is hi-sec players doing the botting, for all we know it could be lo-sec and null-sec players botting in hi-sec.

i dont understand why do you want to reduce manufacturng slots in hisec... Its overcrowded here already.

Think about what you are saying:

CCP > Botting is against the rules.
CCP > We know where the botters are.
The botting continues.

^ non-sequitur

That graph also does not say how they are determining percentage. Is it percentage of bot-associated characters? Is it accounts? Is it resources mined? Is it time spent botting? Or is it just the percentage of accounts banned? For all you know, high sec is just where bots are most likely to get reported. We can't really say who is doing the most damage. Can we?

And, why wouldn't we expect that the place where the most people play to also be the place with the most rule violations?

It sounds like there is still work to do then?

Read Baltec's corp/alliance. Then his posting history. Then understand he will keep posting till Null Sec is king and high sec is nothing but newbie systems and all worship Mittani.
Some of the other goons actually have some reasoning behind their arguments, not just blind hate for high sec.

Than may I suggest that whilst running missions in hi-sec, null-sec folk could utilize these empty manufacturing slots.

Except you aren't punished any more. Not with hundreds of slots with bonuses to certain types of construction. You just won't be satisfied till high sec can't produce anything anywhere near the price null can. Nothing to do with entitlement other than yours. You believe you are entitled to the best at everything and everyone else gets the dregs. Someone else has something EQUAL and you scream. Because the costs for the industrialist don't include the outposts.

The usual shitposting of a goon .... afk-farming moongoo for years in ludicrous amounts for example is no "better reward"?

Spare us your usual bullshit of a poor nullbear pubbie.

I really do not see what forcing casual players, especially the ones with real lives who are not glued to the keyboard every night while mummy brings them snacks and dinner, to just quit can achieve.

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.

The internet is full of truth ....

And why are you posting here? Most eve players dont play in nullsec. Most eve players dont care about your sandbox. Most eve players dont give a rats arse what nullsec does. Most eve players dont even read here let alone post.

So why do you pretend YOU speak on their behalf and have nerdrage about THEIR sandbox?

Choices have consequences.

If a miner chooses not to tank their hull or chooses to mine AFK, those choices have consequences.

If a player chooses to live in nullsec, having full knowledge of the challenges that choosing that lifestyle presents, those choices have consequences.

The idea that you are being forced to do anything is no less victimizing than miners losing their **** about gankers. The difference here is that you don't feel that you should have to HTFU?

I point you to the highlighted text in your quote. The defeatism is truly counterproductive.

I am by no means the most knowledgeable person in game. That being said, can it be said that W-Space is as profitable as it is because they have something that no other space has? Sleeper tech?

Is there any resource or technology that Null has that is not being utilized but is instead being carted up to HS, via a logistical nightmare, to be sold for ISK?

How is it that Null is banging their fists on the table and WH denizens just do their thing without a care for what is happening here? Is W-space any less of a challenge?

Hisec ppl will quit.. Puting to sleep 2 out of 3 acc aniway, hisec IS nerfed already.

And yet I've literally seen no one from W-Space weighing in about how unfair and unbalanced this is. Why do you suppose that is?

What evidence? You tell us your fairy tales without any evidence ever. Youre in no position to demand evidence from anyone.

Then i wonder why nullsec renting programs are so popular. Why all those hisec carebears are willing to pay billions per shaitty systems and willing to move to null instead of staying in hisec.

Why nullsec renting programs generating hundreds of billions isk to large coalitions?

This pure facts simply negate your biased claims that nullsec sucks.

Aaand another one .... prove your fairy tales before your demand proves from others.

Remember .... you were the one who said in public that he posts bs on this forum to prevent ccp from patching something to your disadvantage.

Perhaps then I am not looking hard enough. Citation please. Can you please point me to the thread where Bobspace residents toss out upwards of a hundred pages of complaints referencing the impossibility of them to compete with high sec. And when we're discussing "competing" are we talking about relative ISK gained based on risk or are we talking the static number of possible production/research slots?

Based on my limited knowledge, these wormhole guys are making out just fine. Additionally, their relative ISK gain based on their risk is very competitive.

Of course, they also don't have to deal with drone assist, supercapital, subcap blob asshattery. But isn't that part of the reason that NS residents LIVE in NS? To be a part of that "real" Eve?

You made a choice, you get the play the "real" game you wanted to play. Damn those consequences!

What have hisec bots to do with this discussion? Please don't digress from the subject and tell me why is (not just) cfc still in null if nullsec sucks so bad as you say.?

Why all of you simply don't abandon this gold mine called renting program or moon goo and move to hisec so you could do this superior hisec industry?

Your problem is that you are focusing only on what is better in hisec than null, while you clearly overlooks isk opportunities in null. This tactic is called cherry-picking of facts. Some activities are better in hisec, some are better in null. And your greedy attitude wants it all. You want absolutely everything that is better than in null for yourself.

And yet they do or they do enough not to spend all day typing about how the game imbalance is shitting all over them.



Then please, please, please tell me why you do?

What you're saying, if I am not misreading you here, is that it is impossible to live in NS -- COMPARED TO HS. That being the case I still do not understand WHY you choose to live there. Your claim is that no matter what you do in NS it will never EVER be as good as HS. Of course, it won't. It's ******* NS. It's supposed to be more challenging than the HS Carebear Risk Averse Kingdom of CONCORD. You moved to NS for the challenge but now find that you aren't up for it? I don't get it.

Hell come on up to HS - we have indoor plumbing and ****!

You say, "The costs are much higher". What costs?

Production costs? -- Then just do your production in HS.
Logistics costs? -- Do your production where those selling materials and those buying finished goods are - in HS
Capital Investment costs? -- This is a choice.

What you're asking for is a separate shard. You want to be able to completely cut yourself off from Empire and never have to set foot there again?

It's no different that these whackjob highsec wingnuts begging CCP for a perfectly safe HS.

No capsuleer lives in a bubble (figuratively speaking). There is, and always should be, interaction between all players in all levels of security.

High Sec has transport costs to. Nearly all high end minerals & all T2 materials are shipped in, it doesn't matter if the cost is paid via a mark up on the goods or not. The cost is still there and is passed on.

Now, what I'm curious about is what these 'higher costs' Null pays. Other than Capital investments which you can't assign entirely to industry as the capital investment is put in for mainly other reasons.
Do the lines somehow cost more than high sec per hour?
What are these actual costs.

Rather than the mythical 'shipping costs' which only apply to null sec imports but not null sec exports.

Call it inference Ruby. If you make your ISK where you live, what reason is there to ever go to HS? On that third quote, he is forced to build in empire. Forced. Meaning that if he had a choice (which he does) he would not build in empire and would simply make his ISK where he lives - and never have the need to set foot in Empire again.

I bet that you are socialist and leftist in RL, because they lacks basic principles of industry and economy too. And instead of adaptability, they prefer to nerf the successful ones.

Presumably because botting is easier to do in hi-sec, which has nothing what so ever to do with the vast majority of hi-sec players.

Botting is cheating where ever it is done.

Then I guess botters are really dumb.

Why use bots in hi-sec, when as you say, botting is easier in null-sec?

Dear Baltec 1, forgive me for going off topic for a moment, but you might want to read this article.

http://themittani.com/features/not-dead-yet-subcaps-are-fine-htfu

Oh, and all credit to The Ego.com for posting it.

as a challenge. It really isn't. It is more an agreement between us that bots are ******* stupid. In the second paragraph of my reply, in fact, I say as much. Admittedly, with much more subtle language.

Literally no one "has to" or is required to play this game. The fact that they do but while playing the game they don't play the game and instead have the bots play their game for them is just madness.

Absolutely nothing my dear chap, which is why I started off with, "...forgive me for going off topic for a moment..."

Assuming null-sec folk do not think the fact that most botting seems to take place in hi-sec is not a game imbalance or a hi-sec conspiracy against null, I think any conversation about botting is moot.

Botting is wrong.

I'm going to wager, if you did the maths, it'd be cheaper to import from high sec than to bother protecting miners who contribute nothing but mineral sell orders.

so i'm going to skip all of the waffle and focus on what i asked "how much". 200m/hour high sec incursions, semi afk, uninterrupted make me just shy of that *before* lp conversion.

so you're telling me that for all that extra risk, inconvenience, and interrupted play i can earn basically the same?

i hope you now understand why this thread exists.

that's **** isk. to be blunt. if an incursion community "boasted" a 90m/hour income they'd be laughed at.

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

Well that's not really true is it? Seeing as a lot of accounts are just alts. I personally know someone with 11 alt accounts making a total of 12 for just ONE person.

What kind of nerf could possibly be introduced to highsec? POCOs in high was made as a way to get people interested in pvping in highsec for territory... from what I've seen though the same groups of organised pirates or whatever went in and stomped everything and took it all for themselves. The same people are benefitting from these changes as they were before and still there is no incentive for highsec people to group together and do something meaningful.

I suggest everyone read the minutes again - carefully this time - this kind of topic is discussed. By hamstringing highsec players that aren't already involved in pvp you accelerate their rate of decline.

In my mind if you want to nerf highsec: cut the number of highsec systems to 80. That's 20 systems per empire, take all ex-HS systems and make them lowsec. Null is a huge wasteland already so it can just stay stagnant. Noone cares anyway.

Lowsec contains 8% of the game population and accounts for 24% of all kills in the universe. Giving a bit more room and fewer ******** chokepoints should be considered. If you want people to play in the sandbox might I recommend not throwing sand in their eyes before they climb in?

So there are no veldspar roids in null?

So yes. Some buffs are needed to outposts. But thats is only minor problem. Major problem why null industry sucks is on the shoulders of you alliance management, because they sucks in developing sustainable environment for null industry, and supply chains.

Suggesting that miners need to be 'rehabilitated' implies there is something wrong with them. You've already gotten off on the wrong foot. That being said, Aliances should go for it because of the significant savings they would realize. Not just ISK either, but time.

I've always thought it would be very cool to have a new trade hub in Eve, one situated in Null. It's completely possible. People like deals. People need stuff. People love to gets stuff they need at a deal. What if there were a half dozen or even a couple dozen industrialists based in Null, in a system cluster with a relatively straight shot into highsec? What if these industrialists were pumping out quality goods via the NPC stations in the area at prices lower than the otehr trade hubs? This would be a draw to those looking for great deals. What if there were buy orders at these stations paying more than what people could get in highsec? Another draw.

But even better, what if there was an Alliance that was willing to invest the effort to protect the route into Highsec, and offer some protection to the industrialists as they go about their work? This Alliance would make bank on taxes, rent, and if they were smart, special discounts on the good produced by the industrialists. How cool would it be to see a titan protecting certain sections of the route into and out of this new trade hub?!

At a certain point, inertia would take over and the process could be sustained. Pirates would be punished for preying on those travelling to and from this new hub by the people invested in the trade hub's success. More and more highsec people would be tempted to move out to take advantage of the good deals and unique opportunities in Null. There would be wardec's popping all over as this or that group tries to take over the cash cow trade hub.

It's completely possible. Not easy, but possible.

Why not? Are you saying Goon's couldn't make it happen? I though they were the biggest Alliance in Eve? Why couldn't it happen 'right now'?

The players themselves could do a lot. Goons could setup a few stations where you could refine, manufacture, and sell goods.
They would not even have to do it themselves, just get income from the tax at the stations.Make a deal with a neutral industry corp. Gonns supply the facilities, the industry corp supply the ships and manpower.

Again, pure myth.
Importing product includes two sets of JF fuel costs.
Producing locally at an outpost has no more cost than high sec. Unless your alliance is choosing to tax industrialists in which case.... guess what, you are CHOOSING to drive them away.

So producing locally should be cheaper than importing. If it's not you are doing something wrong. Especially on the bulky items such as ships, where you actually produce them even cheaper than high sec, because your production lines are faster so the time cost is less. (Insignificant as it is atm I know)

I know it's a strange thing, but Null Sec has gates too..... You don't 'have' to jump freighter everything, and if you set it up right you would have your industry right next to a refinery. And in Null Sec you can even shoot first so scouts and escorts actually work. While high sec industrialists move around unable to shoot first so are actually vulnerable to ganks.

So, using a JF for any movement is again, a CHOICE.

And importing Low ends is a CHOICE. You have local low ends in belts, you can mine them. The volume of low ends available in Null is vastly more than available in high. You can also over mine high ends and export the excess for profit quite easily now the ore has had it's mineral distributions adjusted, because you aren't out at nearly the ratio you were before.

So, these are simply CHOICES you are making in how you do business. Not costs forced on you.

What, jumping next door gets half your freighters destroyed? If that is happening, I think you have serious spy issues. Or are you saying the goons had their spies in fleet and you were the ones destroying them via actually being half their alliance. I'd believe the later. Convoys all the way from high are totally different to 'convoys' from one system to the neighbour. Heck. If you are only moving a couple of jumps BR's can move massive amounts per hour in almost total safety (Unless you have a million bubbles on the gate, which again, is a CHOICE).

And the manpower could be there if you hadn't built up a reputation for luring miners in then awoxing them for lolz. Plenty of people would love to mine in Null with perma Rorq boosts. And if you procurer fleet mine, you can deal with interceptors roaming easily. Fit a mix of points & webs, and 40 warriors + 10 ECM drones will eat interceptors alive as they are triple webbed & pointed. It's all easily possible, you simply don't want to do it.

I'd imagine it would be even cheaper to import human capital. Import miners and industrialists to nullsec. Show them the wonders of the untamed wilds of New Eden. Care for them as you would any investment. Pay them an honest wage. And stop shooting at them.

The reason this would be difficult is that you and others in Null have spent the past 5 years or more being shitboxes to these people.

You're asking for CCP to step in and modify game mechanics because you simply can't be bothered to be ******* nice to people.

Emergent gameplay does not always have to involve asshattery. It can also involve actually building an Empire and not something that resembles Somalia.

Except most high sec miners don't do that. Only a few vocal ones do, some of which are certainly ganker alts doing it in a deliberate troll to stir an opposite reaction using reverse psychology. This is EVE after all. Metagame included.

As for Baltec1, LMAO. The Miners obviously exist since the minerals exist. And Null mining is more profitable per hour than High Sec mining. If for no other reason than Rorq boosts that would be true. However larger roids also mean less dead time mining when it has hit 0, and auto respawning anoms mean unlimited ore in a single system so less waste time moving across multiple systems. As well as high end ores which also now contain large amounts of low end minerals ensuring they will always be more valuable to mine.
So..... why are they so spread out when anoms respawn again?

So, if you can't get the miners to Null, you really only have yourselves to blame for creating a null sec environment where they don't believe you can/will keep them safe.

P.S. Nullsec does pay the same costs as high sec for actual industry lines. Unless you are taxing them which is a CHOICE.
And Null Miners make more profit....
So..... You do have it better than High already.

And now we know you are delusional.
Lets slap you with some real numbers.
Tippia says 68,000 slots in High sec. Sounds good enough for me.
Assumption. 50% are empty. You all go on about how so many slots are empty if you move away from the trade hubs. So sounds a reasonable ratio.
You also go on about how no significant industry (Exception, Caps/Supers) happens outside of high.

So. 34,000 slots supply New Eden, meaning 34,000 slots for over 500,000 players.

Goons are less than 50,000 players. So less than 10% of EVE. Lets assume for a minute you were 50,000 though to take a massively high end figure. Not sure if that is the alliance or the entire coalition.

34,000*10% = 3,400.
3,400 slots required to supply the Goons.
This is 10-15 Amarr outposts with industrial upgrades. Depending how efficiently you use the slots bonus times. Given goons, I imagine you would manage them pretty well, so lets say 10. (420 maximum potential per outpost, so I'm allowing for about 25% inefficiency here already)
Goons have what, 220 Sov systems between the alliance?
So.... That's about 1 outpost per 20 systems you control. You have 90 outposts already for that matter. So that's 1 Amarr outpost per 9 outposts you ALREADY HAVE.

So..... You are trying to convince me that you don't have a place for the industrialists? The Numbers show you are either lying, or simply haven't tried to provide for them. And are just trying to get High Sec nerfed into the ground so you can make even more isk.

Point -----> You


By getting the people who mine, manufacture and sell the goods to you to come to you.

Here is a little hint: STOP KILLING THOSE WHO WANT TO SELL YOU THE STUFF YOU USE TO KILL OTHERS WITH:

[

Again, trying to do industry in null (and make profit) is like trying to make cars in Antarctica.


Its the close proximity of main trade hubs (both in quantity and variety of goods) what makes hisec industry superior, not the number of manufacturing slots or instillation costs.

baltec1, as i wrote earlier. Outposts needs a buff like 100% refine rate or more "free" manufacturing slots and maybe more expensive hisec installation costs.

But its just solve only a minor problem. Lets hypothesize that serious nerf to hisec slots was implemented. (5m to installation costs for example)

Lets just say that manufacturing of one battleships would cost 95m in nullsec, while 100m in hisec. market price is ,lets just say 105m.

Success.. you've made 10m from single BS while hisec industrialist made 8 battleships with total profit 40m.? Why? because you dont have materials for 8 battleships, you dont have well supplied trade hub out there in nullsec. You can mine this material but as you wrote earlier, you dont have the numbers for such large quantities and hauling it from hisec would be still inefficient (it takes full loaded Jump Freighter of minerals to build just 3-4 battleships)

That-¦s why nobody is making cars in Antarctica. That-¦s why hisec industrialist are willing to pay several hundreds of milion isk for single BPCs while their profit is only 10m per BPC. But they make dozens of it per single day. Because industry it about quantity, not about the level of margin.

Or a 5% buff to Null income if you do it right. Jeez, you do love to whine.

Doesn't that contradict the idea of it being a nerf?

Whelp, this isn't referring to what I thought it was, as such, some reading needs done.

It gets better than that.

The isk from the deployable?

Is in the form of "tags" in your cargo bay as best as I can tell. So even if you babysit it with a noobship they can just blap him and take it anyway.

Sounds like NPC buy orders in faction navy stations.

Can I ask you to stop cherry picking and spinning of the facts? I play since 2007 and L4s, loot, salvage, etc was nerfed several times.

Some time ago, the constant complaints from the pixel hard-men 'persuaded' CCP to nerf level 4 mission loot.

CCP complied by introducing 'metal scraps' into level 4 missions.

The same pixel hard-men then complained that the introduction of metal scraps was, in fact, a nerf against those who attacked mission ships and or got to the mission wrecks first.

I have never been able to take the complaints of those who wish to nerf hi-sec seriously since.

Some Eve Online players are professional whingers ( from hi-sec, lo-sec and null-sec ) it is unlikely CCP will ever be able to satisfy them. If CCP did decide to nerf hi-sec the professional whingers would still not be happy.

SOE nullsec missions pays 50% more LP than those in hisec. And yet you've done them in hisec. Its the question of security, not about nerfing/buffing missions.

.

Yes, next silly arrogant question?

You know and I know that it was effectively a hi-sec nerf as the overwhelming majority of level 4 missions are run in hi-sec.

It was funny to see the tears from the pixel hard-men though.

Just as a note, taking the recently revealed in the German Forum that 72% of all Bounties are from Null and referencing that to the Fanfest Faucets/Sinks graph, tells us that Null is the largest Isk Faucet in the game, with 42% of the total isk Faucets being Null Bounties, and an unknown additional sized faucet from Overseer Effects sold to NPC orders & Insurance from destroyed ships (Like Dreads).

So it's likely that Null accounts for about 50%.

WH Space accounts for a known 20%, with again, a slight unknown additional.

While all Empire space (Both Low & High) account for about 30%.

These figures include incursions, which between all spaces account for a mere 10% of the total Faucet, at about 1/6th the ratio of bounties.

These figures obviously include only isk creation sources and don't account for LP, Loot, Moon Goo, PI or other such goods creation which only results in isk changing hands between players, so aren't a total income guide, but given everything except LP is better in Null than High, makes it pretty obvious Null being poorer in absolute terms is a lie.

Easy one to answer.
Perception of Risk/Reward. In part helped on no small way by the goons constantly scamming/awoxing people and laughing and then continually posting how Null sucks all the time.

For the figures.
http://i.imgur.com/tO8lW9C.png
Fanfest Presentation 2013. Faucets & Sinks.
As you can clearly see, Bounties average 30-31 Trillion a month over the year, while Incursions average 5 trillion. Incursions are more variable, and I'd love to have the 2013-2014 data to see how that variability changes and if it matches the previous years pattern also or not. But we most likely have to wait for Fanfest for that.

For the 72% of bounties (reference previous graph for total income from that) being generated in Null.
Original Dev post. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=312615
English Translation for those of us not multi-lingual. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4118978#post4118978

While these aren't identical time periods as bounties/faucets in general show they were relatively steady for the entire 2012-2013 period we have no reason to believe they have undergone a significant change in scale overall. So it's the best figures we can use to analyse this situation ourselves unless CCP are prepared to release a fresh batch of data.

----Edit
Also, your 'bot data' is flawed. Simply because they have reported bots banned in high sec does not mean the ratter bots all moved to high sec to be mission bots. The Bots banned data doesn't differentiate between type of bots, and there are a great many spam bots/isk seller bots that they regularly ban out of the trade hubs, which will significantly skew that data. Additionally bots banned does not always match bots in operation.

I don't speak german so I went with the translation.

If the 72% is NPC's killed, then an even larger percentage of bounties come from Null, as Null Rats are much more valuable than high sec Rats. Meaning the numbers skew even further in Null being the largest isk faucet. You can't get away from that. Despite more people living in High, Null is still creating the most isk. As well as the most income in other area's also.

The facts are quite clear on that, Null is the best absolute income. But as I said, some of you will just outright lie.

Always funny .... you ask everyone else to prove all that they say ... and if they do, you and people like you ignore it and repeat all their old bs again without end without any proof at their end.

Goon-Shitposting as usual.

Prove your point if its that easy with numbers and facts from official sources or be the shitposter/nullbear-pubbie as usual.

Except you don't. Mission pay out & bonus are included in the graph. Look under that tiny little bit at the top of each bar called 'extra's. That bit that also includes Overseer effects sold to NPC's, and ship insurance, and is still the smallest part of the entire graph. And includes all low & Null sec missions also, not just High Sec.
Despite the player number in null being lower, despite all your claims about isk/hr being lower in null. And we aren't counting any loot in any of this, of which Null leaves high for dead. Or PI.... Despite all that Null is producing several times what high is.

If you are prepared to deal with a couple of assumptions, we can even estimate the value of LP earned via missions. Though this also includes all LP earned in low & null from missions.
Entire rewards average. Lets go with 4 trillion a month, though I think it's closer to 3. But lets start high side.
Lets then say that 50% of that entire category is mission rewards. The other 2 Trillion are overseer effects, ship insurance & any other miscellaneous items that aren't already covered.
Then we will assume all players get the bonus isk for mission rewards. It's pretty rare to fail to get them done in time after all.
And we will finally assume only lvl 4 missions are relevant here, lvl 5's being rarely run, and lvl 1-3's giving huge factors less reward.
And finally I will assume no social skills. Since mission runners are lazy and never train cha skills, noobs :P (Mainly I have to start somewhere)

Since we don't have hard figures, these assumptions are needed to estimate LP earned.
We now have 2 Trillion isk earned via lvl 4 missions using these assumptions.
I'm going to have to make one further assumption, that LP payout is scaled on the same scale as isk payout for the various different missions, as no-one has made a record of average isk & lp rewards only. They all talk about total earnings including bounties.

Maths working off worlds collide = 3.33 Trillion isk value of LP, using average LP value. Taking the most valuable LP would technically inflate this figure, but the reality is if everyone farmed the most valuable LP, it would quickly cease to be the most valuable as everyone would be providing it and the other LP's would be rarer.
So.... Total value earned by Lvl 4 missions a month excluding bounties. Approx 5.33 Trillion.

Incursion LP is even easier.
5 Trillion / 31.5 Million * 7000 LP * 1000isk (Approx average value for Concord LP)
= 1.1 Trillion isk in LP earned in incursions in a month. So. Incursions with LP included come up to 6.1 Trillion value

So..... Simply blathering on about 'Incursion Isk/Hr' doesn't hold a candle, when you consider that you already have the figures right there proving incursions earn less than null bounties do. You just love to take a best case for incursions, and apply that to thousands of high seccers 23/7, claiming they all earn that much. The reality with incursions is that they don't tick that fast permanently. Only the equivalent 4000 HQ sites are run average total a month between all the Incursions. That's 100 a day, or just over 4 an hour average. And that is between every incursion from Null to High, and lumps Vanguards & Assault income in with HQ sites. Given there are normally 2-3 High Sec incursions running and four communities that run HQ sites...... That means you are not getting anywhere near as many sites per hour as you like to claim on average.

Now for the last part. High Sec Bounties. Low + High Sec bounties total a mere 8.4 Trillion. Low Sec ratting is certainly a thing. But lets go high end and call 75% of that earned in High Sec even. 6.3 Trillion.


5.3 + 6.1 + 6.3 = 17.7 Trillion high sec earnings, including LP into the calculation as well. And pretending Null & Low Sec don't get some of those lvl 4 missions & incursion earnings.
21.6 Trillion a month. Pure Null Sec bounty earning.

So yea. Solid maths, with some assumptions yes, but erring on the likely higher side, and only CCP will have better figures if they ever choose to release this much in depth analysis of incomes.
That solidly shows that in absolute terms, Null earns vastly more than High Sec does. Despite less people living there.

Please enlighten us with better data, not just your constant shooting down of any numbers that don't look the way you want them to.

Show your work, as others have here.

Do you have a link to these records? I would like to look them over.

Except incursions are demonstrably not sustainable at your claimed 200/hr level. As shown by incursion income per month. Not to mention that at most 80 pilots per incursion can run HQ's.

Your figures are based on ideal situations in perfect situations that simply don't hold up over the scale of the true player base vs the few 'elite'

You mean the position which Null Sec demonstrably earns more income than high sec as PROVED by CCP's figures?
You can go on about individual isk/hr all you want, yet at the end of the day, Null earns more as an entity despite smaller population.

Bullshit.
Plain and simple, bullshit.

As expected .... nothing delivered and you have proven that youre simply an incompetent nullbear-crybaby and goon-shitposter.

gd at its best.

And please spare us the laughable bullshit to try to falsify the official numbers from ccp with some crap mission-runner or makeup goon-wiki-whatever websites you try to dig up with google.

And you dare to accuse other poster of lying ....

You didnt used anything at all, pretended that you needed to get back home to give us some surprisingly data which you didnt while you still posted all day here.

Another very funny lie, shitposter. We provided links to data from ccp and you provide just one lie after another without any proof except "you know better".

You lied. And you promised to provide data to support your lies which you didnt do and cant, of course.

Poor tries to play the ball back to me. Go back playing with yourself, laughable liar.

Most of the income from bots is nullsec mission bots and low sec courier mission bots.

Mhmmm. See, insults, accusations, but no hard figures for a large number of people doing true averages. Rather than single perfect incomes. Overall income in Null is higher. It's that simple. You can argue the individual isk/hr all you want, but the month by month income breaks down and shows Null has the isk. As it should, and as anyone with a brain knows is true.

I guess I'm doing it wrong.

Null-sec ratting, ha ha risk

The travel time between 'a good chunk of level 4 agents' alone would reduce your isk per hour.

It is less income than w-space and null, and has been nerfed repeatedly.

When they nerfed:

Incursions
Loot tables
meta drops
insurance fraud
bounty payouts
shitpoasting.

Lol, they never nerfed number 6.

That's 5 things off the top of my head. Read the dev blogs for a more inclusive list.

Better toughen up buttercup. Mining ships evolve just like everything else in eve. Maybe somewhere in the eve fiction the story line indicated that the miners were getting blown out of the sky and went to their factions for help. Evolve with the times people. The past is gone. So many "It used to be like this, but now it's like this" threads, followed by faces. Overcome and adapt.

By your own logic null sec has never been nerfed either. Oh, and the claims that hi sec is being buffed expansion after expansion are also baseless, since changes, such as the mining buffs and insurance, affect lo and null sec as well. This standard of yours works both ways.

Can you list what these "nerfs after nerfs" have been that are exclusive to null alone?

Remember: I'm using your own standard here. If a nerf is not exclusive to null then it should not be categorized as a nerf to null.

He will use his usual response when asked to back it up: "I will dig that out when I get home".

Then he will not return to the thread.

Incursions are not hisec exclusive
SOE missions are not hisec exclusive. (in fact nullsec SOE pays 50% more LPs)

If these are the source complaints than I'd argue the goal of any highsec nerf is flawed. If avenues of making isk only result in no one doing them due to increased risks then increasing null population by nerfing highsec should have a similar effect with a similar end result.

Aren't you just asking to nerf your own income?

Well then just give your extra income to a nice charity.

Not much sense to who? It' makes perfect sense. I for one would quit immediately AND Biomass and destroy everything. There would be no coming back...

Neither does nerfing income in High Sec.

Nerf High Sec all you want.

We don't have AFK Cloakers.
We don't have to check local and DScan every 15 secs.
We don't have to dock every time a neutral comes into system.

But you already know that - you live in High Sec.

Honestly man, it really would make more sense to lobby to buff those anoms again rather than nerf high sec. I mean i get it, you have to do all that **** I listed above, you should get more. But how much more would make it worth your time and risk to go back and stay back?

150m/hr like Missions?
200m/hr like Incursions?

You'd still have to deal with the asshats so it really can never be enough can it?

Even aside from this nerf, the behavior of the players hasn't and the concentration of activity hasn't been in favor of null for a long time. Not prior to the truesec anom nerfs, not prior to incursions, and likely not prior to a number of income changes before that. The premise of an income differential that doesn't totally break one or more areas of space leading to your intent of keeping people in null to make isk is just something I don't see working.

And regarding the refusal to buff, that's probably a much easier issue to trace the source of. As with a number of other things those who have found a way to take the mechanic for all it's worth, and a more pure isk injection mechanic than the highsec counterparts at that, have cause CCP to start capping reward potentials to the detriment of others who aren't reaching those peaks.

Do you suppose there was a possible reason why they nerf ONLY null at that time and left high sec and lo sec alone? Surely they didn't do it just to be spiteful. Surely they didn't have a high level executive meeting where the tone was a simple, **** Null Sec!" I really have to wonder why they would have taken such an action.

Highsec had alternatives when it came to PvE income in that situation. In a case of a blanket nerf to all income streams that wouldn't be the case. How that would end up we can only speculate since it has never happened. Also if the suspicions are true that highsec is really not a place where people live but rather a biproduct of alts and easy isk then we'd likely see some of those accounts reduced for lack of use IF the nerf worked as intended.

And by latest plan I assume you are referring to the ESS.

I think you and I can both agree that the ESS is stupid and if it's going to be deployable anywhere it should be deployable everywhere. But we'll leave that discussion on the thread regarding that abomination.

So in the time since the Forsaken Nerf they've had time to evaluate the results of their intervention, the nerf, and have come to the conclusion that you guys still suck and aren't deserving of pre-nerf bounties? I mean they've had time to see the big picture and to perhaps, in hindsight, re-evaluate that nerf and have done what to remedy the "trouble" that null sec is in?

You will always have those posts, but, as stated before, none of them represent the holistic nerf of highsec on a magnitude that would result in the positives that people who want such a nerf claim it would result in.

That said, I don't think we've seen the sub data to see if there was any change in subs, however minor it may be, that may have correlated with those changes.

Thanks for sticking with us Baltec. It looks like a lot of us are ganging up on you and I do appreciate you hanging in there with us. Seriously.

Null industry has been broken forever man. You're not lying. They did implement some improvements though and are there not more on the way?

But there again you run into the issue of the AFK Cloaky *******, the constant DScan local checking, docking when Neut = TRUE.

I think your best course of action is to write up a serious proposal for how to fix Null Industry, work it out with your fellow Null Industrialists. really consider what your vision is and how best to implement it. Leave out any language involving nerfs to other regions as honestly, I think that is unproductive and will only look like brow-beating. Put it in Features and Ideas, link to it in your sig. Hell send me an EveMail about it and I'll put it in my damn signature.

I really enjoy this game brother. And I'm not feeding you a line when I say that I want you to enjoy it too. But we can both make it better without turning it into an Us v. Them thing right?

The point is that despite all the complaints about 'High Sec earns more' Null Faucets alone beat all other related forms of High Sec income combined. Without considering the other forms of Null Sec income that already exist at all. Meaning that there is more isk to be made in Null Sec.

If there were a problem, CCP would resolve it yes?

Ive seen mission agents in Null

So, like, wtf?

1) No, the Nullgimps make that hard and refuse to even consider a deal

2) No, and the Nullgimps make it hard to go and look anyway. But I would imagine the LP rewards from agents in NPC Null are superior to the non-existant LP rewards from the non-existant agents in Sov Null.

However, the position that Highsec has it better than Null because of the existance of LP is demonstratably false.

Yup I believe I said that

So why not just pop into NPC Null for your LP?

Neither does nerfing HS...

My house is ******.

Your house should be ****** too.

Because that philosophy has always improved the quality of life for all parties involved.

Why is it that if it sucks for you it's "imbalance"?

And this is exactly the double standard I speak of. Let's take this one step at a time. First, list the nerfs you consider to be exclusive to null. And keep in mind I'm using your own definition of "nerf". For example, by your own standards, a nerf to the Forsaken sites is not a nerf to null because these sites exist outside of null.

If I were a betting man, I'd bet the primary reason most people don't head to null is because of the ****** politics and asshattery that is perceived to go on there, whether true or not. I for one, don't want to surrender my autonomy and my fun/play time to someone else.
You want more people in null? What have you done to change that perception? What has your alliance done to change that perception, besides admitting that its goal is to ruin everyone else's game ?

To have fun. Understand sir that ISK/hr is not how I measure success.

Maybe thats the reason why are null sec SOE mission hubs sooooo much populated compared to those in hisec right? Not to mention that nullsec SOE pays 50% more LPs than in hisec.

Yeah, I'm also for fixing bugs, especially those that affect me the greatest. It doesn't mean I'm promoting an exodus into null.

baltec1, this nerf did not just affect your null sec blaster boat. Anyone and everyone running these sites were affected, irregardless on where they spawned. You know this.

The tech nerf was actually a fix. Tech is not even an R64! Come on, you know this :).

Yet it still affected them. It may have affected your gameplay more significantly. But it still is a nerf to everyone running these sites.

Or, would you say that the nerf to siege missiles a few years ago was a nerf to mission runners because it most significantly affected mission runners?

You can't have it both ways :).

You're changing the subject. You claimed the tech nerf was a nerf to null. Is this still your position?

Not... even... a... little... bit...

But it also won't make Null Sec any more profitable.

And explain to me again the logic of how making something else suck more makes another place suck less.

Baltec's Theory of Relativity.

Null sec must suck less than High Sec - for everything.

Anything less than that still leaves Null wanting.

You do know that people in Null are not the only people playing this game yea?

I'm not sayin' anything, I'm just sayin'. You know what I'm sayin'?

Will they gank miners? - we have people that do that already.

Will they bait mission runners and shoot at MTU's waiting for drones to aggress? - we have people that do that already.

Will they grief-dec Indy corps? - we have people that do that already.

Will they blow the crap out of freighters on the Jita undock? - we have people that do that already.

So if you all do come up - please do something new and original. We already have people doing all of this other crap.

This thread reminds me somewhat of people from Somali under the warlords saying the US and Europe need more crime and street gangs as that is the only way Africa will ever overcome its problem and feed the starving masses.

No amount of nerfing high sec changes the dynamic of dicking around with dipshits. If anything it just puts more dipshits in Null and for those of use not interested in ISK/hr or dicking around with dipshits it makes Null no more desirable.

Baltec - It's not about the ISK. You said it yourself.



You want to make null more desirable FOR YOU. Not for anyone else - only for YOU.

No you wont. You will stay and do as you have always done.

I am as confused as you are.....

FYP. Being locked out of a single corp's stations is not enough of an inconvenience, if you compare it to the number of potential targets you get.

If Baltec is not asking people in High Sec to come to Null Sec then who is he asking to come to Null Sec?

Baltec tears not the best tears but still fun to read.

Halp!

I am a peasant and this other peasant I know makes slightly more money doing almost the same thing but he just lives somewhere else!!!

PLZ FIX!!!!11one

Why deal with bullshit in Null sec when you can play in high sec without that bullshit regardless of how much ISK you make?

Of course, if you are trying to argue that high sec bounties are too high an isk faucet and should be nerfed....

Numerous posters have already shown you CCP data showing that it is already higher in null than HS.

Hahahahahaha.

This is so untrue it's actually funny.

There's plenty of ways to make income in null, and the highest earning ones do not directly involve any ratting.

How about building Titans.

What, you can't do that? Too spacepoor? Too low on the food chain? Not enough skillpoints?

Too bad.

This argument again? If you are only ratting in null for your source of income and comparing that to hi-sec then you are doing it wrong.

The same people keep beating this same dead horse. You cannot take one method of income for an entire region be it null/low/hi-sec and say thatGÇÖs proof you can make more isk.

The income potential for null is the greatest of all. Right now the numbers CCP have seem to support this or they would not be nerfing income there. They may nerf hi-sec as well eventually.

You squall babies need to HTFU or pack your sheet up and leave my game.

"The only way I know how to make income is to shoot NPC-controlled red squares.

Why am I space poor?"

HTFU indeed.

In the middle ages, most people thought the world was flat. It did not make them right.

Except the numbers don't say that.
You have pulled mythical best case scenario's for high sec income, and are attempting to claim that these cases are sustainable, when they blatantly aren't.
While at the same time refusing any but the worst case null sec scenario's as valid data.

In short you are totally biasing your data set. So of course you are drawing the wrong conclusions from it.

Regardless, Null Sec income is about to get a potential boost, so any further arguments need to wait to see how it plays out in the actual social meta as to how much of a boost it works out to be. (Since even if a roaming null sec gang is stealing isk regularly, that isk is still being earned by someone in null sec)

Nonesense. Apart from 10/10's all sigs can be run in a low skilled battleships. I could probably run 6-8 of all combat sigs in a thorax with t1 rails.

Sigs are dependable. AFAIK all sigs respawn instantly and are therefore infinite in supply. If there are a total of 10,000 sigs, then at any one time there remain 10,000 sigs. You just have to find them.

As for the OP,

If CCP really nerfed highsec I'm sure another soon to be released space game would take the subs that quit and EVE would experience a very sudden death if enough bears left.

Hardly the games fault you don't fight for your regions, but instead share and rent them out. EvE is a game about taking, not sharing. You're looking for Hello Kitty Online.

So, lets work out a way to increase the supported number of people that won't allow the current number of people to quadruple their income just by cherry picking and keep everyone else out still.
Multiple objective sigs might be a great start, where once you complete one objective the other objectives will despawn soon so you benefit from several people in the same sig?
Also giving more resistance to small roaming gangs since you are no longer solo also.

You cannot make 22 billion in high sec in two months reliably. You maybe could scamming or something but even incursions will not give you that much unless you're poopsocking.


In null you can make that reliably playing a few hours a day. If you're clearing null belts as well you could make up to 10's of billions or more just on the one rare officer.

You are either unlucky, have terrible methodology or hardly ever actually belt rat.
Because that is way below the average null friends get.

So anything my friends do is only an anecdote.... But anything Baltec experiences is automatically the true reality....
Well done making my actual point. You don't have hard statistics, you only have your own personal anecdotes about null income.

Which doesn't match up with the Gross statistics at all. So obviously something very different from what you claim is actually going on.

I did that 30 pages ago La Nariz. I posted data sources, maths breakdowns and end results.

Except it's not useless, because tied together with the other information from CCP which I linked in that thread, we can do a breakdown by area on the largest faucet of bounties, and if we use your translation of 'ships' that actually means Null earns even more isk than I calculated since Null rats are worth MORE than high sec Rats. So 72% of all bounties in Null is the Low Ball figure.
And LP can be calculated using derived figures, which I did also.

All perfectly good maths, though I can understand if it is over some peoples heads as it's University level concepts okf accurate assumptions and derived formula's, though the maths itself isn't that complex.

Other than the fact that your data set is anecdotal, based on best case scenario's in high, ignores or devalues loot in Null, builds in interruptions by reds in null to your base data, and that LP can & was calculated and still didn't match Null pure Isk income on average values of LP.

If you assume that all LP that was earned on missions was worth SOE levels then High has a slightly higher gross income than Null.

Of course, since there is about a 4 to 1 pop ratio, I can't find the figures atm, but no-one has seemed to argue that something like 80% of people live in high, if the average player income was the same in both Null & High, then High's gross income would be four times higher. When a matching Gross actually means the average monthly income of a Null player (Who earns his money through pure ratting or anoms, and we are ignoring all loot including all that faction loot like Pith A etc) is four times the average monthly income of a High Sec Mission Runner/Incursion Runner/Sig hunter. (Again ignoring loot which we all know is fairly insignificant in high compared to Null).

So yea... other than that 'small' flaw in your data Baltec, that totally destroys your entire argument.

I didn't do my maths deliberately trying to show high sec earned less, I did it to see how it came out. If it came out that High Sec was earning vast amounts more, I'd have said so, with the maths, and would be siding with you on the average income topic. And you would be praising my name and citing my maths to anyone who argued as a perfect example of proof. Because you just want people to agree with you. It's sad, really is sad that you are that desperate that anything that disagrees gets rubbished on. Some of the others at least look at the arguments and consider their aspects.

Those mission guides are based on perfect best case scenario's as well as perfect mission chaining of ideal missions. And not having to travel several jumps for the mission either. The incursions are again based on ideal cases.

There isn't enough isk earned in ALL OF EVE for your claimed sustainable incursion income even if just a single HQ fleet was the only one running. Let alone the five HQ communities I am aware of that all compete. Plus all the VG communities.

Individual income is only relevant in how it ties into the gross income. If the average null character is earning four times as much as the average high sec character, this says despite your claimed figures, EVE does not work the way you think. And that is what the Gross income figures say.

Yet if the maths agreed with you, it would be praised as a perfect example & proof baltec. Go peddle your rubbish somewhere else and let the goons who actually accept logic take part.

360 / 90 = 4

So it's 4 anoms a day then?

And on top of that 360 million ISK/day, as of Tuesday, you could also get between 54,000 and 72,000 LP/day.



Source

360 million ISK per day / 90 million ISK per anom = 4 anoms per day..

Of course, you're right. My apologies.

So running anoms. 4 hrs a day gets you 22 billion ISK in 2 months.

And between 3.3 and 4.4 million Empire Navy LP with the new deployable.

My standing with SOE is 10.00. Not overly concerned about it but I guess I'll defer to Jenn on how often I can decline. Can i go by the 4 hour clock or another clock?

Well what a coincidence. It may take *years* before you see the numbers they are claiming.

How convenient.

That's good. Keep invoking Incarna every time CCP does something you don't like.

We'll have numbers from HS this weekend.

What you're listing is income after spending billions of isk and MANY months of skill queu. Your average high sec dweller makes nowhere near that much. Your optimal situations with bright shiny ships and extremely well skilled characters are extremely limited. Even more so then the earlier sites posted by the goon making billions in a day.

What goon is making billions in a day?

Fishblades said in another thread that he made 22b in two months - or -366m per day.

Or are you referring to something else about running sites in Null for "billions in a day"?

You're right, I should have said 180 mil .

Troll.

And I see you ignored the part where you stated 180 mil is easily doable.

Except as has been pointed out & proven, that number is not a sustainable figure for incursion runners. That is a best case figure totally ignoring any wait time for fleet to form & any wait time for you to get in fleet.
So..... Yet again, you are taking the best case figures for high sec, while ignoring the 500/hr Null figures which are the best case scenario's. Since people have achieved that kind of ratio obviously it can be taken as a correct figure using the argument being applied to high sec where you want to take the best case achieved by any single person on any mission and apply that as a blanket 'everyone will get these times'. Without even knowing their true fit or if they used alts/OGB's or anything like that.

Passive income is better than active income. A single Titan is worth upwards of 30b+ in profits, and only takes 40 days to produce.

HTFU

If it's easily achievable as you say, why wouldn't I be able to use your own figure to measure results against? Is 180 not sustainable?

By the way, your "norm" of 100 - 120 is still way inflated. I'll run some numbers this week to see how actual figures fare against these numbers.

I see. So if I meet your number then all is good. If I don't, it's because I'm biased. Since we have already predetermined the outcome, no need to try.

considering highsec was just nerfed relative to nullsec, we can safely conclude this thread is a giant troll

nothing will ever satisfy them

and it's literally the same two people for 90 pages.

THE SAME TWO PEOPLE!!!

baltec and kaarous. hahahahahhahha

Drone sites in nullsec will drop SoE ship tokens in the next patch.

Considering the vast majority of SoE LP is produced in highsec, its a net buff for nullsec and a net nerf for highsec.

CCP wants these ships to be much cheaper within the market.

I don't think you do have the numbers. You say you do. But after 90 pages there is nothing to show for other than saying that I don't have the numbers. And the "we" part is actually rather small, as far as I can tell. Yes it is true that you, Jenn, Kaarous, La Nariz, Tippia, et al have been calling for nerfs to hi sec for quite some time now. But I'm not so sure that constitutes a large "we".

The problem with you argument is that you throw numbers such as "120/hr" or "180mil/hr", eye browses are raised, questions are asked, but no data is ever produced. Instead we're left to testing the validity of these numbers. And if these numbers aren't produced, then the data is wrong or the tester is incompetent or biased. In essence, we're left with claims that become un-provable. And we are forced to accept this as data itself. This isn't how it's supposed to be.

Let's forget that you said 180mil/hr is easily achievable with SEO. Let's instead work with 100 - 120 mil. You say that's the norm. Can you show right here right now the data supporting that 100 - 120 is indeed the norm? Can you show your missioning numbers? No more bullshit. No more "we have the numbers". Do you ACTUALLY HAVE the numbers to prove the claim that the norm is 100 - 120 million per hour?

No, drone sites -- most of which spawn in the dronelands. But they still randomly spawn anywhere in null.

And even if it was "only" the dronelands, that's still a buff to nullsec.

You might as well say that highsec SoE missions aren't a "highsec boost" because you can only run them in "certain parts of highsec"

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4170495#post4170495

Thank you come again.


EDIT : I'm sure he's in hot water now for letting the truth out. It's quite clear that goons in particular have been on a campaign to nerf highsec. Part of that campaign is the propaganda war which involves understating nullsec income as much as possible while wildly overstating highsec income.

EDIT 2 : In before grr goons pubbie and all the childish trolls your type engages in. I have nothing against the goons as I find their activities fairly hilarious. This charade is old and moldy though.

It's also been pointed out hundreds of times that only a select few can pull your mythical +110m isk an hour in level 4s or 180m isk an hour in incursions.