I can't and won't even try to refute economic theory. However only a small percentage of players, likely very small, even care about macro-economics, most are not much more interested in economics other than not taking a loss while being engaged and entertained. At it's foundation Eve is a game, a very diverse, feature rich, quasi simulation of a hypothetical future. The physics engine isn't even remotely close to known laws or theorized possibilities. The simplification is required to make it an enjoyable game. Precision in the simulation of various aspects would make Eve frustrating to the point of death by account attrition. The use of real world parallels only work in aspects to set the game universe in easily understandable framework, otherwise it would be far too alien for the general public. Eve makes you think and diverts a person's attention from issues that daily stress.

The simple fact is player's shouldn't and don't need to micromanage everything, so if a player runs their jobs at a POS, Station, Outpost or by some weird alignment of space time the laundry service of their ship the cost in material and time is already understood and accepted. If a single player corp has the the individual go offline for that annoying experience called the real world, they have their jobs set, POS fueled for a reasonable duration and the corp gets a war-declaration and subsequent burning of the POS to a cinder, the associated loss of structures, product, and materials pale in comparison to the emotional impact of a player who had spent significant time and isk to acquire blueprints especially hard to get originals or faction copies.

Playing Eve is not more important than real life concerns, a job, or relationships. Anyone who would think that really needs to seek some mental health help (I'm not being specific to any one person). Additionally in a game, perception is reality, no matter unfounded it may seem.

Right now, all those losses you note are still risks people take when they put up POS, start doing S&I stuff and then get decced. Even if the BPO is locked down. People still do that stuff though. Or is it different when you lock down a BPO and work remotely?

Yes.



I really am amazed at how fearful some HS industry types are. Its amazing you even undock. Seriously what is the risk of having the BPO in the POS? A war dec? You have 24 hours to get out there and get it safe.

Yeah, you could be ganked doing that, but geez, undock a few alts and it isn't like somebody is going to bubble the station. A couple of insta docking book marks on the station and you should be fine. Play smarter, not like a wuss.



I'm pretty sure you can build a freighter or even a JF in a station at the moment. You really are trying to get your panites in a knot, but some research on what you can and can't do in station might be a good idea. Unless the proposed changes that ships like a freighter must be built in an x-large ship assembly array is part of the changes you are getting worked up about not much.

About that play smarter part, sure you can cancel the job and get your bpo back, If its being researched and you get your BPO out you likely loose a lot of research time. Guess than can be a big deal or not. If its a manufacture job then you loose all of your materials and the build times of the components. Now we are talking some serous isk for most any toon in the game, got any idea how many successful sells you need to make to get back the material loss of one orca job ? Not sure who is wearing the "panites" so I will not even get into the "wuss" aspects of high sec so called PvP corps placing a wardec on a bunch of miners or manufactures to pop a POS.

Sure but better than losing the manufacturing materials AND the BPO.

Your bigger problem will be if NS alliances decide to dec you/industry guys to make your lives harder and slow you down so that they can capture a larger share of the market.

HS war dec corps are mostly...meh...

Quote management needs an overhaul

Thank you Flash for pointing out the existing risk, I glossd over that part and you probably made the point better than I could, definitely in context of my quoted post removed from the quote chain.

In regards to commentary made by Kun'ii

There has been an increase of very capable PvP mercenary High-sec corps since the POCO in high was introduced. Their interest in taking out space based assets would shift from the undefended POCO to more actively engaging an armed POS. The operational premise of such groups is the pursuit of war on a contractual basis to either destroy assets or hamper productivity. That is a much more present, viable, and likely threat. That minority which is growing in numbers is a threat greater than the rest of the majority of high-sec war to be annoying groups combined, and with reasonable risk-assessment more than bulk of null-sec corps and alliances who could only use a subset of their member base and change from accustomed strategies.

The groups that practice the art of war seriously in high-sec have done so in the confines of a restricted system forcing greater proficiency to compensate for less flexibility. Dismissing them lightly is to be either under informed or foolish.

Taking out a POCO vs. a HS dickstar are two very different things.

Even with a full fleet taking down a dickstar is going to be tedious work. And since hitting a HS research POS will produce a fight with probability 0, I doubt you have much to worry about beyond your hypotheticals.

I've never even considered trying to anchor a male exotic dancer let alone male known for their work in the sex industry in space..

Levity aside for deliberate error in term meant to insult high-sec POS operators. Such comments lend one to believe that arguments previously made whether or not based on valid premises are originated from prejudice, contempt and/or ignorance. Market speculation and threat assessment are both based on hypothetical scenarios and projections.

As much as I enjoy the debate, it is apparent that it will degenerate further serving only to further under cut the validity of your arguments and force me to convey ideas in a public forum to degree of precision that is more suited to a technical paper or legal brief. So I concede to the fact I can no longer offer a debate with you within the limits of what I find tolerable in perception of arrogance, elitism, and pretension, in my posts. Although no one has voiced that opinion yet many may already have it and further posts at this degree verbal complexity would add more and reinforce such misunderstanding.

Anyway hopefully we as community get some feedback from Devs soon, there is very little left to debate constructively. With luck I can go back to more casual toned posts that are easier to understand.

Another update.
Hyasyoda mobile labs:

Time multiplier for invention: 0.4 (was 0.5)

[/list]

Kerblammo!

This time multiplier is equivalent to a Tier 3 Caldari Outpost upgrade. That's an additional 40b we don't have to spend while upgrading our space, so thanks for that.

Arrrrgg

DELETE ALL THE OUTPOSTS!

More seriously: will balance time on Hyasoyda lab for that not to happen. Probably tune it down to 0.43 or leave it at 0.45.

I never understood the reasoning behind all this in the first. in Real Life assembly arrays don't store materials or finished products, they get them from storage and put them there.

Personally I think you should make hanger arrays massive and remove storage from all the other facilities, that way things can be stored and managed from one spot...

Darn -- I was seriously thanking you for reducing our outpost upgrade costs :V

But yeah, that is a good idea.

Another update.

Assembly Arrays:

• Material reduction from all Assembly Arrays has been reduced from 5% to 2%.
• Advanced Assembly arrays material waste has been removed. They used to have 10% material waste, they now have 2% material reduction like the regular Assembly Arrays.
• We are considering increasing cargohold on Assembly Arrays, more updates as we get them.


Laboratories:

More details on what's happening to them since slots are going away.

Mobile labs:

• Time multiplier for Research ME: 0.7 (was 0.75)
• Time multiplier for Research TE: 0.7 (was 0.75)
• Time multiplier for copying: 0.7 (was 0.75)
• Time multiplier for invention: 0.45 (was 0.5)

Advanced Mobile labs:

• Time multiplier for Research ME: 0.75 (was 0.75)
• Time multiplier for copying: 0.6 (was 0.75)
• Time multiplier for invention: 0.5 (was 0.5)

Hyasyoda mobile labs:

• Time multiplier for Research ME: 0.65 (was 0.75)
• Time multiplier for Research TE: 0.65 (was 0.75)
• Time multiplier for invention: 0.45 (was 0.5)

I checked the viability of Starbases copy lines versus Gallente Outposts, but completely forgot about Invention versus Caldari Outposts.

Outposts have to have a small advantage next to the cost, which was a good point, even if unintentional


Also people, listing use cases of which Starbase structures have too small cargoholds next to everyday practical use will help a lot in the balancing, so please keep that coming.

EDIT: fixed invention time multiplier on Hyasodiaaarrwhatever mobile laboratory to 0.45 in the previous post.

So Amarr stations get 5% reduction in materials, but POS gets 2% reduction, or do they stack??

Just doing some quick math:

Say Abaddon materials costs 100mil. In a station say install cost is 10mil. I sell for 120mil for 10 mil profit.

Produced in a starbase I save 2% of the material = 98mil cost. Are we saying install costs are still 10mil? Or less?

Let's say that it's 0 (which it isn't). I sell for 120mil for 17mil profit.

It costs 400mil~ to run a large POS. At this reduction I need to sell 20 Abaddons in order to break even. That's 2bil of stock I have to shift before I can even think about making a profit (and the install cost isn't even right, so it's more in reality).

Firstly, are my calculations correct in theory? Secondly, do we think that 2% reduction for manufacturing at a POS is worth it? If the above is correct I'm thinking no.

They don't stack; the 5% reduction in Amarr outposts only applies to jobs started in the outpost. There's a dev post confirming this but I'm too lazy to find it; peruse the [DEV POSTS] button on the top of the forum page to find it if you don't believe me.

I typed that about 3 minutes before I read that on the other post :(

Given that a Large Ship Assembly Array takes 300k grid, and an Amarr Control Tower Small has 1250k grid, I feel like using a large pos for a single LSAA is pretty wasteful.