After reading the Dev Blog, just considering what will this actually mean, and I am thinking perhaps this is partly to try and make high sec manufacturing extremely uneconomical. It all depends on what CCP will set for the cost and how much it increases based upon the number of people wanting to use the station. Any chance you can give us the formula CCP as right now the repercussion are a little hazy?

So, is this now going to make high sec manufacturing now not so desirable? After all, this could be a big buff to low sec if all industrialists will have to relocate out there to get good a decent profit margin.

Also - "Allow Starbases to be anchored anywhere in high-security space and without standing requirements"

This is going to be interesting.

I'm sure it's not that simple.

And any arbitrary "force people into someone's gate camp" changes are going to be met with unsubs.

Nullsec has been very due for a boost in production capability for a long time.

Also - "Allow Starbases to be anchored anywhere in high-security space and without standing requirements"

oh my GERD

space city, here i come!!! \o/

After reading the Dev Blog, just considering what will this actually mean, and I am thinking perhaps this is partly to try and make high sec manufacturing extremely uneconomical. It all depends on what CCP will set for the cost and how much it increases based upon the number of people wanting to use the station. Any chance you can give us the formula CCP as right now the repercussion are a little hazy?

So, is this now going to make high sec manufacturing now not so desirable? After all, this could be a big buff to low sec if all industrialists will have to relocate out there to get good a decent profit margin.

Also - "Allow Starbases to be anchored anywhere in high-security space and without standing requirements"

This is going to be interesting.

After reading the Dev Blog, just considering what will this actually mean, and I am thinking perhaps this is partly to try and make high sec manufacturing extremely uneconomical. It all depends on what CCP will set for the cost and how much it increases based upon the number of people wanting to use the station. Any chance you can give us the formula CCP as right now the repercussion are a little hazy?

So, is this now going to make high sec manufacturing now not so desirable? After all, this could be a big buff to low sec if all industrialists will have to relocate out there to get good a decent profit margin.

Also - "Allow Starbases to be anchored anywhere in high-security space and without standing requirements"

This is going to be interesting.

I'll be watching; if they nerf high sec too much I will have no choice but to quietly slip away, saving myself a subscription fee.

No, it will make it a lot more economical since you have more options available to you.

Yes, if you refuse to relocate away from one of the industrial hubs near a trade hubs, you'll soon price yourself out of the market. That's kind of the point: to give you a reason to relocate away from those hubs.

[
just means you won't need to grind standings to X amount anymore
doesn't mean there will be an overnight POS explosion

but there may well be more explosions

and it's 'almost' anywhere

Given that current players who manufacture around market hubs will relocate further away more evenly spreading the distribution of manufacturing across high sec, I am wondering whether this will mean the profit margins are going to be now finally higher in low sec, and if so, then by how much.

Guess we need to wait to see the formula for this though.

Given how many inactive POS there are out there right now, ie. "anchored" with or without structures and not burning fuel, any sudden rush to throw up a POS will still be faced with the same COST issues of actually running it.

Either way, things will change all over again when CCP finally has no choice but to completely revamp POS's due to the prehistoric code involved.

Fun times.

Come on CCP. I hope you really aint thinking of making hi sec manufacturing less efficient. It makes no sense.

OK heres perspective.
I'm scottish but ill use this exapmple. No offence meant to people in my examples. I know this eve crowd just love to jump on someone.

High sec USA
Low sec Middle East
Null Sec Somalia and the Africas

If I'm making stuff to sell in USA I'd make it in the USA where its meant to be safer for production.
You think I'll fly from the states make stuff in the Middle East where its far less civilised then fly back to the USA fighting off gate camps and pirates to sell it.

Come on CCP. I hope you really aint thinking of making hi sec manufacturing less efficient. It makes no sense.

OK heres perspective.
I'm scottish but ill use this exapmple. No offence meant to people in my examples. I know this eve crowd just love to jump on someone.

High sec USA
Low sec Middle East
Null Sec Somalia and the Africas

If I'm making stuff to sell in USA I'd make it in the USA where its meant to be safer for production.
You think I'll fly from the states make stuff in the Middle East where its far less civilised then fly back to the USA fighting off gate camps and pirates to sell it.

Come on CCP. I hope you really aint thinking of making hi sec manufacturing less efficient. It makes no sense.

I wasn't aware that Africa was considered nul sec, thanks for the info!

Come on CCP. I hope you really aint thinking of making hi sec manufacturing less efficient. It makes no sense.

I'm sure it's not that simple.

And any arbitrary "force people into someone's gate camp" changes are going to be met with unsubs.

Nullsec has been very due for a boost in production capability for a long time.

For the game it does make sense.

OK so they are removing slots and going with a cost scaling system so that in cases where everybody just has to be trendy and all pick the same system to produce in, it will eat into the profit margin.

Big deal.


But the implications of time to produce over availability and how that affects prices based on market demand will be most interesting. On the one hand without waiting for a slot, things get produced faster, but the cost may be higher especially if there is a stampede, but the market could be flooded faster and having met demand, the prices would come down.

(this puts the "pack leader" min maxer types in a position to really screw themselves too)

No matter what happens, there will be tears. There are people who shriek if you give them one more "I" to dot or "t" to cross, merely because of OCD or it might cost them .001 ISK.

OK so Ill offend my fellow countrymen, well It won't offend them I know so lets say Null sec is Glasgow on a friday night after the pubs close then.

I hope they do exactly that....Risk vs Reward. Highsec = low risk, so low reward. Lowsec=higher risk, therefore higher reward.

I imagine that mfg slot costs in high are going up anywhere between 1,000 and 10,000 times over existing costs, for any system within 15 jumps of a trade hub. That includes low sec as well.

If it takes a little over 500 million ISK / month right now to run a large POS, you can bet that to run the same amount of research / mfg slots as in an NPC station will be closer to a billion when the dust settles. Of course, in null sec, the same amount of slots will be a tiny fraction of that. Of course, finding a POS location in high sec will become more than problematic anyway.

Makes perfect sense, that is why the most profitable manufacturing in the world is done in Somalia...

I guess I have to get REALLY busy until June, converting all my LP into faction BPC's, because the cost of mfg those LP items is going to soar.

God, I hate the CSM.

Yes, but if you were able to manufacture in Somalia, it would be more profitable in the US as you wouldn't have to pay any tax. You'd just need to hire a private army to take care of the pirates. Quite a fitting example when relating this to eve I think.

In that case, a lowsec station without that surcharge would obviously inherently give you a 12% margin, which is very compelling.

"If you could"....you mean like if you could elect someone to a group of representatives and have them fly to Iceland and **** and moan to CCP until manufacturing in Somalia was more feasible than in the United States? lol

This is until cargo starts getting lost to gate camps and pirates. That will eat into that 12% real quick.

Quoted for posterity.

While "imagine" is the right word at this point, at least for once these are statements we'll be able to measure the accuracy of, not too far into the future.

So let's see what happens and whether you are correct. I'll predict you're not.

We will indeed see.
If this 14% cap is what CCP is serious about, does that mean it will cost 20 million for one slot to build a BS?
And if min prices will rise as these changes demand, does that mean maybe 30 or 40 million?

I would imagine that the cost scale is similar to corp office where some stations have rather astronomical rents compared to a price next door but low sec by default will have better costs for industry after this change.
Though if there's a sudden rush to low sec stations this might change.

So what will this mean for capital production? With BPO's being IN the POS now, will we be seeing some null-sec builders getting out of the cap business? Its bad enough that if you lose your system you can lose access to your BPO's in a station but sitting hundreds of billions worth of them in a POS in null... thats scary. Imagine how much the spy game will increase as null spies try and discover the locations of building POS's so they can drop in and grab some juicy BPO's...

Remove the ability for players to use stations to safely store their blueprints without putting them at risk in Starbase structures. Players will still be able to start their jobs remotely (via the use of Supply Chain Management and Scientific Networking skills), but will now have to move their blueprints directly into the starbase structures that require it, like other materials.

They really have to let us remap our skills

With all these major changes it really affects one's play style.
They are making some skills less desirable and others more desirable.

Thats probably the straw that broke the camels back for me.

I don't mind more people move to low sec and null sec deserts and make more profit than a high sec player.Why someone who risks jumping transferring etc have same profit with someone that is abusing a high sec station with many many runs?

I really like what manufacturing is going to be and how more fun and fair CCP is making it.

Yes, but if you were able to manufacture in Somalia, it would be more profitable than in the US as you wouldn't have to pay any tax. You'd just need to hire a private army to take care of the pirates. Quite a fitting example when relating this to eve I think.

i like that the poses don't require absurd standings now, that's nice.

After reading the Dev Blog, just considering what will this actually mean, and I am thinking perhaps this is partly to try and make high sec manufacturing extremely uneconomical. It all depends on what CCP will set for the cost and how much it increases based upon the number of people wanting to use the station. Any chance you can give us the formula CCP as right now the repercussion are a little hazy?

So, is this now going to make high sec manufacturing now not so desirable? After all, this could be a big buff to low sec if all industrialists will have to relocate out there to get good a decent profit margin.

Also - "Allow Starbases to be anchored anywhere in high-security space and without standing requirements"

This is going to be interesting.

Devblog - Building Better Worlds

I sort of do as well, but what is going to happen if you want a moon and someone else has a POS there is this:

1) Pay 50mil to wardec corp owning POS;
2) Corp owning POS takes down their POS before war starts;
3) Corp owning POS jumps to new corp and throws up new POS at moon at the same time (2) is being completed;
4) Pay 50mil to wardec corp in step 3.
5) Give up on new moon.

I'll reread this when I get home but this sure seems like the final nail in the coffin for me.

The POS anywhere bit will kill one of my income streams. It also means that there will be a land grab and forced wars for moons. You single man corps are going to get bowled over eventually (it'll take a while).

For the PVP types, enjoy, but the casual small player is getting forced deeper and deeper in to the cracks of the game. I have no desire to be forced in to a large group and listen to corp politics drone on or be wardecced in to ineffectiveness. For me, at the end of a play session if I have to ask myself if I am having fun then that is a sign things are going in the wrong direction.

No, you can't have my stuff.

The solution to this is, attacking POS in highsec is now a suspect level offense instead of a criminal level offense.

No, they really don't.
If something is more desirable than before, just train for it.

This is hardly a highsec nerf, though. It's a universal industry buff that, at most and as it has been described so far, hits nullseccers who have to rely on POSes more than anyone.

Reading is, after all, pretty difficult. I mean when you think about it, that's a three stage ascending complexity process; converting pictographics into phonemes; converting those phonemes into discrete words; converting the combined and ordered words (and the associated context) into a transcending meaning. And that's without even going into technical jargon, nuance, irony or dialectical variations.

Really, it's not that it's surprising that some people are bad it it: it's amazing that anyone can do it at all.

Why don't you wait to see how the story ends before you decide it's a tragedy?

Yeah, that'll be great. Large roaming TALOS fleets burning down POS after POS over beers. People will love that.

Thanks for offering your advice on one part of the comment
It is really the other part that is more important

This is hardly a highsec nerf, though. It's a universal industry buff that, at most and as it has been described so far, hits nullseccers who have to rely on POSes more than anyone.

Let me tell you about strontium clathrates.

POS users will just have to change their production models and add a copy process to the beginning of the total manufacturing chain. It isn't really a big inconvenience considering CCP are both buffing the entire industry interface, and reducing copy times.

This will inevitably benefit systems which are being least used at the moment if CCP get their formula for station tax correct.

Pretty much. It's actually kind of funny to stand back and watch how, on one side of the court, people are screaming about how this will require them to research more copies, and on the other side, people are screaming about how their research corps are being rendered useless because no-one will require additional research any more.

In the end, I except that the logistics chain of large-scale manufacturing will be tossed around a bit, but all the pieces are there and just need to be put back in the right (new) place.

It's a universal industry buff that, at most and as it has been described so far, hits nullseccers who have to rely on POSes more than anyone.

Yeah, that'll be great. Large roaming TALOS fleets burning down POS after POS over beers. People will love that.

A universal buff won't increase profits of manufacturing. Because manufacturers compete against each other. If everyone becomes 20% more effective, then they lower their margins by 20% to compensate.

The only people who benefit from such a buff are people who buy goods, because everything is 20% cheaper now.

The solution to this is, attacking POS in highsec is now a suspect level offense instead of a criminal level offense.

What has lacked sense, based on what I see the nullsec crowd and the 2 or 3 industrialists out there (*snark!), is that players in complete control of their facilities do not have as much control over the efficiency of them as much as the cost and logistics of emplacing, defending, and maintaining them would imply.


Given what they wanted, and for the reasons they cited over the years (I recall some of the goons being vocal about this) we would see a day of "Nullsec super-production facilities" that would put the production and value of a highsec installation to shame.



While I don't have a dog in the fight, it only seems logical to conclude that if someone is going to pay for SOV and defend it, then having some balls-to-the-wall production capabilities is only fitting.

Was that in the devblog? I missed it.

Yes, but if you were able to manufacture in Somalia, it would be more profitable than in the US as you wouldn't have to pay any tax. You'd just need to hire a private army to take care of the pirates. Quite a fitting example when relating this to eve I think.

Can you imagine how many HIgh-Sec POS's are going to be going BOOM after this summer patch? Imagine all the Merc groups and other PVPer's tracking down all the POS's with labs and wardeccing those corps. It will only cost you 50 million to war dec and the chance of a 100mill plus BPO dropping is going to be huge. How many of these small size alt corps actually log in each day and look for wardecs?

I see a lot of tears coming to the forums soon as POS bashing comes back in style.

You single man corps are going to get bowled over eventually (it'll take a while).

There're dire predictions like this before every patch, and the results are never anywhere near as destructive as the predictions say.

Yes by no means offer up your opinions (especially if they are negative)
Wait until it plays out and then give your opinion.
That way CCP can turn around and say "Well you never said anything when it was talked about"


You sure are going out of your way to try and bait people

Hey kids!

Who is super looking forward to the next industry devblog?

Is this another AFK cloaking thread?

Yet, I think CCP is about to remove something for which I worked really hard. This appears neither balanced nor fair.

Hey kids!

Who is super looking forward to the next industry devblog?

Based on everything we have seen, creating passive income sources for null sec doesn't make people fight over it. It just reinforces cartels.

Industry based income encourages stability. Small groups can't break it up and the big guys can agree not to attack each other's industry.

So.... POS's everywhere (not just on moons)? Is....is that going to be a thing?

No.

Ok...so I'm a bit dumb on the whole industry side of things, what's the big deal about these changes? It's not like research slots were readily available in hisec anyway. If the cost scaling works similar to corp office fees, won't the overall net effect be the same?

The net effect is that slots will at the same time be more available and more worth-while to build for yourself in the form of POSes. It creates actual market dynamics around the (over)use of slots in popular areas and creates real economic incentives to find a quiet spot away from the crowd.

All of this is a huge crime against humanity and blatant goon-pandering, of course.

Agreed... But no one seems to care if a few are affected to make a change for the many. It's happened to me too. I imagine, some day something will eventually drive me out. Sucks...

Also - "Allow Starbases to be anchored anywhere in high-security space and without standing requirements"

This is going to be interesting.

Devblog - Building Better Worlds

I'll be watching; if they nerf high sec too much I will have no choice but to quietly slip away, saving myself a subscription fee.

Ok...so I'm a bit dumb on the whole industry side of things, what's the big deal about these changes? It's not like research slots were readily available in hisec anyway. If the cost scaling works similar to corp office fees, won't the overall net effect be the same?

In that case, a lowsec station without that surcharge would obviously inherently give you a 12% margin, which is very compelling.

I have been producing small stuff in low sec, and it was annoying as heck. Any serious production requires so much minerals brought in that you have to take losses to pirates into account as well. Admittedly, that was before Jump Freighters, but those things aren't cheap either, and losing one of these to a mishap during cyno will set you back A LOT.

Besides, there's the time lost hauling stuff back and forth.

I am not really sure I'd face those problems for 12% additional profit.

Probably. It'll depend on how the market adjusts to the industrialists' adjustments too. Let's say that they're a stubborn lot and all the industry prices spike by the 14% I keep seeing mentioned as the highest congestion charge. Will that then be the new baseline that everyone sets their price at (because why cut into your own profit margin)? In that case, a lowsec station without that surcharge would obviously inherently give you a 12% margin, which is very compelling.

I'll be watching; if they nerf high sec too much I will have no choice but to quietly slip away, saving myself a subscription fee.

Also don't fear the change, embrace it.


- Cpt Swagg

OK heres perspective.
I'm scottish but ill use this exapmple. No offence meant to people in my examples. I know this eve crowd just love to jump on someone.

High sec USA
Low sec Middle East
Null Sec Somalia and the Africas

If I'm making stuff to sell in USA I'd make it in the USA where its meant to be safer for production.
You think I'll fly from the states make stuff in the Middle East where its far less civilised then fly back to the USA fighting off gate camps and pirates to sell it.

Come on CCP. I hope you really aint thinking of making hi sec manufacturing less efficient. It makes no sense.

I sort of do as well, but what is going to happen if you want a moon and someone else has a POS there is this:

1) Pay 50mil to wardec corp owning POS;
2) Corp owning POS takes down their POS before war starts;
3) Corp owning POS jumps to new corp and throws up new POS at moon at the same time (2) is being completed;
4) Pay 50mil to wardec corp in step 3.
5) Give up on new moon.

The changes look good but the one thing that may cause a possible issue is the larger alliances simply taking over all the moons that are in convenient locations. Without any standings requirements it will now be feasible for any large alliance to dominate the real estate market and keep any smaller groups out. There is a certain attraction to that within the eve context but there is also some attraction to differentiating the degree of control large power blocs can have in the different areas of space. The standings requirement acted as something of a check on large groups becoming highsec slum landlords/grief landlords and with this gone we can expect all dedicated industry corps to have to become subservient to large PvP groups if they want to be allowed to set up facilities anywhere near a hub.

I would like to see the standings requirements reduced a great deal but removing them completely will make the real estate market rather one dimensional.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but from what I read in the devblog

"Allow Starbases to be anchored anywhere in high-security space and without standing requirements (minus some protected solar systems, like Jita or new player starting systems of course)."

Makes it sound like you will be able to anchor them "ANYWHERE" as in not just at moons, so it'd be like setting up a mobile HQ, as many as you want. If thats the case it won't be an issue, but if this dev just failed in his comprehesion of the word "anywhere" then you have a valid point.

I'm pretty sure the 'anywhere' was in contrast to the current restricted placement based on standings. If they had meant POSes can now be anchored in places other than moons then I strongly suspect they would have flagged that more prominently.

OK heres perspective.
I'm scottish but ill use this exapmple. No offence meant to people in my examples. I know this eve crowd just love to jump on someone.

High sec USA
Low sec Middle East
Null Sec Somalia and the Africas

If I'm making stuff to sell in USA I'd make it in the USA where its meant to be safer for production.
You think I'll fly from the states make stuff in the Middle East where its far less civilised then fly back to the USA fighting off gate camps and pirates to sell it.

Come on CCP. I hope you really aint thinking of making hi sec manufacturing less efficient. It makes no sense.

The changes look good but the one thing that may cause a possible issue is the larger alliances simply taking over all the moons that are in convenient locations. Without any standings requirements it will now be feasible for any large alliance to dominate the real estate market and keep any smaller groups out. There is a certain attraction to that within the eve context but there is also some attraction to differentiating the degree of control large power blocs can have in the different areas of space. The standings requirement acted as something of a check on large groups becoming highsec slum landlords/grief landlords and with this gone we can expect all dedicated industry corps to have to become subservient to large PvP groups if they want to be allowed to set up facilities anywhere near a hub.

I would like to see the standings requirements reduced a great deal but removing them completely will make the real estate market rather one dimensional.

After reading the Dev Blog, just considering what will this actually mean, and I am thinking perhaps this is partly to try and make high sec manufacturing extremely uneconomical. It all depends on what CCP will set for the cost and how much it increases based upon the number of people wanting to use the station. Any chance you can give us the formula CCP as right now the repercussion are a little hazy?

So, is this now going to make high sec manufacturing now not so desirable? After all, this could be a big buff to low sec if all industrialists will have to relocate out there to get good a decent profit margin.

Also - "Allow Starbases to be anchored anywhere in high-security space and without standing requirements"

This is going to be interesting.

Devblog - Building Better Worlds

I don't understand your logic there.

How exactly did the standing requirement prevent any large alliance from creating Corps with 1 guy having 7+ faction standing and all other members (industry alts for example) having no faction standing? Thus anchoring and utilizing as many highsec POSs as they wished?

You make a very good point. I didn't take into account the possible use of alt corps but now, reflecting on it, I'm slightly amazed that the griefing potential of such a set-up hasn't been exploited yet.

It's because someone actually has to grind those standing to 8.0 first and the it still has to be a one man corp that cannot transfer the ownership of a POS but with the new system you can skip the one man corp and standings grind from the equation.

However killing a POS to be able to replace a POS isn't really that profitable since a POS needs fuel to run unlike PoCo's and nobody is so desperate on having a high sec POS in any particular moon that they would pay up to keep it there.
Fuelling & usage requirements also keep alliances from killing all POSes in sight and replacing them for an extortion racket.

Link said blog please.

That information is also cleverly hidden behind the big "DEV BLOGS" button at the top of every page on the forums.

Actually that exact scenario has been happening in the US for a decade or more. The cost of manufacturing got so high due to labor costs that the owners of many companies have either shipped their produ tion lines to Asia or have completely sold their company to a foriegn investor.

After reading the Dev Blog, just considering what will this actually mean, and I am thinking perhaps this is partly to try and make high sec manufacturing extremely uneconomical. It all depends on what CCP will set for the cost and how much it increases based upon the number of people wanting to use the station. Any chance you can give us the formula CCP as right now the repercussion are a little hazy?

So, is this now going to make high sec manufacturing now not so desirable? After all, this could be a big buff to low sec if all industrialists will have to relocate out there to get good a decent profit margin.

Also - "Allow Starbases to be anchored anywhere in high-security space and without standing requirements"

This is going to be interesting.

Devblog - Building Better Worlds

Missions will be pointless to do nowe LP was just a nice bonus for working on standings

Highsec is now reaping what it had sowed.

Actually that exact scenario has been happening in the US for a decade or more. The cost of manufacturing got so high due to labor costs that the owners of many companies have either shipped their produ tion lines to Asia or have completely sold their company to a foriegn investor.

I sort of do as well, but what is going to happen if you want a moon and someone else has a POS there is this:

1) Pay 50mil to wardec corp owning POS;
2) Corp owning POS takes down their POS before war starts;
3) Corp owning POS jumps to new corp and throws up new POS at moon at the same time (2) is being completed;
4) Pay 50mil to wardec corp in step 3.
5) Give up on new moon.

I have to imagine there will be a mechanic introduced to avoid this abuse.

[t's more like absolute greed and disregard for fellow humanity that has resulted in the offshoring of jobs. "Free trade" , tax havens/breaks, and the short sightedness of corporate management driven by stock pricing has created an incentive to send jobs overseas.

Eve is a game where we pretend to be immortal beings floating around in space within a set of rules defined by CCP. An attempt at a serious comparison of Eve industry to real life production is a fool's errand.

Immortal beings possessed of absolute greed, and a disregard for fellow humanity. I still don't see how this analogy breaks down.

Then i really hope no one is allowed to anchor a POS until they have been in their current corp for 10 days to prevent abuse like this.

look at it from the other side; 50m per day to stop some one using a pos.

Exactly. Also, no more than 50m once or twice a week would probably be enough to make their POS operations impossibly tedious and unprofitable.

Yeah, it could make sense for CCP to still retain some advantage regarding faction standings. For example a significant discount in the new NPC station manufacturing/research fees formula.

Bullshit. Labor costs are marginal here as evidenced by google producing phones here and even Apple moving some production back to the states. Apple's biggest reason for producing in China is that they have essentially slave labor that can be called up in large numbers on demand with little notice and then dismissed when not needed. Mushkin makes excellent SSD drives and memory here in the USA at very competitive prices. It's more like absolute greed and disregard for fellow humanity that has resulted in the offshoring of jobs. "Free trade" , tax havens/breaks, and the short sightedness of corporate management driven by stock pricing has created an incentive to send jobs overseas.

Eve is a game where we pretend to be immortal beings floating around in space within a set of rules defined by CCP. An attempt at a serious comparison of Eve industry to real life production is a fool's errand.

I hawe made up may mind going to unsub 5 acconts im don as indi pilot in this game,if all nerfs to hi sec hade been in 1 patch sins i started playin i think they had lost a lott more subs,in sted they nerf hi sec a littel bit ich time they have a bigg update so not hard to se wher this ending,

It looks extremely bad, --- for me.

I have no problem with risk, hiring mercenaries, cost etc. These can all be estimated and factored in. And they are the same for everybody. But how about the effort I put into the game in the last two years to position myself ahead of competition?
Yes, research and copy slots are a scarce resource. This is why setting up a POS in high sec is desirable. Yet, it is not easy. Building up the necessary faction standing was tedious and mildly boring. Yet, I did this to have a competitive advantage. And this now flies out of the window. Free POS in high sec for everybody!

I have no problem with adapting to new playgrounds. Yet, I think CCP is about to remove something for which I worked really hard. This appears neither balanced nor fair.

I hawe made up may mind going to unsub 5 acconts im don as indi pilot in this game,if all nerfs to hi sec hade been in 1 patch sins i started playin i think they had lost a lott more subs,in sted they nerf hi sec a littel bit ich time they have a bigg update so not hard to se wher this ending,

Well, anyone can do step 3 and/or try to suicide gank the other Corp's hauler carrying the new tower while the old one is being unanchored.

Seriously though, with so many moons becoming available (remember 0.8-1.0 systems will be 'opened', Tippia estimated 13.000 'new' moons!) if you really want that moon it's not so crazy to occasionally have to play 'who can anchor a new tower first' games.

EDIT: also, step 5 could well be 'the 'target' corp gives up first because all this taking down / putting up of POSs is preventing them from actually using the POS, wasting their time and probably making them lose ISK because of repeated cancelling of manuf/invention jobs'. So the wardeccing corp eventually gets their moon.

It might be nice to actually have a reason to start wardec.

Even nicer to actually have a reason to defend one.

it's not like it's a situation that can't be countered.

simply grow a pair and defend your [not you specifically, but you get the point] pos.

if some one is unwilling to protect their pos, 50m/24hrs to disrupt them, if not... content creation \o/

So. Will null finally begin mining its own belts?

Which begs the question, how much of a fight can you put up before you are worse off then the loss of 24h of productivity?

That will end up depending on how significant the scaling is from using station slots. That and refining, soon to be announced research concerns, etc.

So, given that war decs will almost always be larger aggressor corp vs. smaller corp, and the aggressor will almost always have neutral logi available, the status quo will not change with the introduction of these changes. HTFU? Sure people will dock up, or avoid the war dec in other ways, just as they do now. And they'll ditch they're POS too. Is that what these changes are meant to encourage?

One way or the other, war decs are a poor solution for removing/defending a POS.

And what would a good solution be?

Truth is, either you make highsec POSs invulnerable and throw away the very foundation of the game (competitive sandbox), or any removing/defending mechanic will always favor larger and more organized groups. EDIT: sounds like I'm hijacking Somebody's Law but who cares? It's not like that Somebody is posting in this very thread

The solution for the little fish? Thrive in your pond 'cause the ocean is full of sharks! Don't make your POS a juicy easy target and you'll be fine.

I was simply disagreeing with the fact that wardecs as such will have a purpose (particularly for the defender) for industrialists/quasi industrialists/other random corps after the summer expansion, just as they are not viable now.

Dedicated war dec corps will still war dec the easy targets. Large blobs will still blob. And small-medium industry (one of the targets of this expansion) will abandon their assets and move elsewhere the moment they become a target, as that is their only practical recourse.

So what you're saying is that there will also be a valid economic reason for mercenaries to exist.

Nope. Mercenaries won't get hired for the same reason mercenaries don't get hired now.

(a) Pay war deccer X to not harass me. Or (b) pay mercenary Y to maybe deter X. Good luck with that. This is unlikely to work well for the two reasons I indicated in my first post, among others.

The industrialist will choose (c) unanchor tower, flip corp, re-anchor tower, or don't bother with asset like tower in the first place. Doesn't have to pay anyone (monetary and emotional satisfaction) and less likely to attract "repeat business" later on.

Nope. Mercenaries won't get hired for the same reason mercenaries don't get hired now.

(a) Pay war deccer X to not harass me. Or (b) pay mercenary Y to maybe deter X. Good luck with that. This is unlikely to work well for the two reasons I indicated in my first post, among others.

The industrialist will choose (c) unanchor tower, flip corp, re-anchor tower, or don't bother with asset like tower in the first place. Doesn't have to pay anyone (monetary and emotional satisfaction) and less likely to attract "repeat business" later on.

While this is a nice sentiment, war decs have many significant outstanding problems. The two most glaring:

(1) The significant difference in cost to wardec small entities vs. large entities
-If I want to wardec Bob's 10 man corp, it's dirt cheap.
-If I want to wardec a 10,000+ member corp, it can get prohibitively expensive.
-It is therefore cheaper and easier to wardec a small corp.
-Some larger entities become effectively immune to all but the most dedicated of war-deccers.

(2) Neutral Reps
-If you are war-decced and go after the deccer, they almost always have neutral reps. Yes, yes, HTFU, I'll get to that later.
-These reps are either provided by alts or through a neutral logi pact with other war dec entities.

So, given that war decs will almost always be larger aggressor corp vs. smaller corp, and the aggressor will almost always have neutral logi available, the status quo will not change with the introduction of these changes. HTFU? Sure people will dock up, or avoid the war dec in other ways, just as they do now. And they'll ditch they're POS too. Is that what these changes are meant to encourage?

One way or the other, war decs are a poor solution for removing/defending a POS.

Can you imagine how many HIgh-Sec POS's are going to be going BOOM after this summer patch? Imagine all the Merc groups and other PVPer's tracking down all the POS's with labs and wardeccing those corps. It will only cost you 50 million to war dec and the chance of a 100mill plus BPO dropping is going to be huge. How many of these small size alt corps actually log in each day and look for wardecs?

I see a lot of tears coming to the forums soon as POS bashing comes back in style.

What if the tower got locked down when the war dec starts because the tower is specifically named as the target. Industrialist if he hires people to defend him for a specific amount of time gets x amount of time that that tower cant be targeted again.

[quote=Salpun]

Sure, the small scale hisec industrialist should fight for what he has. Standard eve adage blah blah blah. But in the end he'll simply choose to put what he has where other people won't be able to to touch it. That's reality.

.

I imagine that mfg slot costs in high are going up anywhere between 1,000 and 10,000 times over existing costs, for any system within 15 jumps of a trade hub. That includes low sec as well.

If it takes a little over 500 million ISK / month right now to run a large POS, you can bet that to run the same amount of research / mfg slots as in an NPC station will be closer to a billion when the dust settles. Of course, in null sec, the same amount of slots will be a tiny fraction of that. Of course, finding a POS location in high sec will become more than problematic anyway.

More POSes?
Easier to POS?
More systems to POS?

How is this less manufacturing in highsec?


Also don't fear the change, embrace it.


- Cpt Swagg

Nope. Mercenaries won't get hired for the same reason mercenaries don't get hired now.

(a) Pay war deccer X to not harass me. Or (b) pay mercenary Y to maybe deter X. Good luck with that. This is unlikely to work well for the two reasons I indicated in my first post, among others.

The industrialist will choose (c) unanchor tower, flip corp, re-anchor tower, or don't bother with asset like tower in the first place. Doesn't have to pay anyone (monetary and emotional satisfaction) and less likely to attract "repeat business" later on.

Then it's about time we make corp flipping a bannable exploit, if you ask me.

Actually that exact scenario has been happening in the US for a decade or more. The cost of manufacturing got so high due to labor costs that the owners of many companies have either shipped their production lines to Asia or have completely sold their company to a foreign investor.

Sure, make a forum thread, petition your CSM delegate, write a blog or w/e. But that's really outside the scope of both this thread and the summer expansion changes in question.

In fairness, so are more than a few of your own comments.

I get it though, your basic point is "the people who want to avoid PvP will do anything to avoid it." The basic point of a lot of us is that those people are playing the game wrong, and that doing that should not be so consistently rewarded as it has been.

But if you ask me, they're trying to make some neglected aspects of the game more appealing for everyone, not just highsec. That's not a bad thing, and especially since we only know the general aspect and not a lot of the particulars (no patch notes, no F&I proposed changes threads, or anything like that), I will reserve judgment.

The POS anywhere bit will kill one of my income streams. It also means that there will be a land grab and forced wars for moons. You single man corps are going to get bowled over eventually (it'll take a while).

For the PVP types, enjoy, but the casual small player is getting forced deeper and deeper in to the cracks of the game. I have no desire to be forced in to a large group and listen to corp politics drone on or be wardecced in to ineffectiveness.

I agree with you. My area of contention was Malcanis's point that this would add purpose to wardec for the defender and the attacker. It won't. Likewise, I disagreed with his assertion that industrialists might higher mercs as a result. I laid out my thoughts on why they wouldn't.

Overall, this change may or may not be good, we'll see.

Now you are talking about rocket science because the average null dummy just can't understand why some people refuse to PVP.

I get it though, your basic point is "the people who want to avoid PvP will do anything to avoid it." The basic point of a lot of us is that those people are playing the game wrong, and that doing that should not be so consistently rewarded as it has been.

I get it though, your basic point is "the people who want to avoid PvP will do anything to avoid it." The basic point of a lot of us is that those people are playing the game wrong, and that doing that should not be so consistently rewarded as it has been.

I still don't get this mindset.

In a game where you chose the means to get to your goals why is evasion of people trying to actively hinder you frowned upon?

A lot longer than a decade but off-shoring is more about tax and regulation avoidance for multi-national companies than labor savings.

I have a US based textile company where I can subcontract cut and sew operations for less than 10% difference of what it would cost in SE Asia - while improving time to manufacture and quality control. The problem is sourcing fabrics in the US. China is full of brand new 9001 factories while US manufacturers haven't made capital improvements of US facilities in decades.

Here are a couple of articles:
Forbes: How does Apple avoid taxes ,
Huffington:18 large tax avoiders

Security for your operations has a price counted in money and manpower (just like in RL), and it gets progressively higher as sec status gets lower. Paying an external body for protection in hisec is still peanuts compared to the costs of security you pay in higher class wormholes, which again is peanuts compared to what nullsec entities have to invest in the upkeep of their defenses.

Ideally these changes would lead to a substantial price hike for ships and modules, lead by the increase of costs in highsec. This opens up opportunities for the birth/revival of lesser trade hubs, and higher profits for those who manufacture in lowsec.

And, gasp, a reason for entities to actually have an industrial wing which can supply them with reasonably priced gear.

I think a good benchmark and indicator for success of these changes, is if the changes result in a substantial re-location of industry alts and operations from HS to NS.

If that happens on a significant scale, I would call it a huge success and improvement for the meta.

I have some serious misgivings about that happening though. Some of the proposed changes seem counter-active, and may result in just a magnification of the current lamentable status quo.

It won't, no. I already build everything at my POS in HS. I also research my BPs there so it's not an extra cost for me. I would still have that cost even if I built at an NPC station. In fact the only change I see here that'll affect my business is the BP copy time change. Of course the market will go screwy for the 3 months after the expansion as many people like me will be watching which way it's going rather than actually making anything.

A lot longer than a decade but off-shoring is more about tax and regulation avoidance for multi-national companies than labor savings.

I have a US based textile company where I can subcontract cut and sew operations for less than 10% difference of what it would cost in SE Asia - while improving time to manufacture and quality control. The problem is sourcing fabrics in the US. China is full of brand new 9001 factories while US manufacturers haven't made capital improvements of US facilities in decades.

Here are a couple of articles:
Forbes: How does Apple avoid taxes ,
Huffington:18 large tax avoiders

I still don't get this mindset.

In a game where you chose the means to get to your goals why is evasion of people trying to actively hinder you frowned upon?

While this is a nice sentiment, war decs have many significant outstanding problems. The two most glaring:

(1) The significant difference in cost to wardec small entities vs. large entities
-If I want to wardec Bob's 10 man corp, it's dirt cheap.
-If I want to wardec a 10,000+ member corp, it can get prohibitively expensive.
-It is therefore cheaper and easier to wardec a small corp.
-Some larger entities become effectively immune to all but the most dedicated of war-deccers.

(2) Neutral Reps
-If you are war-decced and go after the deccer, they almost always have neutral reps. Yes, yes, HTFU, I'll get to that later.
-These reps are either provided by alts or through a neutral logi pact with other war dec entities.

So, given that war decs will almost always be larger aggressor corp vs. smaller corp, and the aggressor will almost always have neutral logi available, the status quo will not change with the introduction of these changes. HTFU? Sure people will dock up, or avoid the war dec in other ways, just as they do now. And they'll ditch they're POS too. Is that what these changes are meant to encourage?

One way or the other, war decs are a poor solution for removing/defending a POS.

if i was them, i'd be going for 'doable in highsec, done better in lowsec'

I think the order is "Doable in hisec, done better in lowsec, done best in null sec"

More risk. More reward.

Devblog - Building Better Worlds