open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Nullsec design goals feedback: Industry
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6

Author Topic

Jon Taggart
State War Academy
Posted - 2011.08.15 18:25:00 - [31]
 

Edited by: Jon Taggart on 15/08/2011 18:24:50
Originally by: Ishina Fel

For example, give the owner of the Outpost the option to "refit" lab slots and assembly lines at will, at a cost. Like, we could then invest into turning a large number of our unused research slots into ME slots, while those other guys in that other Outpost instead pour their ISK into getting more copy slots. The Outpost still has the same 100 slots, but utilization efficiency suddenly goes straight up. And if next month, we need other slots? Well, guess we'll have to invest into a new refit!


I think this is a very good idea. Give players the option of tailoring their slots to whatever they need.

Shadowsword
The Rough Riders
Ares Protectiva
Posted - 2011.08.15 18:42:00 - [32]
 

Originally by: Kotami

So, wait. T2 producers are already at the mercy of moon mining tycoons. And now you want to force industrialists to be vulnerable to said tycoons' facerolling war machines in nullsec? You're OK with forcing players who have invested in T2 production skills for years to live in nullsec in order to use those skills?

Are you insane?


Are you aware that it is you, and the others moon goo buyers, who set the price? There's no such thing as a moon mining tycoon.

As for giving an advantage to null-sec dwellers, I'm all for it. First, because a potential monopoly in 0.0 wouldn't be a problem. It would still be hundreds or thousands of individual producer that would compete with each other to sell their T2 stuff, like right now. Second, because CCP never said it would be an absolute monopoly. I suppose they'll just give 0.0 stations a PE/ME advantage for T2.

Taedrin
Gallente
Kushan Industrial
Posted - 2011.08.15 19:15:00 - [33]
 

Edited by: Taedrin on 15/08/2011 19:21:09
Originally by: Shadowsword

Are you aware that it is you, and the others moon goo buyers, who set the price? There's no such thing as a moon mining tycoon.

As for giving an advantage to null-sec dwellers, I'm all for it. First, because a potential monopoly in 0.0 wouldn't be a problem. It would still be hundreds or thousands of individual producer that would compete with each other to sell their T2 stuff, like right now. Second, because CCP never said it would be an absolute monopoly. I suppose they'll just give 0.0 stations a PE/ME advantage for T2.


Giving an ME advantage to 0.0 stations will make it an absolute monopoly. It will become just as porfitable to build T2 in empire as it is to build a T1 battleship without researching the BPO first or training Production Efficiency V.

If you DO change T2 production so that it can only be done in null-sec (or that the only way to profit from it is to do it in null-sec), then you will need to make changes to accomplish the following:

1) Make T1 production profitable so that high-sec industrialists have something to do. Possibly make it so that T1 production is difficult to do in null-sec, by making low-end materials sparse and difficult to haul to null sec in large quantities.

2) Give low-sec industrialists something to build which is similar in profitability and difficulty as current T2 production/reactions. If you want faction gear to be created in low-sec and replace T2 production - don't just simply have faction gear drop from faction rats - make it so that there is a material which must be collected, and then taken to an industrialist to process and then to build from. Make it a reasonably complex and difficult process, so that there is a barrier to entry - guaranteeing that the industrialist will be able to easily turn a profit.

Mitohane
Posted - 2011.08.15 19:37:00 - [34]
 

My only thought is there is a lot of industry corps that just do industry they don't have groups of security that "enjoy" hanging at a gate doing nothing but watching for someone pos how up to cal the alarm to go hide, which is little more then alt accounts at this point anymore. What would be interesting is a mechanic that would allow for industry corps to be protected by their industry. An interesting goal would be to find a way for an industry corp to be able to produce the improved defenses(turrets and shields and the like) to make up for their lack of security, without giving corps with combination of industry+combatants a bigger advantage from having the extra defenses.

The best way I can think of is if your in the system as an industry corp in 0.0 as a smallholder or even just a pos. Adjust the bonus's for all ships in the field, increase the resists on shields and armors of all ships and modules(pos defenses etc)...reduce the damage on ships by equivalent amount. So even if you had a super tanked bs in the corp your damage would be down by say 75% and you should only be relying on deployed turrets and things to act as security, which requires considerable minerals and other things to produce.

So you end up with a turret farm or equivalent allowing for a pure industry corp to be pure industry and not have to have the very bored nothing to do half asleep people in their security ships camping a gate for an 4hr mining op that will either not see any attention or get blobbed.

Just some thoughts anyway, the turrets or other deploy-able defenses don't have to be godly, or a replacement for player ships, but enough to hold off npcs and give you enough cover to warp out of the belt if needed.

Southern Kros
LOW SEC MINING
Posted - 2011.08.15 19:41:00 - [35]
 

So the rich get richer. Way to ****ing go.

I have spent most of my time in Eve with some mates doing industry. We buy our moon goo from 0.0 alliances. We buy our high end minerals from 0.0 alliances.

Your ideas would then force me to buy ice from the same 0.0 alliances.

Your ideas would make Empire T2 production ****ing pointless. 10 million + skill points in science and industry up in smoke.

We like to play casual. We have no interest in 0.0 alliances. We are happy with our small little bit of eve.

We do not want to be forced to join 0.0 alliances, move to 0.0 space, we dont have the time. We dont trust alliance, most of any isk we make will simply go to fund the Alliance Leaders and their RMT crap.

You will force us to either move to 0.0 and join an alliance, stop doing industry in empire or quit. You forget that Eve is a hobby not a ****ing job. Unlike our jobs we can quit Eve at any time without fear of consequence. You try making eve into a job then quite frankly you can go to hell.

The moment Eve becomes a job then its the moment to quit. You just made it look like a job. We will leave Eve to the meta gamers, bots, RMT alliances and the new dust players. There will be no room for the casual player.

Tread very carefully.

Learath
Posted - 2011.08.15 19:56:00 - [36]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Originally by: Callic Veratar
If there's a massive supply of low-end resources in nullsec, what stops an Alliance from hauling them all to a market hub and crashing the market?

Unless there's a method being discussed that will allow me, as a highsec dweller, to fly some ship into nullsec and come home with a cargo hold full of T2 goods acquired from some source, this seems to be getting quite imbalanced.

Highsec is dependent on all others
Lowsec is dependent on all others
Nullsec is self sufficient
W-space is dependent on all others

EVEN!


Yeah, low-ends in nullsec is an ongoing concern. We're looking into other ways to deal with this.




Lolz.
"Nullsec is going to be the only self sufficient place."
"Yep, lets make it more self sufficient."

Jareck Hunter
Rubicon Legion
Posted - 2011.08.15 19:58:00 - [37]
 

Edited by: Jareck Hunter on 15/08/2011 20:03:00
Originally by: Mitohane
Just some thoughts anyway, the turrets or other deploy-able defenses don't have to be godly, or a replacement for player ships, but enough to hold off npcs and give you enough cover to warp out of the belt if needed.


What about a mobile shield generator, that generates a shield like a pos when activated, which can protect a mining op from being hotdropped?
Maybe with a RF Timer of 2-4h max?

Onlining and offlining should be done in less than 10 seconds, radius maybe 5-15km, price around 10-25 million and maybe 5-10 min anchoring time, so it should be only usefull to protect static fleets.

RAW23
Posted - 2011.08.15 21:40:00 - [38]
 

A few suggestions for making nullsec the best area to produce T2 without nerfing highsec T2 production directly:

1) Make T2 BPOs only usable in null YARRRR!!

2) Introduce a decent POS assembly array that gives neither bonuses nor penalties to ME, thus solving one of the issues with outpost slots. Possible time bonus to allow for better synchronisation of ship production lines (e.g. 1 day cycles rather than the inconvenient 1.5) and, thus, greater efficiency. No ME bonus because a direct efficiency bonus will tend towards making highsec production unsustainable.

3) Increase the logistical difficult of transporting large quantities of moon goo over large distances. The aim will be to strike a balance that increases transport costs considerably over distance, so as to encourage production in the vicinity of the mineral sources without raising the cost of transport so much that none will make it to highsec markets. This could be done through a variety of means, either in isolation or together. Possible examples include:

a) Restricting moon goo transport options to certain ship classes.

b) Restricting jump ships to shorter distances, higher fuel expenditure, lower cargo capacity (this can be explained by the necessity for specialised holds or some such), or increasing the volumes of the mats. Any combination of these could be used to finetune the additional cost in terms of convenience, isk cost or materials cost (these could be sunk into containment fields with a limited duration, helping out another cause by serving as a materials sink).

Some combination of these, or other, ideas could be used to indirectly affect the cost of T2 production in highsec without resorting to closing it down completely.

Antihrist Pripravnik
Scorpion Road Industry
Posted - 2011.08.15 22:02:00 - [39]
 

Quote:
For further discussion. People building things in nullsec should only need to travel to empire (or more than a couple of regions across nullsec) for low-volume supplies. This requires that industrialists have a ready supply of low-end minerals available nearby in nullsec, without breaking other systems or goals. (Likely means some way of mining low-ends in a massively more rapid manner compared to current tools.)


No, no, no, and no. Higher yield or denser ore is the right way - if you want to have oversupply of low-end ore and nerf the mining profession. I will again ask you to consider the idea posted in the previous devblog feedback thread: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1560795&page=9#258 That way, not only that we are not destroying mining profession and make players mine even more devalued ore than it is now, but we are adding an upgradeable framework that can be easily modified and tweaked if necessary. Please, reconsider the linked idea.

Quote:
Geared towards T2 Our current proposal is that hisec is for volume T1 goods, lowsec will be for meta/faction gear eventually, nullsec is for T2, and wormholes are for T3

That's OK, if you are planning to take away corporate monopoly over production and research slots. Again, one good way how to do it is described in that linked reply. Corporate monopoly over industry MUST go away; free market with player (not corporation) driven economy is the solution.

Quote:
Lucrative Building T2 modules/ships in nullsec should be a good way to make a lot of money. There are many inherent drawbacks in doing industry in nullsec and we need to balance out these hidden costs.

And again Smile balancing cost and boosting player initiative to build stuff in nullsec can be done with described Personal Industrial Arrays, as described in the linked post.

Quote:
Requires investment
Again, we want the real wealth-generation machines to require people to settle down and spend some money, because it encourages concentration of effort and makes for interesting targets to attack or defend.

What's a better and bigger investment than having hundreds of players start their own businesses in the settled area? Not only that it will require individual and organized effort, but it will require ISK investment from every individual. Personal Industrial Arrays with a station service as an anchor unit is, again, a solution. When corporate or alliance asset is attacked, the defenders will only react as a blob and only if the major installation is under attack. Individual players (grunts) see this kind of engagement as a chore that does not affect them directly. But, if your Personal Industrial Array's station anchor is attacked, you will care for it. Attackers can disrupt the supply and market by attacking the Arrays that can, for example, have an inactivity timer of 24-48 hours after being repaired when incapacitated. That way, we'll have direct disruption of industrial assets without having to shoot a POS or form a blob and we'll have defenders that care enough to quickly form a fleet of their own to defend their own property. Randomly assembled quick fleets provide the best PvP engagement in game (opposite to organised alpha-Abaddon blobs that are more like a chore).

Quote:
Accessible to all in small volumes
Anyone should be able to build enough bits and bobs to support a reasonably frugal lifestyle, anywhere in nullsec. This allows small groups to feel self-sufficient provided they're all prepared to work for it, while still encouraging specialization efficiency for larger groups.


Exactly - Personal Industrial Arrays! Very Happy

So, please, once again, have a look at the original idea here: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1560795&page=9#258


Ten Bulls
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.08.15 23:22:00 - [40]
 

NULL sec already have a HUGE advantage in T2 production, thats where all the moons are.

Industry belongs in high sec because thats where the trade hubs are.

If you move T2 production to NULL sec, will they be able to produce enough volume to meet the demand of high sec, how much will T2 ships rise to cover the risk of getting it to high sec, double existing prices ?

If T2 production leaves high sec, then a lot of towers arent needed and ICE demand from high sec is lower, which is something to consider with the mining thread.

CCP tried to destroy trade hubs a long time ago, they later recognized it as a mistake, please dont go back there.

CSM is dominated by NULL sec representatives, yet 80%(?) of player-base is in high sec. If CSM says something is good, it only means its good from their biased viewpoints, it doesnt mean its good for the game overall.

Its always a mistake for a company to alienate the majority of their customers.

Mara Rinn
Posted - 2011.08.15 23:58:00 - [41]
 

Originally by: Zirse
Make a pos anchored in nullsec produce T2 BPC at -2/-2 with no decryptor rather than -4/-4. Also there needs to be a way to access datacores in nullsec.


You only need to make invention in null sec 1% better for it to be "lucrative". Any more than about 1-2% and the market will be entirely destroyed for hisec industrialists. Making ME/PE better by 1 is a significant change, much less improving ME/PE by 2. Better invention profits can come from improvements to the invention process such as more efficient use of resources (POS fuel, for example), higher success rates, and small adjustments to BPCs invented in null sec labs.

People complain about the lack of research slots in stations, but is no-one in null sec researching in POSes?

The whiteboard reads like a laundry list of ways to destroy the game.

Windjammer
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.16 00:36:00 - [42]
 

Originally by: Mara Rinn
The whiteboard reads like a laundry list of ways to destroy the game.

Same way I read it. Patience gone. Shouldn’t have to come to the forums to war for a properly balanced game. CCP can’t seem to help themselves but step in it again and again and again.

Mara Rinn
Posted - 2011.08.16 01:16:00 - [43]
 

Originally by: "Nullsec Development: Design Goals"
99% self-sufficient by volume
For further discussion. People building things in nullsec should only need to travel to empire (or more than a couple of regions across nullsec) for low-volume supplies. This requires that industrialists have a ready supply of low-end minerals available nearby in nullsec, without breaking other systems or goals. (Likely means some way of mining low-ends in a massively more rapid manner compared to current tools.)


This is arse-about. Nullsec logistics is an industry in its own. Nullsec denizens already make plenty of ISK from shipping supplies in from hisec to supply nullsec. All it takes is a jump freighter and a few friends, and you can be bankrolling your own nullsec PvP.

Making nullsec self sufficient will kill hisec industry, kill logistics-as-a-career, and turn nullsec life into a boring slave camp where people who used to PvP are forced to guard mining operations or even worse, participate in mining.

Scarcity produces value. This is a core premise of economic theory. The way to make nullsec more lucrative is not to provide more abundance, it is to provide more scarcity. Reduce the relative abundance of ABC in all regions. Make some regions more abundant in Arkonor. Make other regions more abundant in Crokite. Make other regions more abundant in Bistot. Reduce the relative abundance of low-ends and mid-ends in all nullsec and lowsec regions. Leave some "common" rocks in belts, move everything else to grav sites.

Make it worthwhile mining stuff by making the stuff people are mining more valuable.

Limit the abundance of certain low-ends in hisec. Sure, leave veldspar lying around like so much dust and gravel. Reduce the abundance of Plagioclase, Omber, Pyroxeres and Kernite. I'd remove those entirely from belts and move them to grav sites.

There was an idea floated to move all ice to nullsec. This idea does have some merit, but is a rather boneheaded "all or nothing" approach. Certainly, remove all static ice fields from everywhere. Replace them with grav sites. Throttle these sites so that the volume of ice harvested in hisec is reduced (e.g.: by 50%), while the volume of ice in nullsec is effecively "neverending". Establish a guideline of, for example, improving the quantity of all ice consumed that is produced in nullsec. Slowly crank down the number of hisec ice sites spawned until this measure is reached. Some hisec ice harvesters will become extremely rich, with competition arising between corporations seeking out ice sites. Nullsec harvesters will become rich too, simply because the ice they are able to harvest becomes more valuable.

Grav sites should not be identifiable by simply probing them down. All asteroids should turn up on scanners as "asteroid", with the actual composition of asteroids being revealed by surveying them. The manual effort required means that one explorer in nullsec can feed the alliances mining fleets. This is where nullsec has an advantage over hisec - everyone in that system is "on the same team", as opposed to hisec where everyone else in the system is a potential competitor.

You'll know you got the scarcity right when alliances start breaking up because the military fleet commander refused to spend a few hours guarding the mining operations essential to that alliance's continued existence.

PS: guarding a site could be made easier by making grav sites "deadspace" so you can only warp to the fixed warp-in point. By the same token, disrupting an unguarded mining operation becomes similarly easy.

Mara Rinn
Posted - 2011.08.16 01:18:00 - [44]
 

Originally by: "Nullsec Development: Design Goals"
Geared towards T2
Our current proposal is that hisec is for volume T1 goods, lowsec will be for meta/faction gear eventually, nullsec is for T2, and wormholes are for T3


And where do reactions fit in? Boosters?

T2 production should be targeted for lowsec. Nullsec is where the raw materials for T2 production come from, nullsec should not be the place for T2 to be built too. The stuff that makes T2 must be moved somewhere else in order to be used. This is how you make strategic games more interesting. There must be supply lines to cut, there must be logistics to interrupt. There must be strategic targets as well as tactical targets. Otherwise you'll just make nullsec warfare a mindless game of point and shoot the opposing fleet of exactly the same ships that you're flying.

Originally by: "Nullsec Development: Design Goals"
Lucrative
Building T2 modules/ships in nullsec should be a good way to make a lot of money. There are many inherent drawbacks in doing industry in nullsec and we need to balance out these hidden costs.


Building T2 modules/ships in nullsec will be a good way to kill off T2 industry everywhere else in the game, leading to hisec industrialists quitting the game, leading to having noone for hisec pirates to play with, leading to declining subscriber numbers.

If you can't make money from T2 manufacture now, why would you suddenly make more money if it was moved to nullsec where industry is harder due to lack of CONCORD? Sure, T2 prices will go up due to lack of supply, but that doesn't mean that the people manufacturing T2 are going to be making more profit. Their towers will be reinforced routinely, they'll have to put the prices up in order to simply break even.

This game is an economics simulator. You can't just "deem" something to be lucrative.

Scarcity produces value.

You don't make mining more lucrative by increasing yield. That turns mining into a high volume, low margin game - this is not lucrative unless you automate the process. You make industry more lucrative by making the produced items more valuable. You make produced items more valuable by increasing demand and reducing supply. You make Technetium valuable by restricting the supply to less than demand.

Just take a look at datacores for an example of how increasing yield does not make an industry "lucrative". Those R&D agents should require much higher standings and player effort to generate the current level of supply. The reduction of required standings from 6.8 to 5.0 has had a huge impact in datacore prices. There are more people in that industry now, each making much less ISK than was previously possible: the total ISK value of the datacore market has sunk.

Mara Rinn
Posted - 2011.08.16 01:21:00 - [45]
 

Originally by: "Nullsec Development: Design Goals"
Requires investment
Again, we want the real wealth-generation machines to require people to settle down and spend some money, because it encourages concentration of effort and makes for interesting targets to attack or defend.


At last some sense!

Note that we already have POSes which are wealth generation machines (otherwise known as "production capital" to anyone with a skerrick of economics education). POSes require people to settle down and spend some money. POSes provide interesting targets to attack or defend. Limit some modules to only being anchorable inside small or medium POSes and suddenly you have targets for small gangs.

Originally by: "Nullsec Development: Design Goals"
Accessible to all in small volumes
Anyone should be able to build enough bits and bobs to support a reasonably frugal lifestyle, anywhere in nullsec. This allows small groups to feel self-sufficient provided they're all prepared to work for it, while still encouraging specialization efficiency for larger groups.


Restrict traffic volumes through star gates. Provide the means for residents to further restrict (or boost) volumes of traffic going through specific gates. Provide the means to place sentry guns, and make the required sovereignty to anchor a cyno jammer much lower. A cyno jammer should be one of the first options in sovereignty claims, otherwise small holders will find that they anchor their TCU and IHUB, and tomorrow they're blown out of the sky by the neighbours' fleets of supercaps.

Restricting traffic volumes through star gates will allow smaller holders some degree of control over what fights land on their doorsteps. Blobs will still be possible - determined attackers will simply trickle in a fleet over a period of days or hours (as is done when assaulting C1/2/3 wormholes).

It should be possible for a small holder to effectively shut their system off from the outside world, constricting their local stargates to only allow a small number of cruisers through per hour. The mechanisms used to isolate small holder systems should be mutually exclusive with mechanisms required by larger alliances, such as jump bridges, capital ship manufacturing, moon harvesting efficiency, outposts, market services, medium & large POSes, etc. This could potentially be achieved by introducing a new, coarser style of cyno jammer, which also works to restrict the generation of wormholes - thus not only are the wormholes exploited by stargates restricted, but unstable wormholes will no longer appear, and Sansha/Talocan wormhole generators will be ineffective or less effective. Note that the only penalties for current IHUB upgrades are the opportunity costs of not having some other upgrade. Different IHUB upgrades and deployable structures should be able to negatively impact the system in which they are deployed.

There needs to be a relatively clear upgrade path from "small alliance holding a single nullsec system" through to "major alliance holding entire regions of nullsec", with economic, cultural and military advantages from the expansion. These advantages should only be small, not large enough to punish small holders simply for being small.

Any alliance should be able to "turtle up". The advantage of doing so is near immunity to attack, the disadvantage is the lack of access to external resources. Player-run alliances should be able to operate the same way as the Jove: burn bridges, live in isolation. The flip side of the coin is that "turtled" alliances still provide some kind of target for small gangs and black ops: opportunistic strikes against wormhole suppressors, gate limiters, moon harvesters, etc.

But this is drifting majorly off the "industry" topic. The catch is that life in EVE is not easily compartmentalised. A change in an IHUB upgrade behaviour impacts military, economic and cultural factors in any held space.

Sephiroth CloneIIV
Rim Worlds Republic
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2011.08.16 03:00:00 - [46]
 

Originally by: SuHwak
Originally by: Karia Sur
Just thought of an option you forgot to add CCP :-

Make all planets in high sec/low sec worthless, and make only null sec planets provide PI resources.........that should be enough to drive the rest of the high sec industrialists not affected by the other ideas, out of the game.


Why does everything have to be so black vs white?

Yes, less ISK/hour in high sec, but its not ever going to be 0 ISK/hour.

Lets keep this constructive please!


Yea planets in highsec already produce really low quantity, on top of more players draining things.

With planets the production is fair with increasing to lower sec (though any smart person with highsec planet will use it for all refining into higher PI). With other professions though the balance to rewards is not too different between high and null. But industry has little to do with isk printing professions and more with producing things.

In general the stations in null are horrible, they should match empire in slots and cross functions. To refine and produce in same station would be awesome like I can in any NPC one. Why do NPC's get all the best stations, its like player owned means it must suck.

Mara Rinn
Posted - 2011.08.16 03:14:00 - [47]
 

Edited by: Mara Rinn on 16/08/2011 03:15:34
oops. wrong thread.

Embarassed

Miraqu
Caldari
Posted - 2011.08.16 06:53:00 - [48]
 

The only pressing need in null are far more production slots and the necessary minerals.

If T2 invention chance would be improved, the bpos would still be copied in highsec, since it is really dangerous to ship a bpo out. Also you never know if the station will still be yours in the 30 days after your copy job ends. And the same for the invention, if it was profitable enough to justify the effort it would cripple most other industrialists, if it was marginally better most would still invent in highsec since it would be simply not worth all the hassle.

Nullsec industry is far more affected by the other factors in nullsec (Mining, attitude towards industry, the sovereignty mechanics, security concerns) than one would believe. If you improve these conditions in any feasible way, the industry will probably grow on its own.

catinboots
Minmatar
Vintage heavy industries
Posted - 2011.08.16 07:22:00 - [49]
 

Null sec should never be self sufficient they are already way to powerfull and have the monopoly on high minerals and moongoo , giving them more and the monopoly on t2 production will only reinforce that and seriously disrupt the market in production and demand or better supply and demand forcing most people back into t1 ships in the long term
Null sec alliances already have everything they need to sustain themselves and get rich , don t give them everything

El 1974
Posted - 2011.08.16 07:34:00 - [50]
 

I don't understand the reasoning behind trying to make 0.0 more self-sufficient. The current economic model works. 0.0 activities are only profitable as long as high sec has something valueable to trade back for it. If you nerf that you will wreck the economy. Let the carebears do the grinding so you can keep 0.0 as the land of opportunity and adventure.
At most make some small changes. If you want industry in 0.0 then develop it on planets (Dust). Dust could be a competitor for highsec where 0.0 alliances will require effective control over space and invest in orbital structures.

Aedeal
Posted - 2011.08.16 07:43:00 - [51]
 

If you just make nullsec better, you'll end up with overpowering abilities. Keep it even by reducing the HS industrial capacity. Yeh, it means you have to take a risk, but that's pretty much cos people right now don't plan for keeping their industry safe. Make it so that 0.0 alliances HAVE to support industry to be a player and they'll change and adapt to it.

For HS: reduce the number of all job slots to 1/3 current state
Add a 1.5->2x time AND material cost

I get that you like to be safe and all that stuff, but IMO HS shouldn't be a place where you make all your money. End of story.

catinboots
Minmatar
Vintage heavy industries
Posted - 2011.08.16 08:09:00 - [52]
 

Originally by: Aedeal
If you just make nullsec better, you'll end up with overpowering abilities. Keep it even by reducing the HS industrial capacity. Yeh, it means you have to take a risk, but that's pretty much cos people right now don't plan for keeping their industry safe. Make it so that 0.0 alliances HAVE to support industry to be a player and they'll change and adapt to it.

For HS: reduce the number of all job slots to 1/3 current state
Add a 1.5->2x time AND material cost

I get that you like to be safe and all that stuff, but IMO HS shouldn't be a place where you make all your money. End of story.


You forget one thing for 99% of the people playing this game it is a hobby not a full time job , alot of high sec miners i know just want to relax a few hours watching how their stripminers chew up some rocks and make a small income
You are basicly saying. This game should be all about stress and risk

Miraqu
Caldari
Posted - 2011.08.16 10:17:00 - [53]
 

Originally by: catinboots

You forget one thing for 99% of the people playing this game it is a hobby not a full time job , alot of high sec miners i know just want to relax a few hours watching how their stripminers chew up some rocks and make a small income
You are basicly saying. This game should be all about stress and risk



Being in 0.0 does not change the game to a full-time job and stressful. Back in 2009 / 2010 exactly this was a feasible way to make money in 0.0.

But mining has become absolutely senseless. You make no money with it, its insecure as hell and there is no one to buy your minerals. So nobody starts mining.

Therefore simple industry - We are in the industry thread right - does not exist anymore. If I want to build anything in nullsec then I have to buy/compress ore, ship them out into null, reprocess them and start building.

Its a real huge effort because you have to plan around every single piece of tritanium beforehand. The error margin is very small.

Thats why industry is no real casual thing anymore, you used to log in now and then and fill your slots, buy minerals and move stuff and put it on the market. Neither stressful or very risky (if you read intel, talked to your friends etc.)

I do not know where your perceptions come from, but the miner does not use the d-scanner / probes etc. Thats what all the other players are for and why 0.0 corps are always large.

Before the stealth bomber buff you even saw large mining gangs often in 0.0, so you usually had all the minerals to build stuff.

Shin Dari
Caldari
Posted - 2011.08.16 10:29:00 - [54]
 



If CCP want to increase production in null sec, then they need to do the following:

1. Players don't want to use BPOs in null sec, its just too risky for many. So the availability of BPCs should be increased. Reduce the BP copy time and allow a higher amount of runs.

2. To do the most basic type of industry a player needs at least two things, those being a decent reprocessing facility and manufacturing slots. Increase availability of those in all zones.

catinboots
Minmatar
Vintage heavy industries
Posted - 2011.08.16 11:38:00 - [55]
 

Edited by: catinboots on 16/08/2011 11:46:35
Edited by: catinboots on 16/08/2011 11:42:22
Edited by: catinboots on 16/08/2011 11:41:03
Edited by: catinboots on 16/08/2011 11:39:13
@ miraqu

Exactly , i was there in null sec with my industrial character in nullsec in 2010 and i made good money doing the grav sites
And who s fault is that
it has become almost impossible to do today , And who s fault is thatnot ccp not the game , but the lazy idiots who call them selves alliance leaders and their. Even more worthless kronies

Its easier grabbing money with moongoo and speculating with the price then develop the industry side of those systems , we all know it is relative easy to get the idustry rating up to 3 and mantaim that but gets much harder to. Get it to 4 or 5 and keep it there
So yes nullsec needs a idustrial buff. but not at the expense of the high sec dweller gameexperience
And certainly not by removing ice from high sec, will only get abused to fill their rmt pockets
What is really needed is a change in gamemechanic for mining , a more active way of mining that beats the mining bots
For null sec , maybe it is time to kill off those large alliances and put in a cap on how large(limited number of systems) a aliiance. Can be ,

Miraqu
Caldari
Posted - 2011.08.16 12:03:00 - [56]
 

I would not blame alliance leaders for not doing something that makes no sense at all.

Having 10 players mining with rorqual support will net far less than having those 10 players do sanctums and use the money to buy the needed stuff in Jita.

System upgrades do not include factory slots, refining efficiency and better prices.

The alliance leaders would not care if the player has his fleet ships financed by ratting, mining or PI. Nobody really cares how you could afford your fleet ships as long as you show up.

It is just not a sane economic decision. Nobody mines because its economically pointless, then nobody produces in 0.0 because you get no minerals and if you had them you have probably no slots and if you have them your bpc runs are used up.

Since nobody mines, it would be a waste of ISK to even buy the industry upgrades.

We would probably re-open our mining / production wing if it would just make sense to do it.

catinboots
Minmatar
Vintage heavy industries
Posted - 2011.08.16 12:46:00 - [57]
 

Originally by: Miraqu
I would not blame alliance leaders for not doing something that makes no sense at all.

Having 10 players mining with rorqual support will net far less than having those 10 players do sanctums and use the money to buy the needed stuff in Jita.

System upgrades do not include factory slots, refining efficiency and better prices.

The alliance leaders would not care if the player has his fleet ships financed by ratting, mining or PI. Nobody really cares how you could afford your fleet ships as long as you show up.

It is just not a sane economic decision. Nobody mines because its economically pointless, then nobody produces in 0.0 because you get no minerals and if you had them you have probably no slots and if you have them your bpc runs are used up.

Since nobody mines, it would be a waste of ISK to even buy the industry upgrades.

We would probably re-open our mining / production wing if it would just make sense to do it.

Part of me tend to agree with your point of view and my own experience agrees
So i wondering why even bother with idustry in null sec if most income comes from ratting and moongoo on the other hand , if logistics was t such a nightmare if you the only one doing it for your corp and the manufacturing gets a small buff i would be heading. Out back to null sec immediatly
Thou i really hate the nullsec amateur politics in nullsec
But like i said even with a small buff i would like to return
But nerfing high sec industry to death to get players into null sec is even a worse idea than the gold ammo dramma from last month

Eigenvalue
Posted - 2011.08.16 12:49:00 - [58]
 

You want to make nullsec industry easier? Make it easy to name hangar and ship hangar structures. For nullsec pos based corps it's intensely tedious to open every single hangar object looking for that one that contains your personal tab to dump your stuff into, or searching for the ship hangar that has your boats in it when reds pop into system and you only have a few moments to fit up.

If you can name labs, towers, containers, etc, seriously how hard would it be to be able to allow hangar structure naming?

Kotami
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.08.16 14:46:00 - [59]
 

It seems we're all throwing out ideas and raising concerns without context. CCP said:

Quote:
Geared towards T2

Our current proposal is that hisec is for volume T1 goods, lowsec will be for meta/faction gear eventually, nullsec is for T2, and wormholes are for T3


Ok, so CCP, you want to make 0.0 "geared toward T2". Fine. Let's frame the discussion around that.

Demand\Supply

  • As long as there are mission runners, low sec piracy, and war decs, there will always be demand for T2 products in hi sec

  • Encouraging T2 manufacturing in 0.0 will not change the demand for T2 products in hi sec

  • Total assumption: I'd wager a great deal of ISK that the vast majority of demand for T2 products is from hi sec dwellers

  • Outside of making T2 manufacturing in hi sec mechanically impossible, industrialists will always prefer the stability empire provides. After all, that's why we aren't seeing hi-tech factories sprouting up in downtown Mogadishu

  • Assuming T2 manufacturing will remain even remotely possible in hi sec, industrialists will simply roll any overhead costs incurred by these changes right back into their products



Commodities

  • T2 manufacturing does not consume a great deal of high end ores with the exception of Morphite

  • Without question, the most consumed commodities in T2 manufacturing are moon products

  • Both commodities are already exclusive to 0.0 so logically should be cheaper to buy there. By that assumption, 0.0 should already be the T2 industry capitol. Perhaps we should be asking ourselves why it isn't and framing the discussion around that.

  • Assuming PI remains possible in hi/low sec, self sufficient industrialists will continue to produce their own PI commodities. Everyone else will continue to buy them.



Risk\Reward

  • No industrialist is going to risk taking their researched BPOs into 0.0. It isn't only the risk of losing the ISK invested in them, but also the time in researching them. Losing BPOs in an outpost/POS/proposedmodularizedproductionstation - whether by destruction or denial - would absolutely destroy the industrialist's capacity to produce for months. Possibly years.

  • The lawlessness of 0.0 does not foster industry. Again, corruption, unpredictability, and instability is why Mogadishu isn't an industrial powerhouse. This is basic socioeconomics.

  • Without some way for an industrialists to mitigate the risk of losing the tools(BPOs) of their trade, there will never be a mass industrialist migration to 0.0. Fact. They can't just hop into another ship and get back on their feet.

  • If you want them to move to 0.0 there must be enough safety and stability for them to justify the risks. A few scrawny carrots are simply not going to get them to move.



Conclusions (Highly Opinionated)

  • This isn't as simple as changing a few percentages to encourage a mass emigration of industrialists from hi sec.

  • Having any appreciable effect on T2 manufacturing in 0.0 is going to require fundamental changes to other parts of EVE.

  • Encouraging industrialists to move to 0.0 can only be accomplished by retooling/redesigning/re-invisioning parts of EVE that have secondary\tertiary connections to T2 manufacturing. No changes in direct connections will get enough of them to move for you to claim success; industrialists will simply adapt to the changes in hi sec.

  • Propose ideas for discussion that decouples and/or mitigates the risk of keeping/transporting BPOs in 0.0 for T2 manufacturing. There is a reason governments and corporations aren't keeping trade secrets in downtown Kabul.



Kotami

CCP Greyscale

Posted - 2011.08.16 14:59:00 - [60]
 

Originally by: Antihrist Pripravnik
Personal Industrial Arrays


It's a good idea, but it's a niche we'd rather fill with redesigned starbases I think. We do definitely need to increase the manufacturing bandwidth of individual players though, for sure.

Originally by: El 1974
I don't understand the reasoning behind trying to make 0.0 more self-sufficient. The current economic model works. 0.0 activities are only profitable as long as high sec has something valueable to trade back for it. If you nerf that you will wreck the economy. Let the carebears do the grinding so you can keep 0.0 as the land of opportunity and adventure.
At most make some small changes. If you want industry in 0.0 then develop it on planets (Dust). Dust could be a competitor for highsec where 0.0 alliances will require effective control over space and invest in orbital structures.


The core problem we're trying to address is that the minerals for a Revelation are 1.5m m3, which is around 1.5 freighters. Fifty dreads (ie, a decent pre-supercarrier fleet battle) require 75 freighters full of minerals. Once you start building capital ships (never mind supercaps) the volumes moved start to get silly. We still want trade, we still want a healthy amount of stuff moving back and forth, but we want that amount of stuff to be sane as well, which it currently isn't.

Further, we can't really make logistics more interesting and meaningful (and vulnerable!) until we fix this issue, because the amount of stuff you need to move just to stay competitive with what other alliances have already built is too big to be viable if logistics get much more difficult. We need to tackle this problem from both ends at once.


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only