Welcome to Jester's Trek.
I'm your host, Jester. I've been an EVE Online player for about six years. One of my four mains is Ripard Teg, pictured at left. Sadly, I've succumbed to "bittervet" disease, but I'm wandering the New Eden landscape (and from time to time, the MMO landscape) in search of a cure.
You can follow along, if you want...

Tuesday, April 22, 2014

Differentiation

Sigh. I seem to have started another mini shit-storm and again it wasn't particularly intentional. I'm sorry about that.

I want to clarify the post I wrote on the upcoming industry changes a bit, and I'm going to keep this clarification short. But I do want to make sure that if I'm going to be roasted over a slow fire, I'm going to be roasted for things I actually said rather than things people think I said. So let's make sure that people understand what I didn't say here:
I did not say that industry in high-sec was going to be ending.
Please be clear on that because I think it's really really important.

What I did say is that every time CCP Greyscale has gotten his hands on something in the past, he has been a proponent for strong differentiation between various types of space... every single time. Put in simpler language, Greyscale likes to have things be worth doing in some parts of space and totally not at all worth doing in other parts of space. As a predictive model, this statement has in the past been very very accurate.

But this does not not not mean even if this turns out to be true that manufacturing things in high-sec is suddenly going to become a no-profit enterprise. Even when Greyscale strongly differentiates something, he doesn't differentiate the low end to zero. You can still run Sanctums and Havens and Hubs in Syndicate and Providence. You just can't make nearly as much money as you can doing the very same thing in Delve and Deklein.

Therefore, if Greyscale holds to past form, there will be things that it will be profitable to manufacture in high-sec... but I think there will also be lots of things where it will be more profitable to manufacture them elsewhere. That's all I was saying.

Except that I also said that I agree with this strategy and I think that in the long term view, it's healthy for the game. And I do think those things. I think you should make more money living in null-sec than living in high-sec... whatever it is that you do there.

Now by all means, go back to roasting me over a slow fire if you care to.

193 comments:

  1. Playing favorites with your customer base is never healthy, Ripard.

    Never.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He doesn't have "customers." He doesn't monetize this blog. While he may enjoy the recognition, he has been clear that he writes because he wants to. It's why you see other games also talked about. Leave the tired customer metaphors at home, next time.

      Delete
    2. Anon 8:04 I believe Onion was referring to CCP playing favorites with their customers and that Ripard should know that's not a healthy thing for a game.

      Delete
    3. "You can still run Sanctums and Havens and Hubs in Syndicate and Providence. You just can't make nearly as much money as you can doing the very same thing in Delve and Deklein."

      I think this 2 sentences alone are saying enough about CCP´s favorites.

      Delete
    4. And yet CCP has been "playing favorites" as you put it for at least the last four years now and it doesn't seem to have impacted them too badly.

      Your premise is completely ridiculous, though. In ANY other MMO, where are you going to make more money? The level 1 to level 15 area? Or the areas for higher level players? Sure, you can take your L80 player to the L1-15 area and leave him there forever. And that's exactly what a lot of EVE players have been content to do.

      And that applies to high-sec players whether those players want to do industry or suicide gank newbies and mining ships.

      Delete
    5. Seriously, Ripard? You think that is an appropriate analogy?

      Delete
    6. I think, I can see a pattern. You supported CCP´s favoring of Somers RMT-laundry, you support CCP´s favoring of the Nullsec-RMT-Cartels. What else did I miss?

      Delete
    7. It is an appropriate analogy. For all the :shobon:, null sec is and has always been a hard place to be new and ISK poor.

      PVP is a min/maxer's game, and nobody is more hapless by that measure than a new player with a half-million SP toon. Even 5 million SP is considered barely adequate.

      "Just hop in a Rifter and tackle!" is not really a counter-argument, either. That's one, limited role.

      Delete
    8. @Jester

      Probably because all the iterations have rarely effected the vast majority of High Sec players. This is a complete revamp of a primary High Sec activity for a vast majority of players who play EVE. (65% was the statistic right?) I am not a High Sec Industrialist, I am a Faction Warfare Player.

      However I am very wary of these changes for several reasons.
      1. If the cost scaling is extreme and makes High Sec manufacturing nonviable for a large portion of people I believe that is bad. You are directly nerfing an activity that a large portion of the player base participates directly in. And these players are not usually the type to handle a change to their play style. They will not move to Null Sec, Many of them do not WANT to move to Null Sec.

      You made this point yourself once when talking about James 315's CSM position. Nerfing High Sec simply to Nerf High Sec will result in a corresponding drop in Player Base Numbers.

      2. I believe CCP could achieve what they want IE. Making Null Sec Industry more profitable then High Sec by simply reducing the costs of Null Sec without Increasing the costs in High Sec. At the moment if Null Sec Installations don't have slots, and their scaling costs are less then High Sec and/or determined by the Alliances themselves that gives CCP more then enough leeway to buff Null Sec while leaving High Sec manufacturing relatively untouched.

      It would be rather simple wouldn't it? Stations have slots now. Which means that High Sec has a maximum amount of Industry slots that it can run. If you can scale the costs on the station correctly, you can achieve the Maximum Amount of production currently available in High Sec. But then if you scale costs correctly, (Low Sec would be lower because remember? Risk vs Reward? Although part of me doubts that Low Sec will be treated any differently from high sec.)

      Then if Null Sec fosters their Industry, and because it is cheaper for them to operate in Null Sec then in High Sec. They can produce more at less cost with more risk.Without directly nerfing High Sec production capability.

      Certainly High Sec will change but if CCP does it right I think they can change Industry so that Null Sec is less expensive to manufacture, but High Sec is not directly nerfed. And that will be better of null sec, for High Sec and for everyone else.

      Delete
    9. Ripard Teg said:

      "And yet CCP has been "playing favorites" as you put it for at least the last four years now and it doesn't seem to have impacted them too badly."

      Yes, as the PCU graph clearly shows skyrocketing growth until 2010, a peak in 2011, then stagnation and now a decline. No correlation at all can be demonstrated, though...

      "Your premise is completely ridiculous, though. In ANY other MMO, where are you going to make more money? The level 1 to level 15 area? Or the areas for higher level players? Sure, you can take your L80 player to the L1-15 area and leave him there forever. And that's exactly what a lot of EVE players have been content to do."

      And why there is no way to be L80 in hisec, if the gameplay involved is completely different to that in nullsec?

      Do you mean that people who plays in certain ways should stick to the L1-15 and only people who play the right way deserve the favors of CCP and become L80? What is playing EVE, a privilege?

      Delete
    10. So Ripard, your premise is that null-sec is the "endgame" of EVE and that low sec and w-space are only levelling arenas?

      Fuck you and the horse you rode in on.

      Delete
  2. This is good policy.

    If all space was the same; corporations, alliances, coalitions and individuals would have nothing to aspire to.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is exactly the WRONG view to take. Those of us who participate in things like HighSec, LowSec Piracy, Faction Warfare, Wormholers do not want to 'aspire' to Null Sec or any where else. We like the way we play EVE. I like flying in Faction Warfare. I like flying in smaller fleets and blowing up WTs.

      I do not want to go to Null. EVER NEVER EVER. Different sections of the game should be just that. Different.

      Delete
    2. Shegunna, my friend, which section of sov null do you aspire to .... the N3PL or the CFC side? From my little NPC null pocket it all looks exactly the same without differentiation and certainly gameplay that I don't find inspirational nor enticing.

      Delete
    3. I actually was referring more to individual regions/systems than being in the "null is endgame" crowd. One region of space should have great ratting, another great moon minerals, another great belts, etc. This applies to null, low and high... Though I believe that a 'great belt region/system' in high should be less valuable than one in low, which is less valuable than one in null, which is not due to forcing people to go there, but eves built-in risk/reward.

      BTW I'm in the WH's are endgame crowd. :-)

      Delete
    4. nullseccartelwarlordApril 22, 2014 at 3:50 PM

      This does sound cool. Though I wouldn't mind losec being almost equal to nulsec in terms of personal income (ratting, mining, missions) while sov null's advantage is more pronounced in group income (nationalized moons, industry). This would fit with the whole small gang/solo thing losec has going for it.

      Delete
    5. All space is already not the same, and it doesn't give players anything to aspire to. What player aspire to is being part of the team that they admire.

      As far as industry changes, all null sec needed was an even footing with hi sec industry. Hisec has countless NPC owned (indestructible, unassailable) stations with activity lines that are effectively free. Sov null only has what the player built themselves.

      The entire design of industry needs to be changed from NPC-enabled to player-enabled: some of this is coming with improvements to POS activity lines. The cost of NPC facilities in hisec is likely to go up, which is good. The downside is that sov null has indestructible outposts which will have a mechanical advantage over any other player-based industry. Even if outposts were destructible, they already have mechanical advantages in terms of defensibility and storage capacity over POSes, so they certainly don't need better reprocessing (and as we will come to see, cheaper/more efficient activity lines across the board).

      The differentiation needs to come from the players, not from attempting to Greyscale a solution (which is the opposite of MacGyvering a solution) where the game rules define some space as "better" than other space.

      Delete
  3. It's such a small and obvious leap from 'stuff will be less worthwhile in hisec' to 'manufacturing in hisec is doomed' that you shouldn't be at all surprised people made that leap.

    Null sec is already orders of magnitude better (in terms of income) than hisec, it should be pretty obvious what a scaled change to industry means if that's the scaling factor that will be used.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nullsec income really really isn't orders of magnitude better, high end combat anomalies are cool and all but they're pretty close to lvl4 missions when it comes down to it. PI extraction and exploration are really the only two things that can be done way better in nullsec than in highsec.

      Delete
    2. Go blow your smoke up someone else's ass. Let me know the next time you find a billion ISK module in a level 4 mission.

      Delete
    3. @mining the more income in null over Highsec makes it not worth if you take all the logistics and all the other things you had to do "behind the scenes" in account.

      Delete
    4. Been ratting in null for nearly two years, on an almost daily basis (except during wars). In that time, I've seen exactly one faction spawn in my own anomalies, and taken part in pulling the minerals out of two hauler spawns that somebody else killed. I've also sold dozens of scanned-down combat sites or run them with corp mates, only to have crap drops every single time. These billion ISK modules do apparently drop, but those drops happen so rarely that they can hardly be considered part of the typical null sec income stream.

      Delete
    5. “*if* that's the scaling factor that will be used.”

      By my accounting we’ve seen zero 2014 Fanfest presentations on these changes and viewed only 2 of 6 planned devblogs about the matter. That being said, I’m sorely disappointed that Ripard and the other members of CSM8 aren’t jumping directly to histrionics. What the hell is the matter with them?

      We already know that cost scaling between 0% and 14% means 0% in all of Null-Sec and 14% in all of Hi-Sec. It’s positively criminal that CSM8 hasn’t yet accepted this unannounced but already firmly established fact. My God, Dinsdale has strong evidence that the very code creating this deplorable situation was written by a member of the Null-Sec RMT Cartel and forwarded to CCP on thumb drive.

      Going off the rails is our moral duty. This is established procedure. Shame, shame! on any player not following procedure. And double shame on any CSM member not stoking those fires.

      DireNecessity

      Delete
    6. @DireNecessity: we have two devblogs announcing some important aspects of the changes, and Jester warming us up for Greyscale's "null sec needs to be better" approach to "fixing" industry.

      Is it really histrionics to make a prediction that null sec is going to get a much more efficient industrial base than hi sec or lowsec, given the details we already have?

      Delete
  4. I think you're right to have this neutral view Ripard. You yourself have said that you are an industry player for some percentage of your playstyle. To come out with this kind of opinion that has proven to be unpopular I think takes a lot of courage on your part, and for that I commend you.

    I definitely agree that null is intended to be the high-end of things, think of where all the news-worthy events in EVE have happened aside from the random eruption in highsec. Highsec can be for casuals who want to play their way, even hardcore players can find ways to make a profit there I'm sure after these changes come into effect.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "This is good policy.

    If all space was the same; corporations, alliances, coalitions and individuals would have nothing to aspire to."

    You're assuming that everyone should aspire to live in Null Sec. That's certainly not what I aspire to. Does that mean that sooner or later, as everything gravitates to Null, I'll be forced to leave Eve because I don't fit someone else's particular mold? I hope not.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nah, as I explained in my reply above, I meant that more as null alliances should find certain parts of null better than others, or lowsec alliances should find parts of low more valuable than others, carry on for WH and Highsec space.

      Just because null is more valuable overall than low which is more valuable overall than high doesn't mean you are forced to do one or the other. You have the ability to choose the amount of risk you want to undertake to do the activities you enjoy. If you choose less risk, you choose less reward.

      Delete
  6. You may mean well and however the re-balance was intended the message that has come across from the heart of Null sec in forum post as well as posts in the comments sections of this and other blogs is very clear.

    That message is that if you live in HiSec or LowSec you are of no importance and that you should be ashamed not only of wanting to play this game differently but of actually having the nerve to try and exist on the same shard as Null.

    As to Grayscale, I remember the anom rebalance. The alliance I was in and all of our allies lost a huge number of members within in a week of it going live simply because they couldn't afford to be in Null anymore. So as far as future for HiSec and LowSec industry goes the writing can be seen on the wall con not be more clearly seen.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "That message is that if you live in HiSec or LowSec you are of no importance and that you should be ashamed not only of wanting to play this game differently but of actually having the nerve to try and exist on the same shard as Null."

      This sums it up well for me. I don't want to live in null. I am all for differentiation but that doesn't have to mean that null is made into the apex for every activity.

      CCP should WANT diversity in their player base, surely?

      Delete
    2. Both of you are spot on. I found this quote on Massively.com (link below) and thought it insightful.

      "See, gaming fans, particularly those who have been gaming for a while (let's call them hardcore, for lack of a better term), know what they like. They've played a lot of games, they generally play games for long periods of time and as their primary means of recreation, and they don't take kindly to things they love being co-opted to service less invested fans."

      Oddly, the OP refers to challenges in Star Citizen, but I feel the above sentiment carries over to EVE as well.

      I am a casual player because of RL. There simply isn't any more time to devote to EVE. Because I give CCP my money, I resent CCP's view that my playstyle is unimportant and should be nerfed into the ground. Why don't I have just as much right as someone else to play in the sandbox?

      http://massively.joystiq.com/2014/04/20/stick-and-rudder-on-crowdfunding-entitlement-and-dev-abuse/#continued

      Delete
    3. FFS: I make more ISK in Empire than I ever could in Null, and none of the industry changes are going to affect me. AT ALL. If anything, It's going to eliminate a lot of the competition and make it easier

      And I spend MAYBE, 10 hours a month doing Empire Industrial stuff, and another 15 hours a month pvping.

      Delete
  7. "Now, the contempt with which the 'elite' sov nullsec players regard the rest of New Eden has become CCP's official policy."

    ReplyDelete
  8. The conclusion "Go Null or go home" will be the same.

    For your freedom of choice, you can choose if you want to kiss the backside of a SOV-warlord or be a paying pubbie-renter.

    I tend to say Dinsdale will be right and it is only a matter of time until there will be nothing more than very little Veldsparroids and missions without any reward left.

    I think you can be proud of your Seat in CSM8 and what you have done for all players that are not members of one of the powerblocks. GJ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "...any reward left." + in Highsec

      Delete
    2. Way to jump of the slippery slope and make any argument you might have had look stupid.

      Delete
  9. I'm getting pretty tired of seeing this nonsense about null sec. Null already has the best sites to run, the best ore to mine, mercoxit, moon goo income, tax income, the best ratting, etc, etc. Now it has to have the best manufacturing and refining too? And at the same time you guys had to shit all over the players who like to salvage?

    It is like the CSM and CCP are completely out of touch with who has been building all the ships, modules, rigs and all the other shit that gets shipped out to null. We are happy to educate you though, I cancelled three accounts yesterday and I'll cancel two more today. My only regret is that I paid for two or three months of time on two of them and wasted my money on this piece of shit game.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. EVE is hard. Printing ISK in highsec is easy. CSM and CCP acknowledge the risk/reward for manufacturing is out of balance. Sorry to see you go.

      Delete
    2. Indeed, "Eve is hard" unless you are a null sec crybaby and can rig an election to get what you want.

      Delete
    3. Actually, the risk/reward was right where many people were comfortable.

      -Lose a POS in high sec due to wardec...not preferred, but it could happen
      -Pay to fuel a high sec POS...fuel block prices are pretty steep, but acceptable
      -Attract wardecs with a POS and industry corp...cost of doing business
      -Shut down operations for a week while under wardec...grumble grumble
      -Risk losing materials or freighters to a gank...make more trips with less
      -Pay CCP while training a freighter alt...cost of preferred play style
      -Pay CCP while training an industrial alt...cost of preferred play style
      -Pay CCP while training a refining alt or combine and wait, wait, wait...hmm

      Changes that are too much risk or too little reward:
      -Lose a 2 bil BPO that took me a year to research--POS destruction
      -Lose a 2 bil BPO that took me a year to research--inability to lock it down
      -Inability to work cooperatively due to above reason
      -Log in twice a day to see if I'm under wardec...can't take a "no tech" vacation or any vacation to that end
      -Become a "renter" under someone else's "rules"
      -Fund the renting alliance and deal with their politics, though I might not agree
      -Pay CCP while I train JF skills
      -Make a huge move to "renter null" knowing that SOV changes are coming with uncertain consequences
      -Move to one of the NPC Null regions and hope the "Big Blue Donut" doesn't decide to move in.

      That's just too much crap for me.

      Delete
    4. You seem to think that high-sec should have the same value as null-sec, which is simply ridiculous. As I said above, should L1-15 areas in other MMOs have the same value as the areas for much higher level players?

      So, YES, null-sec should have better income for EVERYTHING than high-sec. It should be better for EVERYTHING than high-sec.

      Simple enough to understand?

      Delete
    5. @Jester: Yes, 'fuck highsec' followed by 'fuck lowsec' is easy to understand.

      Delete
    6. Yep, this is all he´s saying.

      Delete
    7. No, I expect to not have to move to null sec in order to play the economic side of the game, arguably the best part, in a competitive manner. You know, like I have been doing FOR THE PAST DECADE. Is that simple enough for you to understand? I like how all of this is a big suprise to you, what were you doing in Iceland when CCP showed this to you, starring off into space dreaming of goats?

      Delete
    8. "So, YES, null-sec should have better income for EVERYTHING than high-sec. It should be better for EVERYTHING than high-sec. "

      Thank you for showing your true colors. You just lost my respect. Completely.

      Delete
    9. Highsec should not be the kiddie pool. Lowsec should not be forgotten. Nullsec should not be reserved for ~elite PVP~ (and who's kidding about that, anyway? it's N+1 pushing F1 for great cultural victory).

      High sec needs veteran content. Not necessarily as lucrative as null sec, because the costs are different, so the benefits should be too. It should have more content that appeals to high-SP players. Incursions were a good start.

      Null sec should have more newbie-friendly content, because podjumping out the starter systems and into your alliance's nullsec home on day 1 is a perfectly valid play choice which CCP should not discourage.

      Lowsec should be considered on its own terms, not as a stepping stone from high sec to null sec. Ditto wormholes, which I also think should get some more newbie-friendly content.

      Treat the zones of space as terrain, not as themepark-style leveled areas, and EVE becomes a lot richer.

      Delete
    10. Eve should overall be more newbie-friendly. Let´s take the example of B-R. The number of active (logged in) players spiked. How long did the new players stay? Until they witnessed their first real massfight? (really exciting under heavy TiDi) Until they realized that Eve is nothingmor than a chat-addon for Excel? Until they got their assets scammed the second time in 4 days? (No, this adds nothing to the NPE) Until they got their Venture ganked?

      Delete
    11. rabble rabble rabble. null-sec hi-sec. rabble rabble rabble
      African snake! snake oooooh a snake.

      That is as much levity as I can muster on this subject.
      Adapt and overcome, or decease. That's all I'm saying.

      Delete
    12. Decease. CCP doesn't need our dirty subscription money. Nullsec can fund EVE on their own.

      Delete
    13. But this isn't another MMO, this is EVE. We don't have levels.

      And why are high levels areas are more dangerous and rewarding? Because the *monsters* are bigger! Why should monster size affect industry?!?

      It makes perfect sense that many things are more rewarding in null sec: more resources, bigger rats, more "room" etc. I'm also a bit bothered that L4 missioning can be better than null...

      But why would a POS work better in null than in highsec? Why would trade flourish in lawless areas? It makes a lot of sense to me that these activities work well in highsec. While it was a serious problem that there were too many obstacles to nullsec industry, this doesn't mean that high sec must be gimped for everything. Differentiation doesn't have to mean high sec sucks.

      Delete
    14. Jester

      Your analogie doesn’t t work on several levels:
      1- EVE has never been about a linear guided progression. There is no lvl 1-15 area then when u finish u leave it and never come back. There is no quests leading u from an area to a higher one, no end level boss. It is the opposite of that. Or should I say it is supposed to be the oppsit of that. A sandbox! You want to build u castle here in the “1-15 area” go ahead. You want to play along? Go ahead. You want to build stuff and sell them without undocking? GO AHEAD!
      Now, if this philosophy has changed, and EVE has become another linear MMO, plz do tell.
      2- EVE is all about different flavor and playstyle. You like large fleet ops and living in your own empire with thousands of other ppl? Go Null. You like small scale PVP? Go low. You like weird things : ) go WH. And you like solo playing doing some trading , maybe industry, missioning, whatever … in relative safety, go High sec. No region should be the best in all, or most aspect of the game.
      3- Considering what ur analogie (lvl 1-15 high sec, and 15-30 low sec, and end game null) where does WH fall into?
      4- These changes are killing solo play. Again, if you want a linear guided MMO, go ahead, push everyone into big corps in null. But until now there was a niche for solo play…
      5- And finally, out of all analogies in the world, you debunked people’s complaints by comparing EVE to a theme park MMO (1-15 noob area, then …) I think you should have gone full ballistic and said that you wanted EVE to be another WOW : ) this way ppl on both side of the argument would hate you

      Delete
    15. "So, YES, null-sec should have better income for EVERYTHING than high-sec. It should be better for EVERYTHING than high-sec. "

      Yes because we should all aspire to be slaves. F1 pushing zombies in Ti-Di fights.

      Delete
    16. Pure market trading is where its at in highsec. I make all my isk on NPC corp toon. No POS, no wardecs, 8m SP. Will still profit in highsec after this "5-10%" tax increase.

      Delete
    17. @Dan: As I said in the original post, my premise that null-sec should always be better than high-sec also presumes that sooner or later, CCP will fix the myriad of things that are wrong with null-sec sov as it exists today.

      Delete
    18. @Jester: You do realize that this makes your premise complete idiocy, yes?

      Swear to god, you got some kind of played by the sov-null CSM members. They mist have loved you.

      Delete
    19. @ Jester regarding "It should be better for EVERYTHING than high-sec".
      I respect your opinion and I don't want to grumble on that.
      But im not really sure that _EVERYTHING_, really everything, should be better. Well, at least, im not sure that "everything better in null" is good for game.
      I didnt yet decided to which side in this debate i am leaning, and effects of this - future will tell, of course.
      But that absoluteness in your (and game's developer) stance is something that somewhat itches me...
      But thanks for clarifying your position. It is always better to have "itching" opinion than no opinion at all. :)

      Delete
    20. @Jester

      The problem with making that presumption is that it's completely backwards to do it the way it has been done (industry first, sov later), especially considering CCP's poor track record in getting around to long-promised features/changes. If they ever get around to sov fixes at all, it may very well be so far down the road that these industry changes will have done their damage long before any sov fixes can bring everything into proper balance. Assuming CCP will make this work by fixing sov at some point in the future is poor design strategy. As the CSM, you guys should have really put your collective foot down on this issue and told CCP not to roll out these changes until they have some sov fixes to go along with them. In not insisting on this, you have failed a large portion of the players you represent, and the end result may be very damaging to CCP's health as a company.

      Congratulations; I hope you're very satisfied with yourselves.

      Delete
  10. As a highsec manufacturing tycoon, these changes worry me. I do not like them. I do not want to see my margins squeezed by the new demand-based station costs.

    The entire reason I do highsec manufacturing is to pay for PLEX and my FW ship losses (and then some, because I'm greedy). I manufacture in highsec because it's very, very easy to make money there with very little effort or risk.

    Obviously, these changes are good for the game overall, even though I don't like them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, the people running Sanctums and Havens didn't like it too much either when those were nerfed across 60% of space. They adapted and so will you.

      Delete
    2. "Null or get out"

      Message received and understood.

      Delete
    3. Or we won't.

      Delete
    4. I know some of the people who adapted... by moving back into highsec, then eventually getting bored and leaving.

      I think the only thing that kept them around in the end was the ability to talk to newbies, regale them with stories, and give them advice.

      The problem with "adapt or die!" is that it's in CCP's interest for people to do the former, but not the latter. With the incentive to stay where they wanted to be taken from them, and no real incentive to stay anywhere else, is it any wonder that these 2003-2005 players eventually left?

      Delete
    5. OP here again.

      @Jester I was actually agreeing with you. I may not personally like the changes because it'll make things harder, but I agree it'll be good for bringing some balance back into the game.

      I also think it's way too soon to predict how *much* harder it'll be (i.e. how tightly manufacturing margins will be pinched and how the market will react) since we've had exactly 2 (of 8?) dev blogs released so far.

      Delete
    6. +1 to Anon 11:27.

      Delete
    7. "Well, the people running Sanctums and Havens didn't like it too much either when those were nerfed across 60% of space. They adapted and so will you."

      Yeah I remember it well, most of the ones in my Alliance "adapted" by dropping accounts and leaving Null or dropped out the game altogether.

      Experience tells me that anything Grayscale touches is doomed but they still let him out of his box why I can't say but they do.

      Delete
  11. [bad joke]
    Well, if this is yet another Jester shitstorm, but don't just get Greyscale banned as well?
    [/bad joke]

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I could go for that. What's the problem? Who would miss him? Oh, who would miss him that matters to me?

      Delete
    2. [bad joke]
      I would love to debate about Greyscale getting banned, but I am afraid that would involve discussing side issues that Jester does not want to hear.
      [/bad joke]

      Delete
    3. Well, it's not as if this is Jester's site (erhhh...?), so maybe the rest of us wants to hear? Spill yer beans plz.

      (In Mr Ripard's defense (someone should make a "The Mittani"/"Mittens"/"Alex Giosomethingsomething" joke out of "Ripard Teg"/"Jester"/"whathisname" ;-) he's always (and did so in the recent post also) expressed...a mild distaste...with Mr Greyscale... I wonder how their physical meetings have been, since that animosity is quite public knowledge)

      Also: I agree with Jester, but that's rly totally beside the point.

      Delete
  12. So when HS manufacturers can no longer compete due to everything being sold at razor thin Null margins, the question each of them will ahve to ask themselves will be, do I put up with daily abuse from Null PvP'ers or do I quit?

    Because that's exactly what'll happen. Two of my friends quit because of exactly this. The anti-"Carebear" mentality is too strong. Until Null's attitude to manufacturers changes, all this will do is drive off players.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yet most of the indy in eve is in Hi-sec so how is that gonna work? The reality is nothing is gonna change on the large scale, hi-sec indy will still be the norm. Hi-sec indys can always move to 0.0 to do it, but most won't despite the claims that 0.0 is safer than hi-sec.

      Delete
    2. I am an Empire Manufacturer. My Margins? On Average? 70% to 150%.

      Do a TINY bit of homework. There are about 500 markets NOT being taken advantage of because I don't have 500 man hours per week to spend doing this shit...

      Delete
    3. Dannar. You forget that there will be several rounds of consequences that will be all cumulative. First, this will raise the prices of stuff at high sec. Then CCP will most likely continue to reduce customer base's income in high sec, affecting their purchasing power. This reduces the income stream to the high sec industry. At each stage there will be trickle of players out of the game as their tipping point is reached, or their friends have left and they see no point at staying. Each time people leave it will affect little by little to the high sec economy. Null sec players will likely only to affect it all adversely on every level and speed up the decline. Your margins will fall little by little until you no longer feel like you are playing game, but doing work. And when it comes to that time, it is time for you too to leave the game.

      EVE hasn't been first game to step into this path and won't be the last either. But I do hope that CCP has the guts to step out of this path.

      Delete
  13. Differentiation is good.

    Ok, most things that generate ISK (or resources) are better in null.

    I can handle if industry is 'better' in null. Honestly, I can. If we make the assumption that most of manufacturing (excluding supers and capitals) is currently produced in empire space (high and low) and we further assume that these changes in the cost of producing goods in empire space is designed to shift this percentage so that more of the goods are produced in Null, I'm ok with this.

    However, if it turns out that these changes tip the balance so that nearly all the manufacturing is done in Null, then we have a problem.

    If it turns out that about half of all manufacturing (excluding super and cap production) is done in Null, then Greyscale will have hit the mark. Balancing the relative safety of hisec against its higher costs. However, if more than half of non-capital manufacturing is done in Null, then the changes have gone too far.

    Considering how long it has taken CCP to make these changes, I cannot imagine that after six months of null dominance in manufacturing CCP would be willing to dial back the changes

    ReplyDelete
  14. I would dearly love to have a dev, or team of dev's, explicitly describe what they think the effect of these changes will be.

    I am not talking the changes, but the fallout. I assume that these changes are designed to drive subscriptions higher, and the null sec cartel mouthpiece Jester flatly stated "Except that I also said that I agree with this strategy and I think that in the long term view, it's healthy for the game."

    So what precisely does CCP expect this to all play out, subscription wise, in the short term and long term.

    I also now know precisely what the cartel mouthpiece meant a few months ago when he stated, and I paraphrase, "a lot of people will be upset where the game is going, but too damn bad, good riddance"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dins, you're making a loud noise over this because - what? You're right and CCP and the CSM is wrong?
      There have been plenty of hints in the storyline that this is the way things were headed. Why so blind?

      Delete
    2. @Quandry, Because I have been working at this hobby called Eve for over 5 years, and have invested thousands of hours into it. Yes, I have been screaming for 18 months, at least, about the fact that the cartels were planning on wrecking high sec for RMT purposes. So I was not blind to it.
      Go read the goon economic leader's comments on page 75 or 76 of the dev blog to my questions. He states that , yeah, we see subs going down in the short term, and goons get to activate some plans they developed years ago. They have been working with CCP for years to get these changes done, because it benefits them hugely.

      I get so bent out of shape because there seems to be nothing anyone outside of the cartels and their lackey dev's can do about it. And that is just plain wrong.

      Delete
    3. @ Dins

      Dude, you are falling for hte biggest Goon Troll of all-time. You are feeding their fire....Stop already

      Get a new vocabularly that does not include the words, Goon, Cartels, RMT.

      If you can do this, your "cause" would be greatly improved and vastly more effective.

      Cred

      Delete
    4. Sounding a klaxon in the fog of war does not bring allies, it just puts folk on edge.
      Goons are not an undead master race race with dev familiars, they're just better at marshalling themselves than everybody else. That takes some deep and serious understanding of the games political topography.
      I honestly thought they would have cannibalised themselves by now. I've been playing roughly the same amount of time as you and I can wait a little longer for a goon implosion. They're ripe for it.

      Delete
  15. Here's the problem with balancing the rewards:

    The null coalitions are capable of creating citadels in sov-null that are significantly safer than empire space. Who's safer, a month-old character in Caldari Provisions flying around in New Caldari Prime (1.0), or a month-old character in Goonswarm Federation flying around in VFK-IV (-0.85)?

    And what's Burn Jita, after all? It's the null powers showing they can turn the heart of empire space into a death zone, and walk away laughing. If risk and reward were balanced, Burn Jita would be followed by something like Burn VFK, with damage proportional to VFK's -0.85 sec status as opposed to Jita's 0.9. Is there any possibility of such a thing happening the way EVE is constructed these days?

    The risks in empire space are steadily increasing, financed by the null powers. What has increased the risks to operating in null in the past year? Aside from metagaming shenannigans, I mean.

    (And no, "go nulll or go home" is not an option for me. I went to null, and left for high poorer than I went in, because one of the high-order powers camshafted the people who invited me into null. If success or failure can be determined by what side of whose bed someone else woke up on, higher up the chain of command, that's not an enjoyable game, that's more like Russian roulette.

    Played with an AK-47.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Who's safer, a month-old character in Caldari Provisions flying around in New Caldari Prime (1.0), or a month-old character in Goonswarm Federation flying around in VFK-IV (-0.85)?"

      Well, here's the killboard for New Caldari: https://zkillboard.com/system/30000145/ -- so far today, there have been 3 kills, over a population of maybe 1,000 to 2,000 pilots who have passed through.

      And here's the one for VFK: https://zkillboard.com/system/30002904/ -- so far today, there have been more than 40 kills, over a population of maybe a few hundred pilots who have been present in local.

      Delete
    2. Who's safer, a guy AFKing a Sanctum in MPPA-A (-0.59), or of guy AFKing a sanctum in Heydieles (0.3)?

      Delete
    3. nullseccartelwarlordApril 22, 2014 at 2:12 PM

      You people who think deklein is safe have no idea what you are talking about. You people who think deklein is safer than hisec are approaching peak dinsdale.

      Goon space is not some magical land in the clouds with ponies frolicking about in peace. It is full of lazy ratting carriers and lazy ishtars who would rather lose their ship to one of the three roving gangs present during peak hours than remain at the keyboard. Once in a while they attempt a defense which may or may not end in complete disaster but ratting is still worth it. That is what null is about. High risk. High reward. If you want to fly your autism chariot you are perfectly safe in hisec as long as your modules are worth less than a billion.

      Delete
  16. Risk verses reward in MY Eve? Unthinkable!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fatuous comment to avoid real debate? Simples!

      Delete
    2. I'll buy into this "risk vs reward" argument only when someone tells me where the risk is in high-sec ganking.

      Oh, look, my dessie got destroyed by Concord! I lost a whole 10M ISK and only made 100M+ profit on the gank.

      Oh, look I took a sec status hit! Now my -10 status has dropped to -10.

      With the current game mechanics, there is a zero percent chance of being killed by Concord before you gank someone, even with blinky red status. Bubbles don't work in high sec, so high-sec players have no chance of catching a ganker before he ganks someone. And even if they could catch him/her, a high-sec player can't even pod a ganker, without taking a massive sec status hit.

      Risk vs. reward? What a joke design philosophy.

      Delete
    3. If bubbles worked in highsec the only people who would ever get caught in them would be the miners and industrialists. Please think.

      Delete
  17. Dear Jester.

    In the othe post you mentioned, that you will be surprised, if there were more than 5% Indu-players ine Eve. While i think this number is way to small (or did you mean 5% of players with 25% of the accounts are industrials?), what do you think how many of them will stop playing and how many follow the new spirit "Go Null or go home!"?

    I would bet, the fallout will be, that more players choose the first option and CCP is loosing even more revenue than now...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I meant players, yes. I am a single industrial (sometimes) player with 5-6 industry alts.

      Delete
  18. So CCP Greyscale has become a sage overnight? Did I miss something?

    The problem with the reward success/punish failure model is that it creates feedback loops. The successful are rewarded for being successful are rewarded for being succesful, ad infinitum, and the unsuccessful are punished for being unsuccessful are being punished for being unsuccessful, ad infinitum. The net result is that whichever alliance seizes the best ground then gains an advantage which increases superlinearly over time. The result is a nullsec which rapidly settles into a static arrangement, which is then reinforced over time. The only possible changes are from human drama like the recent BRAVE IT guy's fit of pique, or the abrupt implosion of -DD-.

    Besides, the argument fails the laugh test: should high sec have the best rewards because the empires there conquered and held territory successfully for hundreds of years? No, in fact--and sensibly--the lore says that Empire's resources are largely depleted, and the best resources are undeveloped on the fringes of civilization. There's your conflict driver.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't get me wrong. I still don't like the guy any more than I ever have. But in this case, he's the right tool for the job.

      Delete
    2. Tool. Heh. Heh, heh. Kinda says it.

      Delete
    3. Time will tell.

      If it turns out like his truesec rebalance, the stasis currently affecting nullsec will be locked in more or less indefinitely. I think the fear of that outcome is pretty much what has Mord Fiddle throwing in the towel.

      I think Mord's being hasty (or else he's just burnt out and looking for an excuse to leave), but seeing Greyscale's name associated with this change makes me nervous.

      Delete
    4. @Anon0908: Yeah, sorry. I couldn't resist. ;-)

      Delete
  19. Ripard, lets be honest here, what did hi-sec industry folks really want and expect from an industry rework or the oft cried for 'industry expansion'? A new UI is the only thing i can think of. It was always going to be nerfs to hi-sec because it's too perfect an environment to do industry in. Be careful what you wish for ...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, I think it's fair to say that all they wanted was UI tools to make this money-making proposition even more profitable.

      Delete
    2. @Jester: OK, stop beating the 'hate the rich carebear' drum. Historically, nullsec makes 67% of the ISK in EVE. Highsec makes 26%. Lowsec makes 7%!

      http://k162space.com/2014/04/18/historical-profits-by-solar-system

      So please explain to me again where giving nullsec an even bigger piece of the pie is a good thing for everybody?

      Delete
    3. This is such a small sample size as to be irrelevant. Your profit model is based on your profit making.

      If I were to run that same model, 90% of my isk making would be done in low-sec.

      Delete
    4. K162Space also does capital manufacturing for the most part, as I understand it. It's unsurprising that most of his capital sales are in nullsec.

      The thing about nullsec is that, barring a very few exceptions, there actually is not enough demand there, believe it or not. If I, as a hobby manufacturer want to build the same 10 items day-in, day-out, I can actually sell them (provided I choose well) somewhere like Jita. There's no way to do that in null, and, particularly when supplying stuff that isn't, say, VFK, you can do it with a lot less effort just buying in a hub like Jita or Amarr and shipping it out to sell with a markup, compared to acquiring the materials (which you'll probably also have to import because, again, there's not a reliable market) and building locally.

      Delete
    5. "all they wanted was UI tools to make this money-making proposition even more profitable"

      Oh wow. If it's that hard for you to hide your contempt for industrialists, it might be time to step away from the keyboard and go outside. Sit on a bench, watch a sunset, get some of the bitter out of your system. Because at this point in time it's obvious we can't have a conversation.

      Delete
    6. You guys do know that Jester make t2 as his main income source in the game?

      Delete
    7. Yeah, the K162 numbers were for that particular player, not any sort of in-game metric. I myself make 100% of my industrial income in high-sec.

      Delete
  20. All this is really going to mean is that you won't be able to do your highsec manufacturing as easily within 4 jumps of Jita. Seriously folks, highsec does not mean Jita. Get the fuck out of Jita. I can find all kinds of highsec manufacturing sites that are nearly unused because everyone thinks they need to be right in Jita. Hell, at least go to Dodixie; you can sell your stuff at higher prices.

    There's a lot more to highsec than the trade hubs, and everything not being in that one-stop-shop package can only be good for highsec. That, plus anything that drives Dinsdale crazt has to be good. It's hilarious how that level of extremisim and constant crying and doomsaying can make you start to hate your own position.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is true. I think the changes to high sec will be good, on balance.

      I mostly object to the combination of "null sec needs moar" and "wait, what's low sec again?" I don't think this cause any grand exodus of industry to null sec, either, I'm just really tired of that refrain. When they're gloating, it's AFKtars as far as the eye can see. When they're angling for a new shiny, suddenly they're poor and beset with Biblical plagues of Interceptors.

      And you don't dare bring up low sec when they're arguing risk/reward, either, because low sec is just there for midpoints and staging.

      Delete
  21. Honestly, high sec industry is not going to go away. In fact, it may even be buffed a bit -- especially in blueprint research and copying -- by the elimination of production slots in high sec. Yes, the costs will go up. But the market will adjust to those costs with astonishing alacrity. Systems that are currently considered "too far from Jita" will become viable to reduce the impact of cost scaling. More hauling will take place, resulting in a boon to services such as Red Frog.

    Null sec industry, even with these buffs, will never approach the level of production and (especially) resource gathering that is seen in high sec. It's far too easy for a single cloaky or a nearby roam to shut down mining. In addition, the skill train needed for a player to remain viable in null sec is simply incompatible with the training of all the needed mining and industry skills. This is especially true when you consider that the income from null sec ratting will always remain more lucrative than the (time delayed) income from mining and industry.

    Honestly, it's just way too soon to make predictions about how these changes are going to ruin the game in high sec. Only 2 of the 6 dev blogs have even been published. Moreover, the chances are very high that your predictions are simply wrong, because you aren't accounting for the fact that market will adjust and your eventual profit margins -- unless you really are willing to sell things for less than it cost you to make them -- will remain largely where they are. There have been several, times when I though that my game and preferred play style was going to be ruined by some change that CCP was making. I thought that when NPC PI taxes were sharply raised in high sec, when they made it all but impossible to use the Hulk in null sec, and even when the ESS was rolled out a few months ago. In every case, I was wrong. Just like those who are predicting gloom and doom for high sec industry are wrong now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ^ This guy gets it! Thanks God there are those out there that can reason things out before getting butthurt! +9000 to you, Sir!

      Delete
  22. All I would say Jester is that you need to look at history. In most cases over the last few years when the community has caused a shitstorm against something you said, you have in the end admitted you were wrong (i'm ignoring the erotica1 thing as most of the people complaining were a tiny minority who just post a lot)

    It might be worth taking a step back and thinking about this. Are these changes good for the playerbase? Sure they make the game make more sense....but do they make the game better or worse for the majority of players?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why did I just get a mental image Miss World asking for "world peace" for Christmas. Clearly there is something wrong with my faculties.

      Delete
    2. Not forgetting that unlike a few years ago, eve is now getting competition. Even if EVE was in great shape (which it is most definitely not) it would take a serious hit.

      CCP decide now to shake up everything to prove how macho they are? More like idiotic. They constantly eschew fixing what actually needs to be fixed for stupid vanity vaporware, now they decide to bugger about with the only part of the game that actually works well - the economy. They still have not fixed the POS's the huge amount of obsolete content, sov or started working on getting the game up to date to keep it in the running.

      For the last two (four if you count the lead up to Incarna) years we've had crap expansion with minimal work (tiericide FFS, that could have been done with a weekly patches), minor changes to scanning WOO HOO) whilst they piss our subs up against the vanity wall of look an FPS, or look a VR FPS - which given CCP's history will tank. Lets face it the gulf between what CCP promise and deliver is so big you could drive a bloody supertanker through with no fear. Incarna, ring mining WOD, WIS, DUST to name a few total failures.

      I'm actually saddened Jester, your blog says you are a bitter vet, but you continually go on about how great this will be. Sad fact of the matter is you've been bought by all the nice graphs they show you. The rest of us are just left with the shite that is an actual update (there hasn't been a proper 'expansion' for far too long.

      Oh and the Stargate vision? I call dibs on that being bull shite that will go nowhere.

      Delete
    3. This ^^. I've only been playing Eve for 3 months but as a software developer, it became immediately obvious to me that CCP just doesn't have the cohesive vision to drive product development being simple iterations.

      When vast parts of your game are in need of overhaul, you need a clear design vision, not just a feature backlog voted on by q community and designed through community.

      Who is their lead architect? Where is the one sentence description of the vision of eve that's used to guide all other design decisions? Without it they're just going to stay stuck in maintenance mode and eventually get disrupted/replaced by something that was built better from the ground up.

      I think they're aware of that risk, bit it seems like so far their plan has been to use Eve revenue to bootstrap their next hit game but obviously that strategy is not working.

      - moosha

      Delete
    4. Have to agree there. There doesn't seem to be much of guiding vision these days. Just some nebulous stuff said by CCP Seagull who then disappeared (maternity leave?).
      I think if these industry changes were presented in such a way that it demonstrated some type of future goal as opposed to the perception of it being a sop to Null-seccers there wouldn't be this much uproar.

      Delete
  23. Eh. I think the playerbase is over-reacting. Moving things from null to high-sec isn't easy for most people, you need the logistics train and gankers are willing to put quite some effort into nabbing jump freighters.

    High-sec is also actually quite huge and I'm sure there are very many stations which will be quite profitable. High volume items which are mostly demand driven in price will probably be produced at places like Jita still, where-as more cost sensitive items will be shipped in from elsewhere.

    The only thing that can be said with certainty is that the average cost of stuff is going to increase. Which mainly hits ratters/ mission runners...and heaven's knows everyone has been baying for that to be nerfed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nullsec makes 67% in the income in EVE. Lowsec makes 7%. Highsec makes 26%. CCP is going to take some of Highsec's 26%, give most of that to nullsec, and a few left over scraps to lowsec to make the game more fair and balanced.

      We're being told this will make the game better for everybody.

      Delete
    2. Most of the income null sec makes goes right into the high sec industrialists pockets, someone has to build all that shit and it's not happening in 0.0

      Delete
  24. ****** Ripard - your 100% dead correct on this. Stay the course, ignore the noise ****

    To all the empire-bears out there butthurt over the changes....HAHAHAHA

    How's that for true colors?

    Unsub - go ahead. Quit the game you love to play and have spent countless hours/days/weeks/months/years.

    Just unsub - because clearly you dont have the ball or brains to TRY the changes out, see how they play out, or god forbid actually try moving operations out to a null-sec pocket?

    If that is you, please leave already so the rest of us can get on with enjoy a new Eve that is taking problematic game mechanic issues head-on for the betterment and longevity of the game.

    I would rahter lose a portion of the "completley stuck in their ways" indy accounts then lose a game I love.

    Harden the fuck up.....

    Credacom

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. oh look another witless troll

      Delete
    2. "I would rahter lose a portion of the "completley stuck in their ways" indy accounts then lose a game I love."

      Don't assume you can keep the game you love while losing the players who pay for it.

      Delete
    3. Creo...Lose enough of those you don't like... and you will lose the game you supposedly love. Period.

      Delete
    4. Oh look, another seven-stone internet tough guy.

      Delete
  25. Oh wow, your so persuasive, but no I don't think I'll head to Null to be some slumlords meal ticket thanks.

    I'll stay in LowSec and watch the flames while you fanatics on both sides drive the casual players out of EvE followed by EvE into the ground.

    By then there should be some viable alternatives to try.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And yet, I presume you buy clothing and electronics and gasoline in the real world.

      Your world view is rather hypocritical, I'm afraid.

      Delete
    2. You've been coming out with the most bizarre crap lately, Jester.

      How does the virtual world of New Eden have anything to do with one's "world view" of the real world?

      Delete
    3. "And yet, I presume you buy clothing and electronics and gasoline in the real world.

      Your world view is rather hypocritical, I'm afraid."

      And exactly what does that have to do with someones willingness to sit back and let the powers that be doomsday EvE I wonder?

      An explanation would be appreciated.

      Delete
    4. It's not hypocritical to want a game to be an escape from the real world.

      In fact, Hilmar has come out and said, flat-out, that he wants EVE to be that escape.

      Delete
    5. "And yet, I presume you buy clothing and electronics and gasoline in the real world."

      Huh? You are comparing the shit we have to tolerate in real life to live our lives and provide for our families to Eve? Real life is here to stay, Eve life is just an unsub away. You think that because people have to tolerate greed and cronyism in real life that they will suffer it in a game. I think not.

      Delete
  26. Your analogie doesn’t t work on several levels:
    1- EVE has never been about a linear guided progression. There is no lvl 1-15 area then when u finish u leave it and never come back. There is no quests leading u from an area to a higher one, no end level boss. It is the opposite of that. Or should I say it is supposed to be the oppsit of that. A sandbox! You want to build u castle here in the “1-15 area” go ahead. You want to play along? Go ahead. You want to build stuff and sell them without undocking? GO AHEAD!
    Now, if this philosophy has changed, and EVE has become another linear MMO, plz do tell.Your site is very excellent.It is very useful for everyone .I like it very most.
    It is very important for earning money. So earn money by using this Online. You can earn money at stay at home.If you can earn money ,Please visit this site Visit W3Schools,because it's very helpful for your earn money at stay at home,by using this Online.

    ReplyDelete
  27. "Now, by all means, go back to roasting me over a slow fire, if you care to."

    Really? Are you in middle school?

    As someone who acts in a role of pseudo-leadership within our gaming community, it would be really great if you would stop whining all the time. I mean you might as well have started singing "Nobody likes me, everybody hates me" or something.

    How about you act a bit less like you're a 12 year old Call of Duty player and more like you're a mature adult playing a mature game.

    You're not the victim.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And how about we stop treating Jester like a priest-king, whom we kill and replace if the rains don't come?

      Delete
    2. @Minerva - this is EVE. EVE is harsh. If Jester can't take the s**t and stones, then he shouldn't climb up on the pulpit.

      Delete
    3. I think you're going to find that Jester's willingness to go into detail to find workable solutions, rather than just drape thin arguments over the threat to rage-quit if you don't agree, is not so thick on the ground that we can assume that someone will take up his position if he is treated so badly as to actually consider quitting himself.

      Delete
  28. Jester, in your last blog on this topic, you indicated that you would have preferred CCP address sovereignty issues before attempting this industry rebalance. I have to concur wholeheartedly with this sentiment, and at the same time, wonder why you didn't push this part harder. I think that a sov revamp is crucial to make sense of these industry changes, and failing to change sov first is a glaring oversight on CCP's part.

    As it stands now, the face of the industry changes appears to be a blatant attack on high sec industrialists. I don't think this was the intent, but without changes to the sov system, there is no proper context to put the industry changes in perspective. As a result, a large number of players will either not understand the intent behind the industry changes, and so will feel slighted and choose to leave, or they will see the intent, but without any kind of timeline to expect sov issues to catch up to and balance out the industry changes, may also choose to leave. Either way, the outlook is not good. CCP really put the cart before the horse this time, and it is coming back to bite them.

    Frankly, I think the problem largely comes down to an issue you have covered before: force projection. This ugly little topic keeps rearing it's head as a primary cause behind a number of unfavorable situations. Whether the PvP is ships shooting in space, or production and market competition, force projection has all too significant of an impact.

    What I mean is that right now, if you can produce goods in one area of space for much cheaper than elsewhere, it is not that much of a cost (when dealing in bulk quantities) to transport your goods to distant locations, making it trivial to undercut someone producing the same goods locally.

    On the flipside, if it were cheaper to produce goods in certain areas of space, but costly and/or more difficult to transport them across vast distances, then it would do more to promote local production and sale of the goods, resulting in more and smaller local trade hubs and diverse economies across the map.

    So once again, it all comes down to cynos being to powerful. The solution of course is to change jump freighters first, then adjust industry. Unfortunately, I think the damage has already been done, and CCP is going to feel the heat for this lack of foresight, as well they should.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. nullseccartelwarlordApril 22, 2014 at 2:46 PM

      Transportation costs through nullsec are not negligible. They are currently high enough to prevent profitable production in null for all but a few t2 items despite the massive production speed bonuses that can be found there.

      Nerfing jump freighters will not create local markets as long as perfect refine exists since it prevents CCP from implementing local production advantages. This is exactly why they are doing the industry overhaul.

      Delete
  29. It is clear that in the heart of civilization (High Sec), industry should be the most difficult to do efficiently. Only in the furthest reaches of civilization (NS) should industry be able to be done efficiently. /sarcasm

    So NO, not EVERYTHING should be better in NULL sec. That is a ridiculous assertion. You can make a logical argument for why NS might have better NPCs (they've been driven from HS). But things like industrialization being better? Come on, quit messing with the game to pander to your NS pals. You are going to damage EVE more than you know.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If games were based on logic then every RPG would end with the main character being executed for mass murder. EVE is internet spaceships with submarine physics. Don't try to hammer in realism.

      Delete
    2. In nulled you don't have to comply to emissions regulations and environmental assessments and infinite layers of red tape. Thus null sec industry will be more efficient due to less regulation.

      There's a decent roleplaying explanation for you.

      Delete
  30. If this is a case of rebalancing Risk vs Reward, it's terrible. Lowsec should be the most profitable place to do industry as it is significantly riskier than null.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agreed. But, Jester lives in null-sec, not low-sec.

      Delete
  31. "Except that I also said that I agree with this strategy and I think that in the long term view, it's healthy for the game. And I do think those things. I think you should make more money living in null-sec than living in high-sec... whatever it is that you do there."

    I don't see how an ongoing series of changes which solely benefit null-sec and encourage a large number of players (the high-sec casual players) to unsub is healthy for the game.

    Maybe you can provide an explanation how this is supposed to work to get more people to play EVE?

    ReplyDelete
  32. Subtract the expected whining and drill down to the real issue. This isn't about whether null sec or high sec should be more profitable - it is about changing elements in the game which discourage particular game play styles and encourage those players to take their sub money elsewhere.

    There are a large number of casual players in this game, and they are being squeezed out. They don't have the RL time available to "adapt" as CCP seems to want them to do (ie. be more PVP active), so they are leaving, in ever-increasing numbers. This is not a good thing - this is most definitely a very bad thing.

    You aren't seeing the bigger picture, Jester.

    ReplyDelete
  33. For once I find myself disagreeing with Jester's point of view on this. If we wanted to play an MMO that had fixed ideas of a 'L1 - 15' area we would. The fact that we play a game openly advertised as a sandbox should tell you that such a rigid view of the world will be largely unwelcome.

    Do I think all space should be uniform? No
    Should Null be more profitable for every single activity possible in Eve? No - this is a uniformity that does not fit the games principles or the lore.

    The only real difference in risk between High and Null in my view is that in High Sec I get an official warning before someone can shoot my POS however this has to be weighed up against the fact that some systems in Null are so far inside blue territory that they are essentially just as safe if not safer.

    In this case Jester you and CCP are wrong and even if you stand by your view you are forgetting about WH space which is a riskier environment to live in than null for two reasons:

    No Local to act an an early warning
    No 'buffer' zones - anyone can turn up in your WH at pretty much any time

    ReplyDelete
  34. "So, YES, null-sec should have better income for EVERYTHING than high-sec. It should be better for EVERYTHING than high-sec. "

    Linear progression belongs in theme-parks not EVE.

    However If the risk vs reward tirade must play out than there's no excuse for EVERYTHING in wh space to not have better income than EVERYTHING in null-sec. The risks and logistical burdens are far greater, why is null-sec income supremacy such a strong case when CCP won't even allow wh residents self sufficiency?

    If we follow the logic justifying these changes the best ice mining should be in wh space right? I don't really think that the best ice or any for that matter should be there myself. That's because I don't find linear progression a compelling form of differentiation, it's a lazy way out of a complex problem and a disservice to the sandbox.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Makes sense, now all you need is a vast voting block to elect people to the CSM so that you can crybaby your way to in-game payouts.

      Delete
    2. Don't take it so literally, worm holes are a good example of well differentiated space, these industry changes are a poor example. The justification for them is inconsistent with the rest of eve, its a lazy fix the easy way out.

      Delete
    3. Wormholes were never meant for permanent habitation. They were supposed to accommodate nomads, which is why they deplete and why there is no ice or cloning facilities. People moved in anyway and now CCP doesn't know what to do with them. This is a separate issue entirely.

      Delete
    4. The colonization of W-hole space is one of the best examples of emergent gameplay that Eve has ever seen. Please cite your source for saying "CCP doesn't know what to do with them".
      w-holers are a significant block in the game lat CSM they got 2 members on, I dare say that those who live in j-space are main stream players. I will go further and say that in my 7 years of playing in all areas of space some of the best players I have met are in Wormhole corps. So why should a bunch of F1monkeys be given all the perks?
      I'm not saying W-hole space even needs anymore stuff I'm just saying that the argument that "null is hard and needs more reward" falls on its face when you consider the truly hard living in W-space

      Delete
    5. This is my point entirely. People moving in was amazing but CCP was extremely slow in responding to it by making habitation any less of a pain. Not talking about just risk but about quality of life issues like the PHA, pos mechanics and the refitting of t3s. Wormholes fall outside the normal hisec<losec<nullsec progression and if you want to integrate them these industry changes are not the place to start.

      Delete
    6. So the risk-reward argument counts for anywhere but J-space, one of the 4 different spaces in Eve? If an argument can´t even hold that far it maybe should not be used at all.

      Delete
    7. What are you even arguing? W-space best exemplifies the risk-reward choice. Capital excitations are some best isk you can make in the game but you can also lose billions if you get ganked. I doubt many null inhabitants would care if w-space gets to be better at more things since we all know the risks involved. The thing is it can't happen without a major overhaul of w-space. There are currently no icebelts, or outposts or mineable moons. Adding these would be a huge change to wormhole life and would fall way outside of the scope of these industry changes. Considering how conservative CCP and the CSM have been about wormholes the odds of a radical change like that happening are between 0 and 1%.

      Delete
    8. If the argument is risk vs. reward then w-holes should get the best of everything not Null-sec.
      If risk vs. reward is not the argument then what is the justification to buff the 2nd or 3rd ( It could be argued that even low-sec is riskier than the blue doughnut these days) in line on the risk reward scale?

      Delete
  35. Ripard, I've tried to keep up on the different discussion points in these two posts, but there's one thing I haven't seen so far (forgive me if it has been addressed).

    Has there been discussion between the CSM and CCP about how the changes to industry can (or will) be gamed by groups of players? For example, I'm imagining that by adding many industry alts to certain systems, and regions, large coalitions or corps could drag down industry and the economy there. This seems like a relatively simple and artificial way of affecting other people's game play. Has this been discussed? Is this seen as an acceptable outcome? Are there any safeguards that will be implemented to at least prevent this from being easy?

    Personally I can understand the logic of having null sec be more profitable than hi sec. Especially if the goal is to encourage people to build these new stargates to god knows where. But as far as growing the subscriber base? I really hope there are some game play additions and improvements coming as well.

    I unsubbed a while ago and have decided not to return until more of the game is actually fun. The series of industry dev blogs still has me hopeful, as the combination of major UI improvements and possibly the "teams" is promising. But the truth is, currently there is too much gameplay that is dreary and outdated.

    Final point: differentiation is good. But it should be in regards to degrees of profitability. Not fun and unfun. The cost scaling mechanic looks like trouble.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ "Final point: differentiation is good. But it should be in regards to degrees of profitability."

      That's exactly what it is, degrees of profitability and regional differentiation - Sov Null to have a 0-14% advantage in taxes (depending on various factors TBA in coming devblogs,) compared to high.

      Delete
    2. "For example, I'm imagining that by adding many industry alts to certain systems, and regions, large coalitions or corps could drag down industry and the economy there. This seems like a relatively simple and artificial way of affecting other people's game play. Has this been discussed?"

      I am sure there was some glee in the room when the CSM, that represents the null sec part of the game almost exclusively, realized that with an army of low skill alts any null entity can clog up production and research stations all over high sec with shit jobs on things like ammunition blueprints to drive the cost of production through the roof.

      Delete
    3. Well it remains to be seen how this will be implemented. But the cost scaling mechanic looks to me like something that is going to be very difficult to get right.

      If you are doing industry in Hi sec, however, close or far from Jita you might be, you are obviously going to have to keep your eye on this. How transparent will it be? How many people will be able to affect it? How easy will it be to manipulate? How many times are players willing to relocate their industry operation before they give up?

      It really is too early to pass judgement on it until there are more details. However it seems to have the potential to create a lot of real, in game, player frustration. Still the main point of my post was to ask the question about how much the gaming of the mechanic has been discussed.

      Delete
    4. I was making the point that there was some discussion but not because anyone wanted to prevent it. They can't wait for it to happen. I bet they tried to make the slot costs as high as possible and the ramp rate of scaling as steep as possible. Read Jester's latest post, he is already just fine with a roaving band of morons going around intentionally keeping freighters from warping just for the hell of it FOR HOURS. Do you think he and the other simpletons on the CSM would be against some "emergent gameplay" along the same lines in the high sec industry space? I don't think for a minute they would object.

      Delete
    5. Why would nullsec need to intentionally clog up slots to raise the price when existing players will do this themselves? Remember people are lazy and if slots are available in Jita for "only" at 14% premium, people will still pay it. They will rationalize the extra cost as not having to pay for transport, not having to risk loss of product to ganks, easy access to materials and markets, speed of finished product to market, or whatever. Hey, what if hisec concentrates into just the main market hub stations? Yeah I know it sounds stupid with lofty talk of profit margins and all, but I think human nature will see exactly this happen and costs rise by 14% (thereby retaining current profit margins). Even null produced stuff will just be sold at this new norm price point. Fears of null producers selling at a 14% discount that hisec producers can't match has no basis in reality.

      Delete
  36. As Jester indirectly stated, the risk-reward ratio breaks in nullsec for reason beyond the control of an indy update.

    The problem is that CCP will try to fix the nullsec risk-aversion issue 10 mins too late. When every non-nullsec players would have quit for brighter skies.

    ReplyDelete
  37. If you are tired of Grayscale's vision of EVE, then check out Ascent. That's where I've moved. Employees don't stay with CCP long, so when there is a change of the guard and EVE's direction, I'll be back. EVE is a good game. Until then, I'll satisfy my need to PVE, manufacture and research for just a few dollars a month--without non-consensual PVP.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pfvt0kwM5M&list=PLkTBXOUzrR0nZMEwmR4PSh_B8ItnBoqV5

    ReplyDelete
  38. "So, YES, null-sec should have better income for EVERYTHING than high-sec. It should be better for EVERYTHING than high-sec. "

    You know, just like all the other theme park MMOs? Jester, I think you should lay off Elder Scrolls Online for a while.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fine. Name me a VIDEO GAME that doesn't follow this model. I can only think of one: ES4: Oblivion. And even it followed the model to an extent.

      Delete
    2. There used to be a great one called Eve. Until you and your buddies decided to shit all over it.

      Delete
    3. One video game that doesn't follow the model of having higher level areas that are better than low level areas for all purposes?

      Probably the first 200 video games I played didn't follow that model? I can't think of a single atari game where higher level areas were better for farming money/xp than low level areas. I can't even think of an atari game where you farmed gold/xp at all, actually. If you want to go with modern games, there are a bunch of genres without the concepts of farming gold/xp. The whole wc1/2/sc1/2 series, and all the other RTS's, up until the point that MOBA's became popular and incorporated gold/xp farming into RTS's. Simcity, and all it's variants. CIV 1-5 doesn't have higher level areas, it just has different terrains. FPS's generally have different multi-player maps that people play, but they aren't divided into low level and high level farming zones, it's just different maps. You've been playing KSP a lot lately, does KSP have high level areas that are better for EVERYTHING than low level areas? I don't play KSP so I don't know, but it sounds sandboxy enough that it wouldn't. Don't Starve is another sandboxy game that came out recently without high level/low level areas, as is Banished, I've been playing those 2 a lot lately.

      Actually, I'm not convinced that you are correct in even your original analogy. I think it's pretty likely that max-level zones are, in fact, not the best places for farming gold in many themeparks, as most players are doing quests there--the comparatively empty mid-level zones often become the best places to take a max level character to quickly farm gold through farming some item or other.

      Delete
    4. @Rammstein,

      I think you have some good points that there are other games where they were more skill-based and more uniform in points or money awarded, such that higher difficulty areas give you a sense of accomplishment just for achieving something there, rather than monetary.

      I've been in KSP far too much lately, and wanted to add that in "career mode" it rewards more science points (a scaling factor) for reaching planets that are farther away, or which present other challenges - to unlock the tech tree. Sandbox mode was the first to be released, you can go in there to tinker with all the toys, and set up your own personal challenges.

      Delete
    5. Civilization, Minesweeper, Myst, Tales of... Wait, is there a prize for this?

      Seriously though, EVE's strength is a combination of its sandbox "be what you want to be" design and its complexity. Toss either, and CCP will be left with a rotting carcass.

      As a side note, not even in World of Warcraft - aka the king of L01 to LXX themeparks - are the high level zones better for EVERYTHING.

      Delete
    6. @Anon: Does a higher science factor == better for EVERYTHING in KSP? Because that's the standard here. If that's true, then KSP doesn't sound like a sandbox to me anymore.

      Delete
    7. In WoW I did almost all of my crafting (i.e. the industry equivalent stuff) in a city with an auction house, material shops, trainers, forges and players to buy stuff. Cities in WoW were essentially noob zones.

      That's not to say that you didn't have to go out into the world as professions were level limited and a lot of recipes were quest rewards or bind on pickup. However those are very un-sandbox like concepts - in order to be a master tailor I have to be able to kill dragons? I magically can't buy a recipe from someone else because of bullshit?

      I think that there was one magic forge in Blackrock spire or somesuch that was necessary for a handful of smithing recipes at release, I don't think that they kept to that concept though.

      Delete
    8. @Rammstein "KSP - science factor"
      The KSP "career mode" where science points matter only for unlocking a tech tree, is rudimentary at this point in development (v.23.5) There's no economy yet, so you can build unlimited rockets using the best parts available that you've unlocked on the tech tree.

      You can freely switch between "career mode" and "sandbox mode", where science points are irrelevant, if you just want to play around with all the toys unlocked, no limits.

      Delete
  39. "So, YES, null-sec should have better income for EVERYTHING than high-sec. It should be better for EVERYTHING than high-sec."

    I never thought Eve was supposed to be viewed in terms of "levels" so strictly. I mean, it levels, obviously, but I thought the intent was to blur the lines in certain ways so that players could create their own content. So somethings should be better in high-sec, some things should be better in null, low, WH, etc. And then let players make the trade-offs.

    I don't mind someone saying income should be greater here than everywhere else, but EVERYTHING? No. just no. Eve is not like any other MMO, please don't take it there.
    What your saying, I think, is that its now OK for CCP to more actively direct who does what in Eve. I don't think that's what the game is about.

    I don't know, and don't care that much really, but that statement kinda bothers me. It just sounds elitist and snobby. Ah well, to each his own.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. On second thought, forget the "elitist and snobby" remark. Wasn't really called for. My apologies.

      Delete
    2. I kind of agree with this.

      Keep in mind, I am not currently an Industry guy, although I do have a tentative skill plan in Evemon for it. But I think Eve can present a far more interesting landscape if areas of space are "different". Not boiled down to better or worse. Wouldn't it be better to promote a synergetic relationship between hisec and null? The idea that everything has to be better in null is just a boring concept, and it pisses on hisec players that would rather not be roped into that drama. I'd like to see the industry efficiency of hisec holding hands with the war machine of null; each area having its strengths and expertise.

      And I'm not too impressed with Greyscale either. Making his perfect system on the abstract is neat, but you have to remember that all those data points are people/customers. Many of them probably don't give a shit about "the perfect system" when their preferred style of play starts to suck.

      I know I'm being a bit premature. I'll hold my final judgment until more info on the expansion comes out. But I'm not encouraged by some of the statements I'm reading.

      Delete
  40. So how can I get into null as a casual player? Please don't say 'by renting' because that just won't happen.

    How about trying to make null appealing and accessible?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Providence, BNI, fweddit, TEST, SMA, FCON, ENLI. Hell there are nullsec groups you can get into by just claiming to be a cyno alt. No activity requirements there.

      Just don't be insufferable and people will let stay.

      Delete
    2. This. And to that list, I would add all the renter corps and alliances.

      Hell, MOST corps in null-sec will let you join as a casual player.

      Delete
    3. Renting?

      I think most players would rather unsub than rent from Goons or PL, thereby contributing to their RMT operations.

      Delete
    4. @Jester - Renter corps just line sov nullsec pockets. Stop shilling for them.

      Delete
    5. Renter corps? Seriously? I would rather unsub then ever sink that low. I don't even live in hi-sec I just hate null-sec and the follower mentality. I can't believe you would advocate for more people to go there and become drones. I thought you liked small gang stuff. You really think you will ever get small gang again if game mechanics force people out to null? Sigh...

      Delete
  41. I know there will be Capsuleers building stargates sometime in the next 3-5 years.

    I wonder what would happen if after it was possible for null-sec to sustain itself if all of a sudden there was 2-10 times the number of systems opened up on the fringe along with a a mobility nerf.

    Take all the areas close to Empire space halve their truesec and value and open up much better space much father away from empire space.

    Use space to separate areas.

    I think a lot of the problems of competition are related to how small Eve is atm to the largest players.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Appealing and accessible? Won't happen because they would have to act like you were a person rather than an income serf and it would dilute their over all F1 spamming majesty.

    ReplyDelete
  43. So standing was POS was removed to enable newer players to get into Industry. It is a interesting argument which happens to be completely false.

    It requires significant isk to purchase a POS, fuel a POS and mobile labs. How do newer players afford all this? Well just about every indie starts off with mining. Start selling the ore but learn that refined is worth more. Progress into refining, well that requires standing to increase the net gain of mineral. Wait I need standing after all? What advantage is it then to remove standing for anchoring?

    So far: mining yield nerf, refining nerf, nerf BPO->POS, slot removed.

    And I recall how indignant you were Jester over the quad-nerf to Incursions. I'd say that Industry is aiming for a quinte or hex count is not yet out of the question.

    Will traders suddenly have limits to number of buy orders which can posted in station? Why not it would encourage a diaspora from the major hubs. Good for the game? But this what is being feed to industrialists.

    Will there be a recidivist limit for high-sec systems? "Warning you about to enter a system which currently contains five criminals, your entry fee is ten million per standing below zero". Hey it is a isk sink that so many keep asking for. Crime has to pay?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When I was a new player it was a lot easier to scrape together 200m for a small pos than it was to get the standings. And no, you don't start out mining. That is a deathtrap that anyone with two functional brain lobes recognizes as a waste of time. It is only done by people who for some reason dream of being a bot.

      Delete
  44. @Jester: Why should Null-Sec be the ultimate end game with all of the perks? w-Hole space is the highest risk in the game. Currently in Null if you lose your station your stuff is just off limits until you find a way beg,steal,sneak it back. In W-hole space whatever you bring in had better be expendable because once your POS is gone you lose every bit of it. So where does W-hole space fit into your (bad) leveling analogy?
    should we expect some new perks?

    ReplyDelete
  45. The fact that the main proponents of this change, the ones posting so vigorously in the Dev blog comment section, are High level Goons whose sig states that they are part of the economic warfare cabal should tell you all you need to know about who this change will benefit the most.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Meanwhile, this year's lowest PCU has been 1100 players below 2013's lowest PCU, and we're just in April. September is the lowest month in the year and I can't wait to see how successful is Operation Fuck High Security: Summer 2014 Issue.

    ReplyDelete
  47. CCP will be thinking in the mid-term.
    1. Grand vision developed by Seagull is hoped to result in player retention.
    2. Necessary changes include rejuvenating null industry.
    3. Short term reduction in highsec industry player accounts/characters is expected.
    4. These will be counterbalanced by concomitant increase in null indy accounts/characters.

    So they are willing to lose casual highsec players in order to secure an enduring null plan.

    Personally, I thunk they should be catering to both.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But can 4 counterbalance 3? Only time will tell.

      And in the same state I think, number 1 has lost its effect. The first time it could have attracted new players. But in this years Fanfest we will see the 4th or 5th version of Seagulls vision. Nothing of it is in the game right now. So as a sideissue more players will left Eve because they are disappointed by seeing the same dream the nth time without any real tangible progress.

      Delete
  48. I feel the same as Mord "For myself, I cannot continue to support a game in which my monthly subscription dollars are used to benefit a small subset of the EVE player base, both financially and in terms of quality of play, to the detriment of all others."

    I live in null-sec, always have. But this CCP pandering to Goonswarm and friends is too much for me to stomach any longer, It's just as bad as the T20 situation in my opinion. I'm done with EVE. 2 accounts unsubbed this morning and it feels good.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Same here. No more of my money for Mittens.

      Delete
  49. I feel like we are losing a bit (or more) of Eve with this change. New Eden was meant to be part of a universe not striated in leveled zones (Jester I don't know where you get that from but you are wrong). Where players live is not static, they migrate back and forth depending on their mood,fortunes, availability. Every area of New Eden should be vibrant and strong in its own way. Sometimes in life you want to go out and drive your car fast (low-sec) , sometimes you want to work for THE corporation (Null-sec), sometimes you want to go all out and party with some hookers and blow until it's all gone (w-hole space) and sometimes you have to go back to Mom's house to rest, lick your wounds, look for another job or just enjoy a good meal back where it all started (hi-sec).
    This idea of Hi-sec being only a noob area just does not make sense,

    ReplyDelete
  50. Why does industry need to be treated like other activity for risk vs reward? Industry is not making profit from the environment like ratting, missioning or plexing but because buyers (i.e. other players) choose to pay a higher amount than it took to manufacture. It takes market research, preparation and and a willingness to shift production to more profitable areas to to find profit and maintain it. Different play style with different risks (your market crashing or increased competition) and likely a different player base that does not enjoy the PvP lifestyle.

    Also, unless the new vision is to decouple the null sec and high sec markets it will be difficult to set up the system that will make null sec more profitable for the industrialist after rent/corps fees/JF costs and not make much of high sec not only less profitable but unprofitable and drive many industrialists out of business (and possible out of game).
    Also, the huge null sec coalitions will only get richer and have yet more possibilities to metagame by distorting markets with huge cartels/monopolies for profit and high sec tears. A rich high sec does not threaten null sec and never will but the reverse can not be said.

    Need wait for the entire story before making any firm conclusions but unless it is just window dressing that will not change the status quo much except for the new ISK sink it is worrying for much of high sec.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Sad watching players unsub just because they can't make the highest profit in the game without having to invest billions in infrastructure, lost ships, or hundreds of hours of structure grinding.

    Really, high sec should be viable but you don't have claim to making the highest profit against those that put in the effort and risk losing most of it on a daily basis. Industry has risks in market value yes, but nullsec shares those same market risks on top of the above work mentioned.

    Also the 0-14% from my understanding of the dec blog is not 0% for null and 14% for high...its based on the saturation of manufacturing in -any given system-. So Jita would be 14% but a low populated highsec system would be closer to 0%. We still need more information before hitting the panic button and unsubbing.

    ReplyDelete
  52. i have to say if you compare something in eve again with levels you need to go back to wow

    also using your comparison wh should get all null buffs times 42?

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.