It's Time: Nerf Highsec

Avatar
*likes*
Avatar
This is something that really bugs me. Alliances can already "tax" members activities, it's called the corp tax. What i think is though when people say that alliances should be able to tax members, they mean a mechanic that automatically taxes members and sends it to the top of the alliance. But for me, that's just the final nail in the coffin for the idea of individual corp identities.I want to see more corp individualism, I want more tools for corps to screw each other over (such as lying on their income to the alliance when they pay their alliance fees). More corp intrigue I feel leads to more fights. Alliance taxing just removes one more thing to fight each other over.
Avatar
Qualified no to the first question. The point of these proposals is to offer players in highsec a reason to actually want a POS, as Greyscale has stated he desires.In a broader sense, the idea of improved nullsec production and refining as outlined by Weaselior in "Destroying the Shipyards" is to benefit those who are in nullsec already. If it attracts new players to nullsec, great, but we don't regard that as likely - it is our belief that many players are extremely risk-averse and will not move out into low or nullsec, period. Attempting to encourage them to do so is a waste of time.Coming back to the rest of your topics: Yes, producers will pass the additional costs along to buyers, just like they do when CCP raised taxes, when mineral prices shift, etc. I wouldn't characterize it as "massive" inflation, though. The exact amount and method by which the cost of production slots in Empire would be raised is up for discussion, but we're not talking about a huge increase here - perhaps a job could cost 1% of the estimated value of the materials used for it, for example. And then at some point, a producer realizes that the cost of a month of POS fuel, spread across one month of production, is lower than what he'd pay in a station, and swaps to that.A similar idea applies to a refining nerf. It wouldn't have to be huge, and frankly it's not actually even mandatory. Part of the idea with a refining nerf is to give nullsec the room to tax mining without it being more worth people's while to evade the taxes and jump to highsec with their ore instead. I wrote about this issue in my "addressing the tritanium problem" article (http://themittani.com/features.... If a system can be implemented that allows an evasion-free means of taxing our miners in nullsec, then a refining nerf becomes less relevant or necessary. On the other hand, without such a system, so much as a 5% mandatory loss in highsec would give us the flexibility to tax at, say, ten percent in nullsec and be reasonably assured that people would just refine in our space instead. The difference is there, and they COULD make more by jumping to highsec if they have the ability, but at that point a 5% delta is a convenience fee, and most probably won't.So short answer, inflation, yes a little, massive inflation, not really no.Who benefits from this is harder, philosophically. Will people benefit by being obliged to do the modest amount of extra work involved in running a POS? Hard to say, although if they hit their mark and greyscale's desires are realized, people will "want to" anyway. But in a more general sense, it opens up an additional use for bounties and crimewatch, potentially revitalizes the highsec mercenary business, and many other benefits besides. I think these are all good things.
Avatar
"Alliances" is the term that gets thrown around (probably because the top-down income F&F would be meant to replace - moon mining - is at the alliance level) but in context all taxation mechanisms would actually remain at the corporate level. If alliances wanted to enforce taxation across their membership and try to collect alliance taxes, that would be up to them.
Avatar
Actually this is a game changer in Sov 0.0, because if it is done as I have heard it will enable people to operate in all those little systems that are held by certain large null entities and never used.
Avatar
If we keep whispering in the ears of the Goonswarm Economic Cabal then one of them is bound to crack and run for CSM8 eventually.
Avatar
Normally I'd be resistant to the suggestion, but I made the mistake of explaining to my wife what the CSM was.She thinks it'd be a great idea.*sigh*
Avatar
Nerf stations, fix/buff POS. I like it. Just make sure these two changes happen at the same time and everything is good.
Avatar
That is the rather critical part, yes. :D
Avatar
Mynnna,Your well reasoned article and insightful responses hardly match the tabloidesque title of the piece, “IT’S TIME: NERF HISEC”. ::Sigh:: -- such are the requirements of journalism. With the few numbers bandied about above my initial concerns that budding young industrialists wouldn’t be able to compete are mollified. Rather, one thing you are doing here is handing Hi-Sec industrialists a longer term career path. In practice I wouldn’t call that a nerf, I’d call that a buff.
Avatar
Glass houses bro...
Avatar
I will freely admit that I chose the title to be as inflammatory as possible, yes. ;)Regarding it as a buff is rather interesting way to look at it, though I have to imagine that *quite* a few people would disagree with you.
Avatar
1) "Tax man" is a concept as fun in a game as poo.2) NPC null sec stations can refine at 50% (example 5J station). Go and justify why civilized empire space facilities should perform worse than no man's land isolated stations.3) In case the OP did not notice, hi sec is clogged with POSes already expecially around Jita. It's not like putting some dozens of millions in a POS is some elite advancement.4) Hi sec POSes are usually owned by 1 - 3 men corps, forget really applying what you call "content" on them (i.e. wardecs), they'll just bring the POS down and put it up again.5) It's always surprising how it's not some poor and gimped alliance, but it's the richest, wealthiest and largest alliance in game is the one constantly complaining everywhere and applying pressure on CCP. Making the game even easier to them will just crystallize the current stagnant perma-domination.
Avatar
I'd endorse Mynnna
Avatar
If alliances actually feel threatened/hurt by unchallenged small roaming gangs, then the ratters wont be the only targets. In my mind, the true goal of farms and fields is not just to provide more carebear ratters for a 10 man PVP fleet to try to gank, but to motivate the local alliance to field their own 10 man PVP fleet to fight them off.
Avatar
Precisely. Farms and fields means that all those ratters that no one really cares about (since their taxes are mostly inconsequential to the operations of the alliance) are suddenly important and letting them all get killed and camped matters. It means that POS are relevant and critical to industry, and so letting larger gangs come in and blow chunks off of them (which they can loot from, ideally) cripples your logistical capabilities. Etc etc etc. And thus, you actually are motivated to fight them off. Right now, a 10 man gang comes looking to gank our ratters, our ratters safe up and they are mostly ignored, unless there are people bored enough to fight them.
Avatar
as some one who dose production in high sec idc about more taxes cause ill just charge more for my products its that simple >_> i wont lose anything only the consumer will... higher taxes will help isk sinks but that is all wont put any large producer in high sec out of business ........ but i am pro higher taxes but i dont think its much of a nurf but catching up to the influx of isk in recent years
Avatar
2) Go and justify to me why wealthy and independent capsuleers are somehow unable to develop facilities on par with "civilized empire space".3) OP is well aware and in fact owns one of such said POS, as it's the only way to find research slots in Empire. This is rather limited in scope.4) They are welcome to do so, though someone is in turn welcome to steal their moon (or slot with the Jita Starbase Authority or whatever), or they could hire mercs to defend it.5) I've never figured out how people think that WE think that "stagnant perma-domination" would be fun when they try to argue this point. Usually I decide they're probably morons.
Avatar
Small time hi-sec player in the process of transitioning to low-sec here.I endorse this product and/or idea.
Avatar
More inclined to see null sec industry buffed, especially in the quality sense. A simple 5% hull hp bonus for subcaps would make a huge change to things.I would also avoid nerfing refining in high sec, its prety hard to make a profit as a refiner as it stands, and even a modest 1% would hit like a ton of bricks.
Avatar
Would break WHWhat needs to happen is VASTLY better refining.Minus 5%, not 25%-35%
Avatar
TL;DRGut ALL the industry sectors! Buff nullsec first, then nerf highsec otherwise you will create an economic disaster.(For the record, lowsec/nullsec dweller)
Avatar
In that case, limit the amount of space an alliance can control in Nullsec and get rid of coalitions and the idea of blueing everyone and their brothers and, get rid of the local channel in Null Security space.. It's not just High Security space that needs a good ass whipping every now and then.
Avatar
I know this is going to get flamed hard but what if with a new iteration Freighters and Orcas were taxed for using jump gates. RP it could be because of the mass of them that is straining the gates and needs isk for upkeep. This would make it more cost effective to move goods though the shortest distance ie low sec routs. Or all ships could be taxed for jump gates so 10 isk a kg or something similar.
Avatar
Thanks for taking the time to explain. Part of my hesitancy comes from a general fear that income nerfs coupled with inflation will ultimately reduce the incentive to PvP. I would support almost any proposal that would offer a reasonable buff to null sec industry, but only in the service of giving everyone enough financial security to happily get exploded. I, for one, still look at the cost of my fitting -- and then at my wallet -- every time I undock.
Avatar
So there!Seriously, what does any of that have to do with the points raised in the article? Just feeling bitter 'cause you can't make friends?
Avatar
Agree with all of that, but I personally think high-sec should be nerfed harder still. Null-sec should be a place everyone aspires to be, that you can mould, make your own, and then profit from. Yeah, you should start in high-sec, and be more (but not totally) secure, but the cost of that security is a severe loss in profitability.
Avatar
look at PI.. they did essentially this.What happened? cost of PI goods went up about the same amount that the tax did. some players (the less risk-averse ones) went to low/null but most PI stayed in high-sec and you can see this is true by looking at high-sec planets. they are heavily contested.what would happen if this were rolled in? ship/mod/ammo cost would probably go up about the same as the new taxes (meaning it would bite the null-sec players too) and life would go on normally. some would fill the niche and orca out to pos's for research and production and then orca back into high-sec to sell.The real problem here isn't security, or even how much isk can be made in null vs high-sec. the issue here is trade deficit.null sec players are buying and blowing up ships/ammo/mods made with high-sec ore, built in high-sec, sold in high-sec. so all that null-sec rat/mining money/loot is moving into high-sec with finished and sold goods moving back out to null.You must find a way to balance that deficit such that high-sec players have a consumable commodity that they MUST use, and that can only be sourced/produced in null-sec. only then can you get economic equilibrium between the two.breaking high-sec to force players into null isn't going to work very well. buffing null to lure people out there won't work either. industrialists don't rat, heck most don't even mine.The problem isn't risk aversion. it's the fact that the real money in null is tech moons, and to reasonably hold one, you need an alliance too large to justify the cost of holding the moon. and even then, there's nobody in high-sec that wants/needs your moon goo.
Avatar
I'd vote for Mynnna
Avatar
No, make sure the POS buff happens first AND WORKS, then nerf stations.
Avatar
There is no way to nerf high sec industry to the point where 0.0 is more attractive. 0.0 industry is broken bottom up. From mining (not nearly enough low ends) to refining (sucks, and terrible in POSes) to manufacturing (far too few slots). Outposts being relatively scarce and good at only one thing mean you have to haul massive amounts of material all over your region.I know people do industry in 0.0, I do it, and we know it's broken. It's an uphill battle every time, and alliances know this and don't value industry corps They see it as a way to appease the carebears while taxing them. But it's always better to just import from high sec.And if you're manufacturing T2, and you're not a Goon, you're fucking terminally stupid. By the time you import all the moon goo, you might as well build it in the safety of high sec and jump in the finished product.
Avatar
Making highsec a worse place to live will not encourage highsec carebears to move to null. It'll leave them doing what they've always done, or barring that, make them stop playing. For those already concerned about death spirals and flatlining active player averages, this is the absolute last thing you'd want to encourage.Make null and w-space better places to live, rather than try to shit up the rest of the game just because CCP sucks at designing high risk/high reward.
Avatar
Mynnna for CSM8!
Avatar
I'm going to go ahead and assume you read the title and skipped ahead to comment, without reading all the stuff in between that amount to buffing highsec by offering actual opportunities for advancement to industrial minded players.
Avatar
It's makes about as much sense as a small minority of the game calling for a nerf that would affect a large majority. As it is in the real world, the smallest groups make the biggest racket when they whine. Do you think CCP isn't aware the majority of their money is made in High Sec? As far as friends go, I hate everyone equally.
Avatar
Wait for me! I'm still emptying mine in the river
Avatar
Why not just make POS manufacturing have a 0.9 material multiplier in highsec, 0.85 in lowsec, and 0.8-0.75 in Sov 0.0. Make it worthwhile.
Avatar
Quite a few people might disagree but they would be mistaken.“What? Start taxing us? Fine, I’ll set up shop elsewhere. Let the little people pay taxes at their public factories. Jeeves, bring me the ledger! We’ll be calculating POS set up costs and fuel expenses and comparing them to these new taxes for I suspect there’s profit to be made.”I just don’t see a nerf to Hi-Sec here. I see the addition of a whole ‘nuther layer of interesting Hi-Sec play.
Avatar
One year ago I would have hated this idea.But after living months on sov null and W-space, and had lots of POS on any sec... I must admit this idea makes perfect sense.I'm only a bit worried about the effect on Jita's hub and prices, and the accessibility of industry slots for newbies wanting to manufacture some frigates (as with this system not only stations close to hubs would be taken, but also those way far off)
Avatar
I'm well aware of this; nullsec industry needs to be fixed, but as I said a proper nullsec/POS fix won't make them more attractive options than what Highsec has to offer. In order to make null sec/POS more attractive a null sec/POS industry fix must be paired with 'nerfs' to High sec industry.
Avatar
Mynnna and I had a convo yesterday. For 250m, I will bully him into running.
Avatar
Derp, I don't see anything that results in a supposed nerf in hs.what your article is about, is a request to increase tax on npc manu & research slots, bump sales taxWhat your article actually covers is how important a piece of game play pos's could be if ccp got there shit together and finally made a new mechanism that a player could own and anchor nearly anywhere and do some of the aforementioned things.
Avatar
It's almost as though the title is meant to be inflammatory but does not actually technically relate to my topic. You cracked the code!
Avatar
In terms of regulating highsec POS numbers, the material is already here: starbase charters. POSes in highsec already require starbase charters to remain operational, essentially a license to own a POS in their space and under concord's protection. Just limit the production and supply of these charters supplied by the empires on a monthly basis, and you can essentially control the number or given POSes in empire space at any given time, whether they be anchored at a celestial or not.
Avatar
No fuck nullsec... I DONT WANT TO PLAY CTA:ONLINE!!! YOU WANT TO NERF THE LAST DECENT SPACE IN THIS GAME WITHOUT ANY PETTY GEY DRAMA? THEN FUCK YOU AND THIS GAME I WILL UNSUB WITH ANY NERF TO HIGHSEC BECAUSE I AM SICK AND TIRED OF THESE FECKING PLEBS ON THAT BACKBENCH JUST WANTING TO PAD THEIR POCKETS AND THEIR CRAP 0.0 SPACE, FECK EM ALL
Avatar
"You must find a way to balance that deficit such that high-sec players have a consumable commodity that they MUST use, and that can only be sourced/produced in null-sec. only then can you get economic equilibrium between the two "I've got it. Have some moon goo or other that isnt produced in hisec. Btrilliant !
Avatar
The point of the example proposal - a system "starbase authority" to whom you pay a fee for one of a limited number of slots in a given system - isn't to limit the number of POS in highsec, period. The point is that the cost to run the POS would scale the way offices in stations do, thereby making it more expensive to run your setup in an extremely popular location.In other words, it's to give people a reason not to default to putting their POS in Jita. ;)
Avatar
I'm glad that the majority of my blueprints will have "good enough" research done by the time this gets implemented. That way, only the newbies will be inconvenienced.
Avatar
So you're running? Awesome, got my vote.
Avatar
While we're at it, lets remove Meta 4 from empire (including low sec) where Meta 3 could be found in low sec.
Avatar
A disappointing article. Sensational headline caught my interest (as a POS owner) but the article just failed to deliver after that. Lazy unconvincing 'trust me on this' had the same ring of truth as someone opening their statement with 'to be honest'. The lack of research and reasoning left me wondering what the author was thinking, and why this is not just another 'change all of eve to better suit what I wanna do' article.Ya, I guess I'm just a tard and didn't read it properly :-)
Avatar
2) The refinery isn't performing worse, the owners are taking some of your minerals in payment. If you like, instead of giving you fewer minerals he station could charge ISK for refining.5) Obviously its inconceivable that the large, successful alliances might be large and successful because they're full of smart people.
Avatar
To be quite honest, all I hear is people from the CFC/PEST whining that they are not making enough isk and that its inconvenient for them to live in null.CFC/PEST tears, best tears.
Avatar
I think unlinking POS is a good idea. I think keeping them cheap, hidden, but easily destroyed is also good. IMO EVE should play more like an RTS. You have your resource/base, and are either competing to replace another's resource operation with your own, find a new one, or defending your own.It's not that EVE lacks all of the above, it's that to do the above requires too much. POS bashing is boring and requires way to many players, too little return on a POS relative to NPC stations (addressed by the OP), and they're limited to where they can be.
Avatar
Yes i want pos to change yes i want to mess with ALL stationsI want them all merged under one thing Space structure ....I want all space structure to be destroyable and i want it to be both scaleable that a new player can "aim" for one and that it can scale to such a big degree that a "Lucas art - Deathstar feels small". There was also talk about giving them an ability to use some kind of jumpdrive to relocate this could reduce the grind when taking over areas as the previous owner could jump out its resources.can CCP do this? i belive so.to unify all the space structures they need to do the following (MY OPINON)# create some kind of modular pos thats build of a* racial ControllTower, racial powercore, racial datacluster* then allow addons to be added to the module that each "uses" Cpu and power* adjent modules benefit from each other* powercore & cpu create massive heat and need heatsinks added to make them work at peak performance.* add modules like : - Docking Bay (allow sub cap to dock like in in a station) at the cost of reduced armor at the pos - Shield Expander (expand the shiled out to mimic the POS shield of today) at the cost of reduced shield strength - Mooring bay for SuperCap (Allowing you to anchor super Caps) - ManufacturingModules, Lab Modules- Clone bay , repair bay all other services you need.Basicly once the above is done you can Convert all exising structures to the "new" system and noone would care. once thats done you should remove 90% of all the research/ manufacturing slots in all highsec stations or even better remove 90% of all highsec stations and let the players create the stations in game.ofcourse there should be a hefty cost for a highsec station thats stands in equality to the security status of the system.this does three things.1# move allmost all stations over to player controll.2# adds risk to highsec stations (if your corp get Wardec and you don't defend your station you might lose it)3# unify all space structures in to the "new" system. and all Stations become destructable.
Avatar
I support this product and/or service.
Avatar
"(probably because the top-down income F&F would be meant to replace - moon mining - is at the alliance level)"Quick historical note - thats a decision people make, not something required by game mechanics. BoB ran corp-owned moons, Goonswarm had all that drama with Suas (I think) owned moons allegedly going into a special slush fund, and Im sure we can think of others.
Avatar
No. What needs nerfing is the idiotic mentalities of people who want to prey on those who would rather be left alone.
Avatar
Just wanted I wanted. Months of standing grinding missions so I can do production and research tax free! All in the safety of highsec. Why go to null!
Avatar
Offering such wonderful opportunities as jump through extra hoops to get the services they already have access to, only at a higher cost and more limited capacity. Sounds like an awesome buff. Do you not read your own articles?
Avatar
As most ideas bound to incentivise "A" by deincentivising "B", there is a real chance that B is plain abandoned by people who are doing it because A doesn't attracts them."Don't manufacture/refine/research in hisec stations" is more likely to drive people to "don't manufacture/refine/research/play the bloody game at all" than to bother themselves setting up a ISK pinata for PvP focused wardeccing corps.But then, EVE does not need any players who refuse to play it the right way, does it?
Avatar
cry more pls
Avatar
not this, I may live and breath nullsec, but i have several friends that stayed in high and lowsec corps. Like it or not they do have a very crucial role in nullsec alliances. While it's currently mostly in manufacturing for nullsec, it needs to have a role for it once the money lines to nullsec dry up. This is probably why CCP has been loath to revamp nullsec industry.

A Pie in the Sky Vision

"We want POS to be something everyone wants to own."

No, I'm not providing a source. It's something CCP Greyscale said when talking about his 'vision' for the POS revamp during the tenth Alliance Tournament. If you really care enough you can go dig up the video.

Or, instead, you can take my word for it and think about that statement. In particular, think about how godawful stupid it sounds in the current environment of EVE Online. We'll give Greyscale the benefit of the doubt here and at least assume that they successfully implement a new system in which they're cool and neat and the process of setting one up is not godawful horrible. And even then, why should you want one?

Oh sure, there's plenty of potential for them to be instrumental in any nullsec revamp, and any improvements to them no matter how small are a welcome change for wormhole dwellers. Give them the ability to build and refine and genuinely live out of them and they'd probably think they'd died and gone to heaven.

But most people don't live in nullsec, or w-space. Yes yes, "a nullsec pilot may have several highsec alts." I've heard the argument before, and even made it myself. Nevertheless, I have a hard time imagining that at least a significant plurality of unique players are not highsec dwellers. So I ask again: why should any of them want to own a POS?

All this has happened before...

So, get this. You may want to sit down for this one.

Ready?

Once upon a time CCP actually nerfed highsec.

Crazy, right?

The particular nerf was bumping the tax rate in NPC corps to 11%, across the board, from the 0% it had been at. The wailing and gnashing of teeth was fairly extensive — eighteen pages in response to the devblog itself, another 14 spawned prior to the devblog when people noticed on SiSi, and what were probably countless smaller threads though I can't be bothered to go verify that assumption.

Now, there were a few reasons for that, and very good ones. Wardec immunity plus zero taxes was too good, plus CCP wanted to encourage players in a massively multiplayer online role playing game to... you know, actually interact with other players. Shocking. But the most relevant here was actually their first bullet point.

It seems like an unrealistic scenario that the empires in EVE provide infrastructure, security and a host of other financially demanding services at no cost. I sometimes read people complaining about how EVE's physics are unrealistic, but on the realism scale, that still pales compared to a government that refuses to tax its citizens.

No cost... or what might as well be no cost, perhaps?

Who needs wants a POS, anyway?

So, lets think back to that question I posed. Why should a highsec player want a POS? In a station, they can dock and store as many ships and modules and items as they please, all for free. They can use manufacturing bays for a trivial amount of ISK — monopolizing an entire 50 slot station for a month straight costs just a few million ISK. They can turn around and sell what they just built to the market, in the same station, again for a trivial fee — just 1.5% sales tax and 1% broker fee (which drops down to as low as .75% and .185% with skills and standings). Refining, nominally an expensive activity (50% base yield, plus taxes on top of that), costs nothing in practice. Just about the only thing you can't do in a station is research, and that's a matter of availability rather than cost. Queues for research slots are often measured in months rather than days, yet actually using them costs the very same "almost nothing" that manufacturing does.

Compare that to a POS. The only real advantage is research slots and the availability thereof, and for that privilege a player pays a considerable premium. Manufacturing is faster as well, but in most cases the hassle and extra cost do not outweigh the additional yield. In all other regards the services of the POS are inferior, if they exist at all. They can't compete with the — to borrow a phrase — "whole lot of infrastructure, security, and a host of other financially demanding services" that stations provide, all at next to no cost.

The Tax Man Cometh

It's probably obvious where I'm going here. Tax it all. Jack up the costs. Bump the cost to research and manufacture. Make a certain amount of refining loss unavoidable, and so on and so forth. Some fees can additionally scale the way offices do. Manufacturing and research, for example, should scale up far more significantly than they do now based on demand, the way offices do.

While we're at it, perhaps some infrastructure should be removed as well. An oft-quoted statistic is the fact that Sobaseki has more manufacturing capacity than many entire nullsec regions. While it's usually cited as evidence that nullsec lacks capacity, it can go the other way as well. So get rid of some of it. Stations with medical bays are not quite everywhere, so why should the landscape be dotted with so many stations that can build and refine and do research?

Your own little Isle of Man

At last, the point. Now that we've gutted the extent of services available, and made what remains much more expensive, people have reason to want a POS. Or, rather, will have a reason to when (if?) the revamp eventually comes. Are you a newbie, or a small time producer who doesn't make much use of the services, never stores too many ships and other belongings? Great! You pay next to nothing and it's no big deal. On the other hand, if you're a big time producer, do a lot of research, or refine tens of billions of ISK in material a month, perhaps it's time to get a POS.

Now, we're not trying to be punitive here, so there's a simple requirement: every function whose taxes are increased needs to be feasible on a POS. Some, such as manufacturing, refining and research, are practically a given — they exist, though they need refinement. The same can be said for storage, both of ships and other items. And things that don't exist? Cloning bays and office modules ought to be trivial to implement. Less trivial would be something such as a market module, enabling you and others to buy and sell at your POS. Perhaps the ability to run your own self contained station would not be ideal, but it would be really cool.

Of course, POS will have to be limited, somehow. Right now it's by moons, but CCP wants to unlink POS from moons. And, thousands of POS littering every corner of a system just won't do. So perhaps in the future, you'll pay the Jita Starbase Authority for a POS license, which is of course limited, and cost of which scales up with demand.

Because in the end, the tax man always gets his.

Seven year veteran & economics guru of EVE Online as well as CSM 8 representative. On the side I play PS2, WOT and Hearthstone.