To increase the nullsec player income, you must nerf it

If you care to listen any nullsec pilot long enough to hear all his cries over Phoebe and the Entosis link, he'll get to the bottom-up incomes and the low nullsec income, usually dubbed as "nerf highsec income". He'll even mention that he had to start a highsec alt to make money.

This is wrong. Not "I don't agree with it" wrong, but "open an economy textbook" wrong. You see, the main nullsec bottom-up income is anomaly ratting. Sure, you can do missions in NPC null, but not in Sov-null. You can mine, but you can mine anywhere else too. Bounty-paying anomalies are the unique feature of nullsec (highsec bounties are pennies) and that's what most dwellers do: rat anoms. They aren't happy about their hourly wage and for a good reason: a highsec missioner makes the same and he don't have to care about neutrals, never called into fleets and can buy stuff in Jita instead of importing everything. Hence the "nerf highsec" sentiment.

What our economically challenged friends miss is that highsec missioners don't make much ISK. They make LP. They turn LP and ISK into faction items and implants. Then they sell it. The price they get is the price people with ISK give. Who has the ISK? The nullsec people, as they control the only serious ISK faucet of the game. So the truth is nullsec people gladly trade the fruits of one hour of ratting into the fruits of one hour of highsec missioning. They also gladly trade it for 5 minutes of trading, but that's besides the point.

The point is that this is unaffected by any kind of nerfs. What would happen if CCP would cut the LP payouts of highsec missions and incursions to half? Then missioners would be able to produce half as many TFIs for example, therefore their prices would rise to about its double and nullsec people would have to rat twice as long to buy one. At the end of the day, the hourly income of highsec missioners would still be similar to nullsec ratters (not exactly the same as WH people will have an effect, for example many players will switch from the expensive faction ships to T3).

Now the question is why the dangerous and uphill-in-the-snow nullsec life isn't more profitable than the easymode highsec life? Because of the multibox- and bot-ratting that prints ISK easily. These are the competitors of nullsec ratters. To shift the LP:ISK price ratio, you must shift the LP:ISK supply ratio. Do you want more valuable ISK? Decrease ISK supply! So to increase nullsec player income, you must nerf nullsec and not highsec! Removing local would hit botters and multiboxers much harder than it would hit players. A player is better in intelligently responding to threats, while bots are better in watching local. I mean, look at this: Only a blind can't see that dead-end systems and constellations are busy with ratting, while systems connecting regions are not. Well, a traveler isn't dangerous, so there isn't more danger when he is around. The reason for hiding is that those who use local channel get scared from every random dude (see also: AFK-cloaking), so they avoid busy systems. Without local channel, they wouldn't undock at all, leaving all the ISK available in anomalies to players ratting in PvP-capable ships, in fleet. Sure, their ISK/hour will drop, but with the extremely decreased ISK supply, the value of ISK will be much higher (serious deflation).

So if you are a human player in nullsec, you should support taking away local and every other change that you'd hate but the botters hate more. Also, report every bot you see. They make you poor, not the highsec missioners! There is another way to increase nullsec income: lure more new players to highsec, who will produce LP and minerals and will need ISK. This would also shift the LP:ISK supply in favor of nullsec. This would need non-wardeccable corps and better tutorials.


PS: I like these battles.
This is even better: 3x outnumbering minions of Evil lost 3x more.
If only the "invasion fleet" would have numbers like this instead of losing to Celestii...