Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Honest Jill
|
Posted - 2010.11.17 08:04:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Honest Jill on 17/11/2010 08:05:39 CCP can easily eliminate most griefer decs by making highsec very fruitless and putting more ISK into lowsec, as well as by adding more lowsec and making more entry points into highsec so that lowsec is safer.
Since highsec is noob space, if you're big enough or rich enough to be griefer decced then you're too big to remain in noob space.
Thus, I propose that CCP...
+ make more lowsec systems, and increase the number of entrypoints from highsec to lowsec. + nerf highsec missions again, possibly with a cap on highsec bounties. + reduce or remove the cap on the number of wars that corporations can declare. + increase lowsec rewards.
|
Xorv
|
Posted - 2010.11.17 08:24:00 -
[2]
Awesome!
/Supported.
Although the second point needs to be stronger and go way further.
|
GIGAR
True Slave Foundations
|
Posted - 2010.11.17 08:46:00 -
[3]
Having an incentive to get out of highsec if you really want to earn ISK seems like a logical idea.
------------ The story of the Sansha Nation:
1) Sansha: "Well, I found a way to pwn everything, but it's not very ethical :/" 2) The 4 Empires: *Cries like babies and goes to war, 4vs1* |
SkinSin
|
Posted - 2010.11.17 09:37:00 -
[4]
Edited by: SkinSin on 17/11/2010 09:37:04 Not supported. Mainly because you encourage the use of a stick to get people out of where you don't want them and into where you do. Presumably so you have more targets. Stealth, I want more people to shoot, whine?!
People don't go to low sec because they don't feel safe and can't effectively do PvE which is a product of the people there.
People don't go to null sec because if they try to establish themselves, they get stomped on by the alliances and it turns into a job rather than a game.
The sole solution should be (and only needs to be):
+ buff lowsec. Change missions to require more PvP fits, change mission NPCs to be more like sleeper NPCs. Add worthwhile features that only exist in lowsec (I'm not talking just level 5 missions and Ore, but other stuff too). And Add more routes into lowsec, so there's less chance of running into a gate camp.
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.11.17 10:26:00 -
[5]
not supported.
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar Green-Core The Obsidian Legion
|
Posted - 2010.11.17 13:49:00 -
[6]
Originally by: SkinSin A lot of good stuff
I have to agree with Sin. It's time to stop looking at what needs to be nerfed to get people to move, and start looking at what can be reasonably buffed to accomplish that goal.
Consider this: Highsec, WH space, and Nullsec are all, to a greater or lesser degree safer and more profitable than lowsec. So why the hell would anyone go there?
The issue with lowsec isn't that people don't go there - the issue is thay have no reason to go there. Nerfing high sec won't make them leave - they'll just adapt and make do, or they'll quit the game. You have to get them excited about going into lowsec. I'll be honest, the only reason I ever go to lowsec is because there's a shortcut to Jita that runs through Rancer. Nothing else in lowsec interests me enough to put up with the risks of lowsec.
--Vel
|
Festus Planewalker
Amarr
|
Posted - 2010.11.17 13:52:00 -
[7]
Have to agree with SkinSin on this one, not supported.
|
Dracoknight
Gallente Standards and Practices
|
Posted - 2010.11.17 14:31:00 -
[8]
Not supported, High sec isnt "noob space" 1.0 is, also noone is supposed to feel "safe" in this game at all, which might be one of CCPs own arguments. ____________________
I wish my Thorax could use missiles... |
Alara IonStorm
Agent-Orange Nabaal Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.11.17 14:35:00 -
[9]
I honestly don't care about getting more people to Lo but...
Bounties.
High<<<<<<<<Low<<<<Null
The ability for someone to be able to shoot you should factor into the reward hugely.
-- I am now on a Crusade to Fix the Omen!
For Great Justice!
|
Carcosa Hali
|
Posted - 2010.11.17 15:53:00 -
[10]
I'm with buffing lowsec as well.. sure the 0.0 crowd will cry about it just like they did when BS rats were added to lowsec.. but more needs to be done.
|
|
Gallians
|
Posted - 2010.11.17 16:22:00 -
[11]
Not supported, high sec is nerfed enough, buff lowsec, not nerf high, if anything.
There are a couple decent ideas like more entry points into lowsec, but overall I don't see anything CCP could do to make low anything other than a gate camper hangout.
|
Ronan Connor
|
Posted - 2010.11.17 16:28:00 -
[12]
Not supported.
Once again - I have nothing against boosting low sec. As long high sec player dont get their style of play nerfed. Taking fun from one group to give it to another will cost ccp player and doenst take into account that despite the pure pvp intention EVE is no longer home of only hardcore pvp fans or pvp fans at all.
I'd say war dec price should be raised to a amount which mirrors the wallets of the deccers and each a variable fee for each ship taken down in high sec. As insurances are often a topic it is only logical that the value which is payed out by the insurance would be taken down from the war deccers corp. Mercs get payed like this - "pay 100 misk for the wardec and replace me every ship..."
Oh and about the "noob-space". True noobs start there, but there are more advanced player there then you think. I saw loads of ex-null players who have "retired" to high-sec or experienced player who just dont want to go to low or null sec. |
Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2010.11.17 18:13:00 -
[13]
Less stick, more carrot.
This signature is useless, but it is red.
|
Lykouleon
Trust Doesn't Rust
|
Posted - 2010.11.17 19:02:00 -
[14]
This proposal suffers from a lack of good understanding of what a grief dec actually does on a broader scale...
As well, its The PitBoss' sacred duty to cleanse the universe of carebears. Wouldn't want to be mucking about in his fun
Quote: Lord Makk > Our pilots are masochist buttjockey
|
ToryAlexander
|
Posted - 2010.11.17 22:21:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Ronan Connor Edited by: Ronan Connor on 17/11/2010 16:43:30 Not supported.
Once again - I have nothing against boosting low sec. As long high sec player dont get their style of play nerfed.
I'm not proposing removing level 4 missions. The only change would be that people would get less ISK for killing highsec NPC's.
Since the content would remain exactly the same, nobody's play style will get nerfed. They'll just get less ISK for missioning in highsec.
|
DURRRHHH
|
Posted - 2010.11.18 00:36:00 -
[16]
I do agree that lowsec mechanics fix is in order, increasing the payout for level Vs or offering even better quality agents in low sec, but nerfing high sec is not going to substantially increase the chances of more people in low sec. If anything, itll make the vast majority ****ed off (80% of eve live in high sec?).
Nevertheless, this will not be supported for the original purposes of the OP, because griefers will only continue to grief because they can. This will only make it easier for wardecers to find easier prey. This does not solve the problem. And asking griefers to "play nice" will only just make them work harder for the delicious tears of newbletts.
|
LordElfa
|
Posted - 2010.11.18 01:27:00 -
[17]
People don't go to low sec because there isn't enough incentive?! Really?!?
No, people don't go to low sec because it's become a tear wrangling, shoot on site **** hole. Even pirates are leaving low sec nowadays. It's what actually happens when you give a large group of players an area to freely kill whoever they want with almost no consequence.
First it becomes a slaughter house, then it becomes a wasteland. What CCP needs to eliminate isn't griefer decs, its Low Sec. Take what is now low sec and split it up between Empire space and Null sec. Then, open PVP arenas through high sec where people who want to fight can go to fight without all the smart bomb gate camping and pretend pirates that have made Low sec the tumbleweed headquarters of New Eden.
Or, you know, whatever. I don't actually care but I thought I'd just give my worthless two sense regardless. Party on Capsuleers.
|
Aphrodite Skripalle
Galactic Defence Consortium
|
Posted - 2010.11.18 07:26:00 -
[18]
/not supported highsec already is nerfed enough. There are people here who like to play the game more peacefully. Thats what high sec is for. In fact i would like to get rid of -10 people, even if they are in a pod. They should get shot by concord instantly.
|
Ronan Connor
|
Posted - 2010.11.18 12:37:00 -
[19]
Originally by: ToryAlexander
Originally by: Ronan Connor Edited by: Ronan Connor on 17/11/2010 16:43:30 Not supported.
Once again - I have nothing against boosting low sec. As long high sec player dont get their style of play nerfed.
I'm not proposing removing level 4 missions. The only change would be that people would get less ISK for killing highsec NPC's.
Since the content would remain exactly the same, nobody's play style will get nerfed. They'll just get less ISK for missioning in highsec.
What bliss it must be, when you run around with such an ignorance. Getting less isk out of lvl 4 is as much a nerf as taking away lvl 4 and put them into low sec. To earn as much you would need to go to low sec, therefore my playstyle would be nerfed. The same thing happened already to miner. When you could earn about 10 misk/hr in high sec two years ago its now far less, combined with favoring ganker in highsec.
|
Biocross
|
Posted - 2010.11.18 16:42:00 -
[20]
Not supported.
Does nothing to address griefer decs, artificially tries to populate a space that people aren't interested in by destroying one in which they are.
This solves no problems, and creates quite a few.
|
|
Portmanteau
CTRL-Q
|
Posted - 2010.11.19 15:33:00 -
[21]
Originally by: LordElfa People don't go to low sec because there isn't enough incentive?! Really?!?
No, people don't go to low sec because it's become a tear wrangling, shoot on site **** hole. Even pirates are leaving low sec nowadays. It's what actually happens when you give a large group of players an area to freely kill whoever they want with almost no consequence.
Nowadays ? LMFAO u mean u have noticed this alarming trend in the 4 months u have played the game ?
Quote: What CCP needs to eliminate isn't griefer decs, its Low Sec. Take what is now low sec and split it up between Empire space and Null sec.
Er 4 Faction warfare militias (as well the ebil nasty piwates who are ruining ur game *cry) would like a word... where the **** are we supposed to go ?
Quote: Then, open PVP arenas through high sec where people who want to fight can go to fight without all the smart bomb gate camping and pretend pirates that have made Low sec the tumbleweed headquarters of New Eden.
... and with that simple 2 word phrase u reveal the quite obvious fact that u are playing the wrong game, pretty much everything u post on this forum is somehow related to making the game easier/safer for you. If Eve is so far removed from what you want to play... why not **** off and play something else. Stop ****-poasting ur stupid ideas based on 4 months ingame whining how hard and dangerous this game without thinking about the who ur stupid ideas might affect.
|
z4e
|
Posted - 2010.11.19 17:05:00 -
[22]
LMFAO lord elfa. All i thought of when reading your post was Runescape. Take your two sense back, dont wana flame but what you say is scary.
0.0 : Strength in numbers, where i live is probably safer than highsec, and anoms are sweeet. Keep it.
Lowsec : Pirate hellhole is correct, so it should be made worth while to go there as this is most dangerous (in my opinion)
Highsec : I wouldnt change it.
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar Green-Core The Obsidian Legion
|
Posted - 2010.11.19 17:41:00 -
[23]
Lowsec actually needs to be made the most profitable area of space. It should produce more ISK per hour than nullsec, wh space, and highsec.
Risk versus reward, as they say. --Vel
|
LordElfa
|
Posted - 2010.11.19 20:05:00 -
[24]
Edited by: LordElfa on 19/11/2010 20:07:28 Edited by: LordElfa on 19/11/2010 20:06:26 Don't be mad Portmanteau, I'm not trying to ruin your game. Just because I've only played it for 4 months doesn't mean I'm not entitled to my opinion of what I would like to see. If I didn't like the game as it is now I would go elsewhere. I mean its not like CCP is going to read my post and go directly to making Eve the way I like it or anything and nor would I want them to.. Hell, even I laugh at some of the stuff I post days after I post it and wonder what I was thinking at the time.
Bottom line is, it was just a post, so don't get your knickers in such a twist over it. Also, while I've only been a player for 4 months, it doesn't mean I haven't spent a lot of times digging through the forums and reading up on the history of the game. You know you don't have to play the game for 5 years to understand it. It's a sandbox game where everyone's combined efforts make the game world what it is. I'm also aware that if I and nearly 60% of the posters on these boards got what they think they want implemented in game, the whole thing would collapse into ruin inside of 2 moths or less.
It doesn't mean I'm not going to say something ******ed and outlandish for ****s and giggles, that's part of the fun in posting on here, sometimes you say something serious with real feeling and sometimes you talk out your butt for great justice. It's all in good fun as far as I'm concerned.
Fly safe.
|
Lord Dralos
|
Posted - 2010.11.20 15:28:00 -
[25]
An idea for low sec would be to ban the use of cynos and make the area conquerable like in 0.0 this way reduces capital ship usage in lo sec fighting and lets the smaller corps get a chance at claiming sov in lo sec. Then maybe the game would create a new area of pvp for the corps too small to get into 0.0 and too big to remain in hi sec a stepping stone if you will to allow gadual movement of new blood so to speak into 0.0.
|
LordElfa
|
Posted - 2010.11.20 19:17:00 -
[26]
The only problem I see with banning cynos in low sec would be that someone could still build a buttload of dreadnoughts and carriers in a system and essentially take it completely over. With no ability to jump another capital fleet in to engage it, the system could be permanently locked up. Am I wrong here or am I missing something?
|
Lord Dralos
|
Posted - 2010.11.20 19:42:00 -
[27]
hmm not 100% sure on that can a cap ship use jump gates anyone ??, also we are forgetting the one thing most cap ships dread the most is stealths coming in blowing crap up and well you get the jist of it even cap ships can be taken down using the right tactics .
|
LordElfa
|
Posted - 2010.11.20 22:56:00 -
[28]
Edited by: LordElfa on 20/11/2010 23:01:22 Excellent point. I don't believe Caps can use jump gates at all because of their size, so only ships built in a system with no cynos allowed would be the only caps ever there.
My earlier post about removing low sec aside, I can't think of any good ways to lure people to low sec without fundamentally changing how low sec operates which would anger everyone who depends on it the way it is now to operate and make a living. I mean there is already a lot of good things in low sec worth going there for, just not enough to outweigh the risk involve for most. the only way to really create a larger draw is to lower the risks which defeats the whole point of low sec.
|
helmut cheddar
|
Posted - 2010.11.21 07:17:00 -
[29]
Originally by: LordElfa The only problem I see with banning cynos in low sec would be that someone could still build a buttload of dreadnoughts and carriers in a system and essentially take it completely over. With no ability to jump another capital fleet in to engage it, the system could be permanently locked up. Am I wrong here or am I missing something?
what kind of moron is going to build a cap ship in a system it can never leave ?
|
Biocross
|
Posted - 2010.11.21 08:18:00 -
[30]
Originally by: helmut cheddar
Originally by: LordElfa The only problem I see with banning cynos in low sec would be that someone could still build a buttload of dreadnoughts and carriers in a system and essentially take it completely over. With no ability to jump another capital fleet in to engage it, the system could be permanently locked up. Am I wrong here or am I missing something?
what kind of moron is going to build a cap ship in a system it can never leave ?
You don't go to wormholes a lot do you?
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |