Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 59 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
89
|
Posted - 2013.10.11 19:45:00 -
[1051] - Quote
Wooo this topic is still around! This still needs to happen!!!!! |
KanashiiKami
105
|
Posted - 2013.10.11 22:18:00 -
[1052] - Quote
if CCP do seriously consider this, i will suggest the below :
1) instead of the suggested hard core low sec boundary around every empire, introduce a new type of space --> 0.4 space is now known as neutral space.
2) in 0.4 ... both lowsec and high sec mechanics are in place. there is a secondary concord police call the mercenary concord and there is also random pirates.
3) merc concord reaction time in 0.4 carries a delayed reaction time of additional 15 seconds but the armada that turns up will only consist of ECM frigates. they are destroyable ships.
4) CCP introduces a new type of player structure. a mercenary concord battlestation (MCB) with finite HP (player destroyable). the MCB defense mechanics is the same as a POS, but MCB consumables do not require player intervention. it only functions to dispatch more merc concord ships based on concord rules of engagement (and these MCB will dispatch ships that carry heavy firepower, not like ECM frigs)
5) every addition/anchoring of these MCB will impose a merc concord NPC tax on the anchoring corp. maybe a daily tax charge of 5m isk per MCB set to auto deduct from corp wallet. due to this variation, mercenary concord will also react faster to anchor corp members under "distress".
6) MCB structures are usable in 0.4sec (so now 0.4 may see a whole new type of game play). logistics "business" alliances will need to secure a route lined with MCBs, player pirate group will seek to destroy these annoying things in 0.4. and for these things to play out flexibly, CCP will need to create a rather large boundary of 0.4sec.
7) in any 0.4 sec, a MCB can be anchored (and up to 2 per gate) 100-120km off the gate.
8) MCB structure and ships can be targetted and destroyed. a MCB station can spawn a finite number of merc concord ships per minute, and there is a maximum limit of 10 additional merc concord ship spawned per system per MCB anchored.
9) MCB can be upgraded by anchoring shield resist mods and other mods (limited by PG/CPU)
10) instead of completely destroying a MCB. MCB can be taken over, by unloading 20000 units of marines into the MCB when it is vunerable during a 30 second window of it coming out of reinforce mode. this is a idea borrowed from HQ TCRC (incursions). now i think this is a good idea, CCP may extend this idea into normal POS, but maybe inject 50000 marines instead, or even 1440 exotic dancers to render it un-usable for the next 24 hours! LOL !
11) to bring things further, maybe this method of implementing MCB can be expanded into the entire universe and not just 0.4sec. and maybe the MCB can become an auxilliary anchor object next to your own POS?
of cos .... i must be very bored to be thinking up the above .... plz do comment WUT ??? |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
893
|
Posted - 2013.10.14 14:36:00 -
[1053] - Quote
ye https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Aesheera
Blacklight Recon Strictly Unprofessional
447
|
Posted - 2013.10.14 15:36:00 -
[1054] - Quote
Common Arguments:
This would make everyone just live in Jita!
If all hisec players lived in Jita then who would do amarr missions and mine amarr ice/ore? Not everything can be found in one empire making it nessecary that players spread themselves out evenly.
**Don't they already?
Every system will be like Rancer
Rancer is Rancer because it is impossible to go around it. Their is only 1 link that connects Minmatar and Caldari space, only one. If new regions are added like I prescribe then it will always be easy to circumvent these camps with a little know how.
** You CAN get around it, it's just a truckload more jumps.
This interrupts my playstyle!
Do you really need to do Damsel in Distress once for every faction? Is it really that big a deal if you now need to sell your products locally instead of at one super hub as an industrialist?
** Only truly bad indies sell it all in Jita. Those that pay attention to their goods and their respective values ALREADY park their wares all over New Eden.
It is impossible to cross low sec safely and it disrupts traders gameplay!
On the contrary, empire to empire wormholes that can fit freighters and cloaking haulers are available to traders. Volumes of items being moved to make prices more homogenous will be reduced meaning greater profits will be made each trip making the use of these methods more profitable.
** Such wormholes are few and far between. The opposite will occur: pirates will all get their sec up to be able to get to highsec and just buy there stuff their directly. Lowsec markets will be even worse than they are now.
It doesnt make sense lore wise!
WRONG. Borders between enemy nations do not have to be safe and are often not. Security status is not determined by the presence of the empires military but concord's ability to secure those areas. The US Mexico border is a RL example of this, its a desolate desert covered with patrol agents and drug cartel operatives who will sew your genitals to your face and put explosives in them after sending your corpse back to your family. The borders between allied empires could be also insecure, since they may be frontier areas since this idea comes with adding new regions that disrupt gate travel, these areas would be a frontier, thus not very well secured.
** Empire gates already aren't safe perse. Plenty of freighters get suicide ganked as is. Miners get ganked plenty as is. Plenty of wars to disrupt empire 'safety'. Also, borders are protected. The people - in EVE's case the players - make it unsafe. It's already that way.
Gate camps aren't fun or pvp!
While mostly true the fact that gate camps exist will provide opportunities for pirates to make money actually pirating. More importantly the fact that a gate camp is there means that someone will want to come and break it up, encouraging fleet pvp off stations encouraging more fun.
** As you mentioned before: JF's will be used to directly hop into lowsec - if they would to begin with. As far as making ISK from pirating goes: gatecamping isn't necessarily profitable. 15 people on a gate, 1 bill isk, split 15 ways. Yay. Also, with numerously more entries, it will be alot easier to detect where camps are, they'll be spread even more thin and creative people will avoid these systems easier than they do now.
I'm not trying to beat you down for being creative, but i don't think this will be a solution, this will only be frustrating. And not just for carebears - for pirates as well. Primary since '07. GÖŃ
If It Bleeds, Kill It - II |
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS type X
78
|
Posted - 2013.10.14 18:15:00 -
[1055] - Quote
Mr Barbeque wrote:1. The point is to illustrate how these gates wouldn't be perma-camped. Your response is it wont make your freighter safe. Yes, you undocked, you are no longer safe. 2. Thats your choice of investment. You would still be able to compete locally, saving those JF trips for what would be worth it. What is it that forces you to freight that cargo across empires? Could it be your choice of where to aquire these goods? Your choice of what goods to invest in? 2.5 The proposition isn't about ganking freighters. 3. Show how you've trumped the supporting arguments in any way shape or form. 4.You attempt to argue against me by using the example of a space ship in the context of real life. Then proceed to attack me personally for poorly thinking. Sounds like projection. What makes it a bad example of how trade does not need stability to exist? 5. mr barbeque wrote:Destabilizing the markets is the point, as static gameplay is boring Maldiro Selkurk wrote: I mine ore and run the same missions everyday, it is basically static. I cannot speak for all highsec players but there are definitely a significant amount of us that basically do the same thing every game day.
You find it boring, I find it peaceful. If you want excitement and volatility probably more than 1/2 of all game playing space is just that, go to Null, True or WH space and have at it.
What would stop you from continuing to mine or run missions? 6. Personal attacks just damage your credibility. They are also delicious. If you have a counter argument reasoned out I would be happy to see it presented.
1. Stating that some pirates will be fighting each other over gate camp spots hardly qualifies as refuting that they will be perma-camped. Seeing as the pirates are fighting over them means that the gates are so valuable as camping places that intelligent pirates will be killing each other so they can feed on high sec commerce 23/7.
2. Why should my high sec activities and profits be nerfed into the ground just to make yours better?
2.5 If you don't realize this proposal definitely concerns freighters then i can only say that clearly your lobotomy was an absolute and unbridled success!
3. My arguments are better than yours that is just a fact, your inability to see that not withstanding.
4. You said that black markets exist and gave an example that mary jane gets smuggled into and around the U.S. all the time. Basically you are saying that since it is easy to smuggle a kilo of mary jane around the U.S. it would be easy for commerce to smuggle goods through the new gate camp infested low sec hell that this proposal would create. I said as a counter example that smuggling a 2km long spaceship around the U.S. surely would not go unnoticed and likewise major commerce going through your gate camp hell wont go unnoticed either.
5. Your argument was, "Destabilizing the markets is the point, as static gameplay is boring". I stated that what is boring to you is peaceful to me and others that live in highsec space. I personally would find endless blasting each other into bite sized pieces boring but i'm not calling for the end to piracy or any other pvp activity simply because i would find it boring. I only state that given that a majority of EVE space already is a pvp paradise that no further EVE space be given to it and more importantly that highsec no be busted into four parts by this new pvp space you desire.
5.1 Where do i state that i will stop running missions or mining? (I don't blame you for refuting arguments I never made, I know for a fact it is a much easier task than refuting the ones I actually make).
6. You state, "Personal attacks just damage your credibility. They are also delicious."
I at least have credibility to destroy, your arguments have none.
7. You said, "If you have a counter argument reasoned out I would be happy to see it presented".
Consider them so presented.
Looking forward to your next post ending with this exact same statement as it seems you end all our discourse with it. It is a lame attempt at APPEARING ahead in an argument you clearly lost three posts ago.
p.s. I will impose upon you to enlighten me about an area which i must admit total ignorance. It is clear you have spent countless years mastering this particular area of expertise so if you would be so kind as to answer this simple question.
How does it feel to lose every argument you get into? Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really. |
KanashiiKami
105
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 06:21:00 -
[1056] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:Matthias Thullmann wrote:I should start a new thread "Separate the four empires space with nullsec". Maybe we should separate the nulls with high "It would create more dynamic gameplay"
HAHAHA ! YES !!!
and for aprils fools joke ... jita is surrounded by lowsec?
actually the idea null is webbed by hisec is great. but i would ... use the neutral sec thingy ... the neutral sec perforates every space system, neutral sec is the only real "highway" to all of eve WUT ??? |
Anthar Thebess
REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN
144
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 07:40:00 -
[1057] - Quote
Up Up you go +1 |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
594
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 15:21:00 -
[1058] - Quote
damn... and I thought this thread was dead... stupid alt bumping |
Vox Zevin
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 02:30:00 -
[1059] - Quote
This is my first post on the Forums ever, My apologies If it isn't appropriate to post here i see it's a bit of a old topic. I am a care-bear , I have been since i started eve in 2011, I mostly play alone and don't have the personal time to devote to Big corps and hardcore pvp, Mad respect to people who do, I think it's really cool. That out of the way, Eve needs this, or something like it. I'm not entirely risk adverse, but why would i travel through low sec now?? I'm not a masochist.. Being forced to travel through low-sec though is entirely different and everyone would be in the same boat, I say bring it on. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
615
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 03:33:00 -
[1060] - Quote
Vox Zevin wrote:This is my first post on the Forums ever, My apologies If it isn't appropriate to post here i see it's a bit of a old topic. I am a care-bear , I have been since i started eve in 2011, I mostly play alone and don't have the personal time to devote to Big corps and hardcore pvp, Mad respect to people who do, I think it's really cool. That out of the way, Eve needs this, or something like it. I'm not entirely risk adverse, but why would i travel through low sec now?? I'm not a masochist.. Being forced to travel through low-sec though is entirely different and everyone would be in the same boat, I say bring it on.
Alright, who's alt bumping..... |
|
Anomaly One
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
10
|
Posted - 2013.11.12 04:27:00 -
[1061] - Quote
still think this is a good idea
|
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
645
|
Posted - 2013.11.12 05:00:00 -
[1062] - Quote
Apparently not, or the select very few wouldn't have to keep bumping the thread.... (Still not convinced they're not all the same person)
|
Jacque Custeau
Knights of the Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2013.11.12 05:03:00 -
[1063] - Quote
I started playing in 2003, and this is exactly how empires were separated. What we have now is the latest edition of the 'highway' CCP put in place because people complained about travel times (we have warp to zero now, we didn't back then). I for one, thought it was neat. I had to go through Amamake and Sisiede to buy blueprints from Gallente space, and I remember it being a nice roadtrip. It also allows markets to be more localized, instead of one super hub like Jita.
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
901
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 15:52:00 -
[1064] - Quote
Jacque Custeau wrote:I started playing in 2003, and this is exactly how empires were separated. What we have now is the latest edition of the 'highway' CCP put in place because people complained about travel times (we have warp to zero now, we didn't back then). I for one, thought it was neat. I had to go through Amamake and Sisiede to buy blueprints from Gallente space, and I remember it being a nice roadtrip. It also allows markets to be more localized, instead of one super hub like Jita.
Exactly https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Powers Sa
731
|
Posted - 2013.11.15 15:43:00 -
[1065] - Quote
I like how this thread is 64 pages long. lol |
Fatima Kara-Khanid
0
|
Posted - 2013.11.15 17:22:00 -
[1066] - Quote
I would agree with low and even null bordering the enemy empires, but having low sec separating caldari and amarr for example has no reason. Minmatar and Ammatar should have, but not Amarr and Ammatar.
But all of this would make no sense at all if the present state of crime, penalties and concord action remains the lazy work it is.
The sense a true section of the empire alliances would work for its possible reasons only if such empires had engaged in full war. If there is trade from NPC corporations among empires, enemy corps operating in enemy space (like pend in amarr space), there is no reason to have such thing aswell.
Empires grudges (cant be called war) is something very little loved by CCP it seems. Things in that front had not change from a long time, and it seems not likely that they will change soon.
But again, with the kind of players that dominates the online time of hisec, there is no reason to look into this matters aswell. Concept Warfare: Argument made by changing the concept the words used actually refeer to. Often used with: Stick Figure Argument - Red Herring - Ad Hominen - Reductio ad Absurdum |
Kaerakh
Obscure Joke Implied Kiki's Delivery Service.
21
|
Posted - 2013.11.15 17:33:00 -
[1067] - Quote
Fatima Kara-Khanid wrote:I would agree with low and even null bordering the enemy empires, but having low sec separating caldari and amarr for example has no reason. Minmatar and Ammatar should have, but not Amarr and Ammatar.
But all of this would make no sense at all if the present state of crime, penalties and concord action remains the lazy work it is.
The sense a true section of the empire alliances would work for its possible reasons only if such empires had engaged in full war. If there is trade from NPC corporations among empires, enemy corps operating in enemy space (like pend in amarr space), there is no reason to have such thing aswell.
Empires grudges (cant be called war) is something very little loved by CCP it seems. Things in that front had not change from a long time, and it seems not likely that they will change soon.
But again, with the kind of players that dominates the online time of hisec, there is no reason to look into this matters aswell.
Reason, this person has some. |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
1848
|
Posted - 2013.11.18 20:46:00 -
[1068] - Quote
This should happen. It could be implemented with FW events which would gradually change the controlled territories and maybe even destroy some star gates. Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
Anomaly One
38
|
Posted - 2013.11.19 00:39:00 -
[1069] - Quote
^great one
This change alone would bring so much into EVE please CCP consider this! it will NOT affect a carebears life since they mainly stay in the same system/region, think of the possibilties ! *~~*running my own mission and have some class bully run up and blow me up because they think its funny, then give the excuses that I was just firing fireworks at you*~~* |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1041
|
Posted - 2014.02.02 16:38:00 -
[1070] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:Apparently not, or the select very few wouldn't have to keep bumping the thread.... (Still not convinced they're not all the same person)
I have 188 characters to like this thread. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1041
|
Posted - 2014.02.02 16:39:00 -
[1071] - Quote
Fatima Kara-Khanid wrote:I would agree with low and even null bordering the enemy empires, but having low sec separating caldari and amarr for example has no reason. Minmatar and Ammatar should have, but not Amarr and Ammatar.
But all of this would make no sense at all if the present state of crime, penalties and concord action remains the lazy work it is.
The sense a true section of the empire alliances would work for its possible reasons only if such empires had engaged in full war. If there is trade from NPC corporations among empires, enemy corps operating in enemy space (like pend in amarr space), there is no reason to have such thing aswell.
Empires grudges (cant be called war) is something very little loved by CCP it seems. Things in that front had not change from a long time, and it seems not likely that they will change soon.
But again, with the kind of players that dominates the online time of hisec, there is no reason to look into this matters aswell.
Lore should never guide gameplay, especially when you can pull new lore straight out of you're ass and people would accept it. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Seranova Farreach
Biomass Negative
634
|
Posted - 2014.02.02 16:46:00 -
[1072] - Quote
this shouldnt happen.
low/null are already rather unpopulated except for the choak points and stating areas.. all you would be doign is creating more choak points and more low/nulls which wouldnt get attention _______________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1041
|
Posted - 2014.02.02 16:47:00 -
[1073] - Quote
Seranova Farreach wrote:this shouldnt happen.
low/null are already rather unpopulated except for the choak points and stating areas.. all you would be doign is creating more choak points and more low/nulls which wouldnt get attention
Unless you added lots of systems, so there wouldn't be any choke points, and every system added would touch an alternate route. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Cael Autumn
Daktaklakpak. Red Coat Conspiracy
31
|
Posted - 2014.02.02 17:01:00 -
[1074] - Quote
I can get on board with this, with a few stipulations:
There needs to be tax on racial goods for empire stations. Pirate goods should be taxed more heavily in empire than lowsec. Hybrids should be taxed more heavily in Amarr/Rens than in Gallente/Caldari space. Shield tank modules should be taxed in amarr/gallente space; AND racial stations should give production bonuses to their racial mods, so it's cheaper to produce gallente things in gallente space, and caldari things in caldari space.
I would like there to be incentive for the minor hubs to be better than Jita for non-caldari items; but the players won't do that on their own.
I'd like a universe where you want to go buy a ship, you have to ask "which hub do I go to to get it cheapest" instead of "oh, I'm going to jita..."
---
Second, there should be ONE highsec route around the 4 empires, but it should be the absolute longest way imaginable. All trade hubs should be at least 20 jumps from each other through highsec.
There should be ONE, ridiculously short, optimal route, which links each hub together within ~7 jumps, 3 of which are lowsec. There should be TWO alternative routes, which makes the trek from hub to hub about 10 jumps, which has 2 distinct lowsec jumps. There should be TWO additional alternative routes, which makes the trek about 13-15 jumps, and has only 1 lowsec jump.
The ability to chose an alternate route and the unlikelyhood of all 5 routes being camped would give players incentive to use these routes. Not with freighters, mind you, but maybe battleships, cruisers, things they don't want to burn 20+ jumps in to buy a module 10-15% cheaper. |
Anomaly One
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
262
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 07:13:00 -
[1075] - Quote
This needs to happen. Never forget. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8sfaN8zT8E http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5l_ZjVyRxx4 Trust me, I'm an Anomaly. DUST 514 FOR PC |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1255
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 08:43:00 -
[1076] - Quote
Jacque Custeau wrote:I started playing in 2003, and this is exactly how empires were separated. What we have now is the latest edition of the 'highway' CCP put in place because people complained about travel times (we have warp to zero now, we didn't back then). I for one, thought it was neat. I had to go through Amamake and Sisiede to buy blueprints from Gallente space, and I remember it being a nice roadtrip. It also allows markets to be more localized, instead of one super hub like Jita.
yes, but nowadays eve population is 4 times larger... no way to have that traffic only trough single lines on low sec. The whoel network would need to be revamped to have at LEAST 3 routes always... "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1255
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 08:45:00 -
[1077] - Quote
Cael Autumn wrote:I can get on board with this, with a few stipulations:
There needs to be tax on racial goods for empire stations. Pirate goods should be taxed more heavily in empire than lowsec. Hybrids should be taxed more heavily in Amarr/Rens than in Gallente/Caldari space. Shield tank modules should be taxed in amarr/gallente space; AND racial stations should give production bonuses to their racial mods, so it's cheaper to produce gallente things in gallente space, and caldari things in caldari space.
I would like there to be incentive for the minor hubs to be better than Jita for non-caldari items; but the players won't do that on their own.
I'd like a universe where you want to go buy a ship, you have to ask "which hub do I go to to get it cheapest" instead of "oh, I'm going to jita..."
---
Second, there should be ONE highsec route around the 4 empires, but it should be the absolute longest way imaginable. All trade hubs should be at least 20 jumps from each other through highsec.
There should be ONE, ridiculously short, optimal route, which links each hub together within ~7 jumps, 3 of which are lowsec. There should be TWO alternative routes, which makes the trek from hub to hub about 10 jumps, which has 2 distinct lowsec jumps. There should be TWO additional alternative routes, which makes the trek about 13-15 jumps, and has only 1 lowsec jump.
The ability to chose an alternate route and the unlikelyhood of all 5 routes being camped would give players incentive to use these routes. Not with freighters, mind you, but maybe battleships, cruisers, things they don't want to burn 20+ jumps in to buy a module 10-15% cheaper.
High sec currently already have groups that can ALONE camo that many routes if they are moved to live in low sec. I am pretty sure combined with low sec curretn dwellers, if there was sure traffic.. all these routes would be camped... "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1428
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 11:12:00 -
[1078] - Quote
Make this so CCP. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Anthar Thebess
REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN
348
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 12:20:00 -
[1079] - Quote
Like it. -=Reopening old corporations=- Do you have old and closed corporation and like to reopen it? Like this topic and keep it on the top by posting. |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1263
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 15:40:00 -
[1080] - Quote
I think.. another way .. but less enforceful woudl be.
Add a TAX based on the ship mass to jump between regions.. except when in low sec... suddenly there is a reason to try to do it.
As long as the tax is enough. "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 59 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |