Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Darius Caliente
Tempest Legion Psychotic Tendencies.
48
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 07:18:00 -
[1] - Quote
I'm not suggesting that this will fix low-sec long term but it will increase content while we wait for a fix for low-sec.
The concept is pretty simple... 0.4 is currently the bastard child of low-sec. You can't moon mine, you can't assign fighters. These are completely arbitrary restrictions. Let's open up 0.4 systems and put them on par with the rest of low-sec. This should be an extremely simple change. This means new moons for people to fight over, additional systems where fighters can be assigned to a smaller ship (which will be much more useful after the upcoming drone changes).
What's do ya say CCP? Let's make it happen! It'll give us something to do while you figure out how to reinvigorate low-sec.
|
Noxisia Arkana
Deadspace Knights
315
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 16:47:00 -
[2] - Quote
Honestly didn't know there was a difference between .4 and .3 space. +1 just for the 'knowledge is power.' |
Setsune Rin
Collapsed Out Shadow Cartel
202
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 18:51:00 -
[3] - Quote
support this change....no idea why it wasn't done 10 years ago, it's kinda silly |
Gully Alex Foyle
Black Fox Marauders Repeat 0ffenders
109
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 19:19:00 -
[4] - Quote
+1 unless someone gives a good reason for 0.4 being as it is |
Arthur Aihaken
Perkone Caldari State
3339
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 19:37:00 -
[5] - Quote
Why open it up? I say prohibit cynos in 0.4 systems as well. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Setsune Rin
Collapsed Out Shadow Cartel
202
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 20:52:00 -
[6] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Why open it up? I say prohibit cynos in 0.4 systems as well.
yeah...lets make lowsec cyno travel even more of a clusterfuck for pirates, great idea
go lose some more officer battleships to tornadoes or something, get out |
Quaggan Stomp
The Milkmen Ideal Society
7
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 22:05:00 -
[7] - Quote
I disagree.
The 0.4 and .3 systems are a "buffer zone", which arguably starts in 0.5 with the occasional gank gate camps and the delayed concord response.
It is also a place for many players to enjoy more small scale combat, much more PvP in frigates, destroyers and cruisers takes place in these systems then further out, precisely and exactly because these restrictions are in place. Lifting them would have a very negative impact on that.
Keep in mind that not everyone likes cap blobbing and sov warfare. Many of us find that to be about as exciting as mining (anotherwords, boring to tears).
In fact, I would like to see many more places in the game dedicated or restricted to smaller fleet and more action oriented combat warfare rather then the usual null mechanics.
And if you're dumb enough to fly anything officer fit into a space dominated by bunch of small cheap T1 ships, then thats your own fault. As a vet player you should have known far better then come parade a big ass target in front of ISK hungry gangs.
|
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2303
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 22:13:00 -
[8] - Quote
Ban Cynos in low sec caps should be a null thing and remove moon mining passive income is bad for the game. -á --á |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
2169
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 22:33:00 -
[9] - Quote
What does this actually fix? Does having some additional systems that can moon mine change anything significantly? Is fighter assignment that much of a thing (I didn't think fighters were really worth using generally to begin with).
It might be better if you actually posted what the problem is and how these changes actually fix it.
|
Quaggan Stomp
The Milkmen Ideal Society
7
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 23:00:00 -
[10] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Ban Cynos in low sec caps should be a null thing and remove moon mining passive income is bad for the game.
I wouldn't go that far, cause unfortunately cynos are used for logistics. Logistics = boredom. Anything impeding logistics, slowing them down, or getting in their way = more boredom.
|
|
Darius Caliente
Tempest Legion Psychotic Tendencies.
56
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 03:07:00 -
[11] - Quote
Derath Ellecon wrote:What does this actually fix? Does having some additional systems that can moon mine change anything significantly? Is fighter assignment that much of a thing (I didn't think fighters were really worth using generally to begin with).
It might be better if you actually posted what the problem is and how these changes actually fix it.
Many of the low-sec entries (from high-sec) are 0.4. These are the first systems that new players, used to high sec, venture into. I've often seen newer players come in with a tower and a moon harvester, scan moons and start setting up only to find out they can't after their tower is online. These people, pack up and leave high-sec because they don't want to go deeper.
Fighters are about to become much more useful when Drone Skills and Modules start to affect them.
In either case, it's about eliminating a very esoteric set of rules that confuse most newer players and prevent some of those groups from ever venturing further into low-sec.
It also creates temporary conflict in low-sec by introducing additional moons that people can fight over. |
Darius Caliente
Tempest Legion Psychotic Tendencies.
56
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 03:14:00 -
[12] - Quote
Quaggan Stomp wrote:I disagree.
The 0.4 and .3 systems are a "buffer zone", which arguably starts in 0.5 with the occasional gank gate camps and the delayed concord response.
It is also a place for many players to enjoy more small scale combat, much more PvP in frigates, destroyers and cruisers takes place in these systems then further out, precisely and exactly because these restrictions are in place. Lifting them would have a very negative impact on that.
Keep in mind that not everyone likes cap blobbing and sov warfare. Many of us find that to be about as exciting as mining (anotherwords, boring to tears).
In fact, I would like to see many more places in the game dedicated or restricted to smaller fleet and more action oriented combat warfare rather then the usual null mechanics.
And if you're dumb enough to fly anything officer fit into a space dominated by bunch of small cheap T1 ships, then thats your own fault. As a vet player you should have known far better then come parade a big ass target in front of ISK hungry gangs.
I don't think either of these restrictions change cap blobbing or sov warfare. The ability to assign drones makes it easier for a small group with a single carrier to apply additional DPS without too much risk to their carrier, especially since those fighters will become deadly after the update. It has nothing to do with fielding more caps, in fact it has to do with removing capitals from the field.
As for wanting smaller ships, just venture into any part of Faction Warfare, it's currently the only active part of low-sec and it's frigates and destroyers with the occasional cruiser fight.
This is about easing new players into low-sec in many ways, increasing the population. By allowing these edge systems moon's to be mined, more of the risk-taker indy groups are going to give low-sec a chance and places like Neziel, Reblier, Raravath, Vecamia, Gyerzen, Teshkat, Ouelletta will become much more interesting. Those single low-sec systems all alone, the dead-end pockets and the back-side entrances to larger pipes will become more active.
|
Rapscallion Jones
Omnibus Solutions
6
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 05:07:00 -
[13] - Quote
Darius Caliente wrote:
Fighters are about to become much more useful when Drone Skills and Modules start to affect them.
In either case, it's about eliminating a very esoteric set of rules that confuse most newer players and prevent some of those groups from ever venturing further into low-sec.
One of these things is not like the other one.... |
Sabriz Adoudel
Mission BLITZ
2628
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 12:14:00 -
[14] - Quote
/signed.
0.4 is usually the most dangerous part of lowsec as it is often a highsec border choke point.
Rancer, Egghelende, Hagilur - three of the most dangerous systems in the game, all 0.4. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=326497 --áPsychotic Monk for CSM! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=238931 - an idea for a new form of hybrid PVE/PVP content. If you want to mine in highsec, read www.minerbumping.com. |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
2173
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 13:40:00 -
[15] - Quote
Darius Caliente wrote:Derath Ellecon wrote:What does this actually fix? Does having some additional systems that can moon mine change anything significantly? Is fighter assignment that much of a thing (I didn't think fighters were really worth using generally to begin with).
It might be better if you actually posted what the problem is and how these changes actually fix it.
Many of the low-sec entries (from high-sec) are 0.4. These are the first systems that new players, used to high sec, venture into. I've often seen newer players come in with a tower and a moon harvester, scan moons and start setting up only to find out they can't after their tower is online. These people, pack up and leave high-sec because they don't want to go deeper. Fighters are about to become much more useful when Drone Skills and Modules start to affect them. In either case, it's about eliminating a very esoteric set of rules that confuse most newer players and prevent some of those groups from ever venturing further into low-sec. It also creates temporary conflict in low-sec by introducing additional moons that people can fight over.
That argument is pretty weak at best. Taking your example, a new player who obviously has done little research into moon harvesting under your proposal would setup their harvesting tower in this .4 system. They would then likely lose that tower in short order from a fleet of fighter assisted carriers, and then never venture deeper into lowsec.
I can sort of understand removing what seem like arbitrary rules, but your attempt above to legitimize them is pretty weak. |
Stalence
Caldari Colonial Defense Ministry Templis CALSF
18
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 15:54:00 -
[16] - Quote
+1
Agree with OP completely.
I would just add that Booster manufacturing at a POS also be allowed in 0.4 space as part of the proposed change. |
Stalence
Caldari Colonial Defense Ministry Templis CALSF
18
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 16:06:00 -
[17] - Quote
Derath Ellecon wrote:Darius Caliente wrote:Derath Ellecon wrote:What does this actually fix? Does having some additional systems that can moon mine change anything significantly? Is fighter assignment that much of a thing (I didn't think fighters were really worth using generally to begin with).
It might be better if you actually posted what the problem is and how these changes actually fix it.
Many of the low-sec entries (from high-sec) are 0.4. These are the first systems that new players, used to high sec, venture into. I've often seen newer players come in with a tower and a moon harvester, scan moons and start setting up only to find out they can't after their tower is online. These people, pack up and leave high-sec because they don't want to go deeper. Fighters are about to become much more useful when Drone Skills and Modules start to affect them. In either case, it's about eliminating a very esoteric set of rules that confuse most newer players and prevent some of those groups from ever venturing further into low-sec. It also creates temporary conflict in low-sec by introducing additional moons that people can fight over. That argument is pretty weak at best. Taking your example, a new player who obviously has done little research into moon harvesting under your proposal would setup their harvesting tower in this .4 system. They would then likely lose that tower in short order from a fleet of fighter assisted carriers, and then never venture deeper into lowsec. I can sort of understand removing what seem like arbitrary rules, but your attempt above to legitimize them is pretty weak.
A new player probably does not possess the skills or capital required to set up a POS, moon mining array, and a reactions chain. And if they did, why should they expect their tower to be treated any differently than a vet's tower on a valuable moon? Conflict over resources is supposed to happen in EVE.
Secondly, I'm not sure how you take down POSs in your neck of the woods but I'll tell you it almost never involves carriers in low-sec unless the carriers were there to rep a POS. Think dreadnaughts, battleships, battlecruisers or a blob of cruisers.
Also by your same logic, new players should be prohibited from selling plex to afford faction-fit battleships for high-sec missions for the fear they may get ganked and then never undock again! |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
1106
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 17:52:00 -
[18] - Quote
I disagree with any "fix" that would reinforce the fine line between lowsec and highsec. I am in favor of blurring that line instead. One reason it is difficult for players to get their feet wet in lowsec is because it doesn't have a shallow end. 0.5 to 0.4 is akin to stepping out of the theme park and falling several feet into deep, churning ocean water. That might be how the Navy Seals train, but most olympic swimmers have much more humble beginnings. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) And bring back the missile Inquisitor!! |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
2176
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 18:18:00 -
[19] - Quote
Stalence wrote:Derath Ellecon wrote:Darius Caliente wrote:Derath Ellecon wrote:What does this actually fix? Does having some additional systems that can moon mine change anything significantly? Is fighter assignment that much of a thing (I didn't think fighters were really worth using generally to begin with).
It might be better if you actually posted what the problem is and how these changes actually fix it.
Many of the low-sec entries (from high-sec) are 0.4. These are the first systems that new players, used to high sec, venture into. I've often seen newer players come in with a tower and a moon harvester, scan moons and start setting up only to find out they can't after their tower is online. These people, pack up and leave high-sec because they don't want to go deeper. Fighters are about to become much more useful when Drone Skills and Modules start to affect them. In either case, it's about eliminating a very esoteric set of rules that confuse most newer players and prevent some of those groups from ever venturing further into low-sec. It also creates temporary conflict in low-sec by introducing additional moons that people can fight over. That argument is pretty weak at best. Taking your example, a new player who obviously has done little research into moon harvesting under your proposal would setup their harvesting tower in this .4 system. They would then likely lose that tower in short order from a fleet of fighter assisted carriers, and then never venture deeper into lowsec. I can sort of understand removing what seem like arbitrary rules, but your attempt above to legitimize them is pretty weak. A new player probably does not possess the skills or capital required to set up a POS, moon mining array, and a reactions chain. And if they did, why should they expect their tower to be treated any differently than a vet's tower on a valuable moon? Conflict over resources is supposed to happen in EVE. Secondly, I'm not sure how you take down POSs in your neck of the woods but I'll tell you it almost never involves carriers in low-sec unless the carriers were there to rep a POS. Think dreadnaughts, battleships, battlecruisers or a blob of cruisers. Also by your same logic, new players should be prohibited from selling plex to afford faction-fit battleships for high-sec missions for the fear they may get ganked and then never undock again!
Stalence,
If your reply was directed at what I wrote all i can say is wow, please try again. You missed the entire point by oh several hundred light years. Re-read and try again.
|
Darius Caliente
Tempest Legion Psychotic Tendencies.
64
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 21:06:00 -
[20] - Quote
Stalence wrote:+1
Agree with OP completely.
I would just add that Booster manufacturing at a POS also be allowed in 0.4 space as part of the proposed change.
I didn't realize this wasn't allowed... adding it to the original list. |
|
Darius Caliente
Tempest Legion Psychotic Tendencies.
64
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 21:12:00 -
[21] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:I disagree with any "fix" that would reinforce the fine line between lowsec and highsec. I am in favor of blurring that line instead. One reason it is difficult for players to get their feet wet in lowsec is because it doesn't have a shallow end. 0.5 to 0.4 is akin to stepping out of the theme park and falling several feet into deep, churning ocean water. That might be how the Navy Seals train, but most olympic swimmers have much more humble beginnings.
Your logic escapes me. Many of the players I know consider high-sec to be among the most dangerous areas of space and many of the 0.4 systems that would be involved in this are single jump systems in high-sec pipes. This would give players an opportunity to setup moon mining without being harassed by locals (since most live in pipes) and with little risk of POS removal (unless of course they tried to claim an R64). |
Darius Caliente
Tempest Legion Psychotic Tendencies.
64
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 21:14:00 -
[22] - Quote
Rapscallion Jones wrote:Darius Caliente wrote:
Fighters are about to become much more useful when Drone Skills and Modules start to affect them.
In either case, it's about eliminating a very esoteric set of rules that confuse most newer players and prevent some of those groups from ever venturing further into low-sec.
One of these things is not like the other one....
You do realize that just as there are new players that buy plex to buy and fit officer fit scorpions, that there are new players that buy plex to use in the Character Bazaar to buy capital toons right? People are attracted to this game via battles like B-R and Asakai, they want the big ships right away. |
Greygal
Redemption Road Affirmative.
211
|
Posted - 2014.04.21 02:58:00 -
[23] - Quote
+1 to OP.
To me this is comparable to the changes CCP is making in highsec this summer, where they are removing the restriction for anchoring pos's in all highsec systems. That is an arbitrary restriction analogous to the current arbitrary restrictions in .4 lowsec systems.
As many new moons are about to open up in highsec for anchoring pos's, I imagine that a number of people who have pos's right now anchored in lowsec will move their pos's up to highsec, since they will no longer need standings to anchor them in highsec, and they can anchor them nearly anywhere. This means that some of the current (potential) conflict drivers in lowsec will be reduced. Opening up more moons in .4 systems for moon mining will (possibly) create a reason for those who already have pos's in lowsec to move and/or keep their pos's in lowsec instead of moving them to highsec.
Just my two bytes.
GG What you do for yourself dies with you, what you do for others is immortal.
Free public roams! Visit http://www.redemption-road.com or join mailing list REDEMPTION ROAMS for more information! |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
1131
|
Posted - 2014.04.21 06:14:00 -
[24] - Quote
People who see highsec as dangerous really just lack a grasp of basic highsec defense. My alliance is almost constantly wardecced and I'm pretty safe in highsec. I'm actually a bit of an expert on staying safe in highsec, and sometimes I play peekaboo with the war targets and fly industrials around them. But it doesn't take all the knowledge I have to stay safe. All it really takes is keeping your expensive stuff away from trade hubs unless it's in something tanky, or during a war, fast aligning.
I'm aware that many people can stay pretty safe in lowsec, nullsec, or wormhole space. I can, too. The problem is that these people take for granted the layers of protection they are surrounded by: 1.) alliance members who maintain local security 2.) being in the right parts of space 3.) understanding the game mechanics and hunting tactics of your area 4.) just getting lucky
One person will spend a week in lowsec and get left alone well enough to make some good ISK, get situated, annd have enough backup ships and resources to defend themselves when hostile players finally show up. Another one will go out and hunt for a good spot for a week, and not find one, and will be mercilessly pursued by pirates at every turn. The second one will complain that lowsec is tough to start in, and the first will say "you just don't know how to do it right."
Alternate scenario: One person posts an ad in the recruitment forum saying they want to join a lowsec corp. They get an offer that looks good, they go out to lowsec and join up with a great corp who shows them the ropes and takes them on pvp roams and lets them get some nice kills, and they get to help protect their space. Another person posts an ad, gets invited to a lowsec corp that seems good. The corp shows them the ropes and takes them on pvp roams where ships are frequently lost and the enemy constantly pushes his corp around. He finds himself constantly on the move, never getting a chance to settle down and get used to anything. He complains that lowsec is hard, and the first person says "you just don't know how to do it right."
Lowsec is easier for some people than for others, but one thing is for certain: lowsec is dangerous for the majority, especialy newbies. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) And bring back the missile Inquisitor!! |
Darius Caliente
Tempest Legion Psychotic Tendencies.
68
|
Posted - 2014.04.21 14:56:00 -
[25] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote: Insert long winded commentary on the relative safety of high-sec vs low-sec and no lack of self-aggrandizement
You have some valid points and some invalid points, but they aren't overly relevant to this discussion. In the end, you proved a simple point... safety is subjective. Since safety is subjective, the pilot should, regardless of age, choose where they want to live and make a profit.
Over the weekend, I had two separate conversations with industrialists that were interested in venturing into low-sec but were weighing the cost vs benefit and the limitations of defensive options for mining in low-sec.
I'm sticking with my previous claim that a lot of border systems are 0.4 sec status, making them the first low-sec systems that these industrialists might visit. There are also plenty of "out of the way" 0.4 systems that are easy to access and seldom frequented. These would make great homes for these industrial corporations. If they could find a moon that they could harvest or they produced boosters, this would add to the viability of moving to low-sec. Additionally, with the changes coming to fighters, they could increase the defensive capabilities of their mining fleet by dipping a carrier out of the POS shield and assigning fighters to the mining fleet (which will add reasonable sub-cap defensive capabilities with the summer changes).
As GreyGal pointed out, restrictions in high-sec are disappearing (anchor a POS (almost) anywhere without standing) so why shouldn't similar arbitrary restrictions disappear in low-sec. It just makes sense. |
Darius Caliente
Certified. Affirmative.
70
|
Posted - 2014.06.06 10:47:00 -
[26] - Quote
Now that the fighter changes have been released and are amazing, I'm going to say that I still think this is an awesome idea. |
Darius Caliente
Certified. Affirmative.
78
|
Posted - 2014.06.17 14:42:00 -
[27] - Quote
Alright CCP... You've confirmed moon mining and drug manufacturing in 0.4 systems. Any word on fighter assignment? |
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
297
|
Posted - 2014.06.17 15:06:00 -
[28] - Quote
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:+1 unless someone gives a good reason for 0.4 being as it is
The only thing I can really think of as mentioned earlier in the thread is it acts as a buffer zone for the big boys. There's nothing really worthwhile in 0.4 systems with the current mechanic and so by association they have less incentive to be there.
This could actually be extended to 0.5 as well, with 0.1 - 0.5 being 5 security rankings of lowsec and 0.5/0.4 being a lot like a heavily restricted highsec but lowsec hybrid and 0.6 - 1.0 being 5 ranks of highsec. Under 0.1 you have obviously 0.0 where all the rules are lifted and the 'true EVE experience' begins.
YMMV. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |