Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 26 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation The Honda Accord
2604
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 19:44:40 -
[61] - Quote
By the way for what it's worth. I've lived in low sec until recently. I was there 99% of the time for the last 5 years. I didn't mind it much once you learn the ropes but it sure would be cool if there was something special about it that made it truly unique. |
Daemun Khanid
Calculated Miscalculation
698
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 20:00:19 -
[62] - Quote
Scrap fw. Make lowsec nullsec sov system w/o caps and bubbles and with lower isk generation potential. Then lowsec is null sec sov for smaller corps / younger toons without cap skills. Maybe make citadels a little easier to kill in low sec to make control of systems more fluid and active. Personally, after years of lowsec life I'm in the middle of packing, finding a nice corp and moving out to null for my first time. There's just no incentive for staying in lowsec unless youre a faction warfare farmer or you just have nothing better to do or no deeper interest in EvE than hunting down farmers for "gf's. "
And also agree that hs incursions should not exist. Too much isk too little risk.
Daemun of Khanid
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3181
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 20:01:45 -
[63] - Quote
Vic Jefferson wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:What is reasonable for high sec? Lower than low, lower than NPC null, lower than sov-null, lower than WH. Was I too honest? They have the right idea with the variable bonuses on the industrial arrays. The entire game right now is too hinged on big-ticket content with big-ticket objectives, leading the actual number of people with hands on the 'generate content' levers to be really small. CCP keeps making this worse by repeatedly focusing on regions which lend themselves to this sort of play, while whole-sale ignoring regions which should empower small, scrappy entities. Hi-Sec being more profitable than it should be is a band-aid which be painful to remove until they fix Low/NPC null.
From someone like you, I was expecting an answer like that. I was more interested in the guy I quoted for example. Part of the issue for CCP to "fixing" this is that something will have to eat a bat and nobody really know players will react to this bat. You hit people in low and null with the nerf bat, they are people who already are used to adapting at least in part to situation changing. They "live" in environment where adapting is essentially the norm. Batting high-sec is different. Yes there are indeed a certain amount of character there who will probably just adapt becuse they are used to by being null/low/WH alts and even that comes with a "but". How many people actually adapt in low/null/WH because of how HS is right now is an unknown right now. Will they move their alt? Abandon it? Say screw that I can't sustain myself with HS anymore?
The other one part is the true HS player. The one who isn't someone's alt. This guy sure as hell isn't the type to adapt or at least haven't really demonstrated it. What will he do when the swing goes in?
The last unknown is how many are in each of those sets? CCP has to analyse this and think real hard about it because while the game still has momentum and a active player base, it really has to make sure it has a way to replace the normal MMO player bleed in one way or another. Forgetting the "I quit because you nerfed/buffed X", you still have to renew your base for because no matter how good your game is, your player will go away at some point for varied reason that might be 100% unrelated to the game itself. |
Salvos Rhoska
2387
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 20:12:17 -
[64] - Quote
Daemun Khanid wrote:Scrap fw. Make lowsec nullsec sov system w/o caps and bubbles and with lower isk generation potential. Then lowsec is null sec sov for smaller corps / younger toons without cap skills. Maybe make citadels a little easier to kill in low sec to make control of systems more fluid and active.
Adjacent Player Sov entities would conquer LS immediately, with or without caps. LS entities would be wiped out overnight, or forced to join or rent.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
5992
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 20:27:46 -
[65] - Quote
So we've now come full circle with all indicators pointing to null-sec as being at the root of a lot of problems in the game. i wonder if everyone was forced to join a null-sec corporation or alliance if that would actually improve the game...
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Avaelica Kuershin
Paper Cats
323
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 20:43:27 -
[66] - Quote
erg cz wrote:Make Jita and Amarr low sec. Dodixie is dead market anyway, just as Hek or Rens.
Right now Jita / Perimeter / Amarr are so full of trade goods, that making them low sec will gives gankers years of content.
As long as there is high sec, that idea wouldn't work. The markets would simply shift.
|
Vic Jefferson
Knights of Poitot Rote Kapelle
1187
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 20:44:43 -
[67] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:The other one part is the true HS player. The one who isn't someone's alt. This guy sure as hell isn't the type to adapt or at least haven't really demonstrated it. What will he do when the swing goes in?
I...I just don't know what to say. It must be so hard for an obligate high-sec player to adapt to not having income which overshadows most of the rest of the game. Why, with all the expenses and dangers that go a long with living in HS, HS income should be competitive with the rest of the game, right?
Income is there to create content with - to start fights, to give the impetus for conflict. It makes for a terrible, unhealthy game when some of the best income is in the safest space, and there's both no way to fight over it, and places that can foster open conflict are relatively impoverished.
Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?
|
Kaybella Hakaari
State War Academy Caldari State
50
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 20:52:24 -
[68] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Arthur Aihaken wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:High Sec is the problem and you can't get high sec people to understand that no matter what you do. Recent history is proof. Low-sec is the problem, and trying to deflect the issues with low-sec by blaming high-sec and null-sec is just a cop-out. As I've previously stated, I have no problems with L4s and Incursions being relocated to low-sec - provided CONCORD comes along for the ride in ALL low-sec systems. Otherwise it's totally a deal breaker. And just like that you stuck your head in the sand like every other short sighted high seccer. It's win win for me. If they fix high sec all our experiences improve, but if they repeat the null sec mistake and " just buff low sec" I'll be ok and YOU (high seccers) will get screwed all over again like you just did when we started Rorq mining. Shortsighted-ness doesn't make sense dude. Wake up. Not true. If blitzing L3s is about as good as farming L4s, we'll just go to blitzing L3s instead of farming L4s. |
Artemis Ellery Sazas
Shock and Awe Inc.
94
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 20:58:00 -
[69] - Quote
I spend a lot of my time in low sec and find it quite enjoyable. Some things I would change to make low sec a better place:
Remove station and gate guns. I prefer solo, frigate pvp, but have to pass on a lot of fights because of gate guns.
Reduce or eliminate loss of sec status penalty, especially for podding.
Eliminate the ability to use stabs in plexes, plex farmers doesn't add content to the game imo.
No supers allowed
Give low sec only, bonuses for booster manu.
Move 50% of high sec ice belts to low sec
Increase low sec ore belts to include Gneiss and Ochre
Reduce taxes for NPC stations in low sec to encourage manufacturing and research
I really only care about the first two, but wanted to give support to some earlier ideas.
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3182
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 22:10:38 -
[70] - Quote
Vic Jefferson wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:The other one part is the true HS player. The one who isn't someone's alt. This guy sure as hell isn't the type to adapt or at least haven't really demonstrated it. What will he do when the swing goes in? I...I just don't know what to say. It must be so hard for an obligate high-sec player to adapt to not having income which overshadows most of the rest of the game. Why, with all the expenses and dangers that go a long with living in HS, HS income should be competitive with the rest of the game, right?
What do you do if they decide to pack up and leave? Because while Vic Jefferson and Frostys Virpio don't really give a **** if some high sec pubbie scrublord quit EVE, CCP somewhat has to care. I'm not even sure of what I would do if I was in their shoes by now because a **** load of the customer base might be entirely present only because of the current imbalance and I really don't know how to replace them if they go. CCP either already has taken a decision and just does not say it or has to take one over this. At that point, it will make it's bed and have to lie in it.
Both our position of not relying on HS for our gameplay mean we don't have the point of view of someone who does. I really don't know what Joe pubbie #123 will think after he is told HS incursion HQ sites now pay 2 million ISK and 200 LP, all his lvl 4 mission happen in LS and every single lvl 3 mission is changed in way to prevent blitzing in any way, shape or form. It sure as hell would change the income curve tome something that makes more sense according to the theory tho. |
|
Salvos Rhoska
2391
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 22:14:03 -
[71] - Quote
No cynos in LS.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
Daemun Khanid
Calculated Miscalculation
699
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 22:31:05 -
[72] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Daemun Khanid wrote:Scrap fw. Make lowsec nullsec sov system w/o caps and bubbles and with lower isk generation potential. Then lowsec is null sec sov for smaller corps / younger toons without cap skills. Maybe make citadels a little easier to kill in low sec to make control of systems more fluid and active. Adjacent Player Sov entities would conquer LS immediately, with or without caps. LS entities would be wiped out overnight, or forced to join or rent.
Possibly, but there would be no more incentive for them to waste time doing so than there is for them to inhabit the low sec systems now, and with swarms of smaller corps and alliances speciallizing in cruiser amd bs warfare would it be worth their time and effort? While commiting assets to fighting off said swarms they would be leaving less assets behind to defend their null sec assets worth a far greater value. Ofc weekly timers on citadels could make it way too easy to defend on multiple fronts but thats a seperate issue.
Daemun of Khanid
|
Torin Corax
Game of Roams
265
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 22:31:26 -
[73] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote: What do you do if they decide to pack up and leave? Because while Vic Jefferson and Frostys Virpio don't really give a **** if some high sec pubbie scrublord quit EVE, CCP somewhat has to care. I'm not even sure of what I would do if I was in their shoes by now because a **** load of the customer base might be entirely present only because of the current imbalance and I really don't know how to replace them if they go. CCP either already has taken a decision and just does not say it or has to take one over this. At that point, it will make it's bed and have to lie in it.
Both our position of not relying on HS for our gameplay mean we don't have the point of view of someone who does. I really don't know what Joe pubbie #123 will think after he is told HS incursion HQ sites now pay 2 million ISK and 200 LP, all his lvl 4 mission happen in LS and every single lvl 3 mission is changed in way to prevent blitzing in any way, shape or form. It sure as hell would change the income curve tome something that makes more sense according to the theory tho.
The question I'd like to ask dedicated high sec players is simply...how much income do you actually need?
Assuming a reasonably clued-up HS player who knows how to avoid ganks/ baiting etc. just how much isk income is needed to buy "stuff" that is never really going to need replacing?
That's the issue with risk/ reward in HS. It's annoying to me that those who conduct their affairs in the safest space in the game, also have unnecessarily high rewards. Meanwhile those who take risks in more dangerous space will generally have a lower return, or at least a far less reliable return, on their time.
Again, in my case that's a choice I make based on the enjoyment I get from trying to make isk while avoiding those who would take it from me....but for those who look more towards the bottom line the choice to stay in high sec is pretty much a no-brainer.
This just seems out of balance. Personally I'd not so much like to see content removed from high sec (incursions and the like), just tone down the rewards. Players can then still do the things they want to do while making a more balanced return on their time investment. If they want a better return, then they will need to take risks. I think a fair few would actually do this. Not every HS player is a carebear...but a lot of them are good at math, and if the numbers don't add up in low sec then why bother.
Low sec could also be looked at from the view of adding new, perhaps unique, content specifically tailored to fit in with the risks that exist there. Content that focuses on smaller ships, used with care, that can match the income of Lvl 4 mission running. Or if used with extreme success, match incursion isk, with a reasonable level of reliability. Exploration is close, but still a little random. |
Salvos Rhoska
2392
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 22:45:25 -
[74] - Quote
Daemun Khanid wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:Daemun Khanid wrote:Scrap fw. Make lowsec nullsec sov system w/o caps and bubbles and with lower isk generation potential. Then lowsec is null sec sov for smaller corps / younger toons without cap skills. Maybe make citadels a little easier to kill in low sec to make control of systems more fluid and active. Adjacent Player Sov entities would conquer LS immediately, with or without caps. LS entities would be wiped out overnight, or forced to join or rent. Possibly, but there would be no more incentive for them to waste time doing so than there is for them to inhabit the low sec systems now, and with swarms of smaller corps and alliances speciallizing in cruiser amd bs warfare would it be worth their time and effort? While commiting assets to fighting off said swarms they would be leaving less assets behind to defend their null sec assets worth a far greater value. Ofc weekly timers on citadels could make it way too easy to defend on multiple fronts but thats a seperate issue.
Expansion is incentive enough, as well as removing LS annoyances for HS market access, and cos they are bored.
There is no way you can resist the full brunt of NS dropping countless caps on you. LS locals would be annihilated overnight. The rest is just cleaning up.
Dont kid yourself as to your chances.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
MadMuppet
A Better Corp Name
1269
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 00:04:00 -
[75] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:So we've now come full circle with all indicators pointing to null-sec as being at the root of a lot of problems in the game. i wonder if everyone was forced to join a null-sec corporation or alliance if that would actually improve the game...
I'd leave. I did the null sec thing a couple times. First as a newbie and I ran 30 jumps with my @$$ on fire. The second time was BORING! 100+ ship fleets... ALIGN, WARP,ALIGN, WARP.... as the saying goes, the view only changes for the lead dog of a sled team.
People need to get it, nobody will leave high-sec by force. They won't, so stop.
People also need to understand that **ANY** change to the game mechanics is going to be exploited by the large groups. If nothing else, a brief reading of the history of the GOONS will show that to be true.
I took a three year break from EVE because they were aiming towards forcing group play. I hated that, I liked to 'live in the cracks'. If the day came where you logged in and had to choose between the RED or BLUE team I would log off. Anybody preaching that players MUST go down a certain road after a certain time is PART OF THE PROBLEM*
-MadMuppet
*If you are part of the problem, you will be nerfed.
This message brought to you by Experience(tm). When common sense fails you, experience will come to the rescue. Experience(tm) from the makers of CONCORD.
"If you are part of the problem, you will be nerfed." -MadMuppet
|
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
3499
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 00:19:09 -
[76] - Quote
Lowsec is actually quite good, balanced, from a pure PvP perspective, best space in New Eden imo. Casual, small group friendly. Income-wise it's not that good if you want to actually live there, so this aspect needs improvement. Also I can see that citadels make FW "sov" more or less pointless.
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
goudaMob
TunDraGon Lost Obsession
14
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 00:19:30 -
[77] - Quote
Please keep low-sec. I don't want to be forced into tidi gameplay. |
MadMuppet
A Better Corp Name
1269
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 00:24:26 -
[78] - Quote
goudaMob wrote:Please keep low-sec. I don't want to be forced into tidi gameplay.
P l e a s e k e e p l o w - s e c .
I d o n ' t w a n t t o b e f o r c e d i n t o t i d i g a m e p l a y .
This message brought to you by Experience(tm). When common sense fails you, experience will come to the rescue. Experience(tm) from the makers of CONCORD.
"If you are part of the problem, you will be nerfed." -MadMuppet
|
goudaMob
TunDraGon Lost Obsession
14
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 00:27:47 -
[79] - Quote
MadMuppet wrote:goudaMob wrote:Please keep low-sec. I don't want to be forced into tidi gameplay. P l e a s e k e e p l o w - s e c . I d o n ' t w a n t t o b e f o r c e d i n t o t i d i g a m e p l a y .
P l e a s e k e e p l o w - s e c .
I d o n ' t w a n t t o b e f o r c e d i n t o t i d i g a m e p l a y . |
Daemun Khanid
Calculated Miscalculation
699
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 00:32:30 -
[80] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Daemun Khanid wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:Daemun Khanid wrote:Scrap fw. Make lowsec nullsec sov system w/o caps and bubbles and with lower isk generation potential. Then lowsec is null sec sov for smaller corps / younger toons without cap skills. Maybe make citadels a little easier to kill in low sec to make control of systems more fluid and active. Adjacent Player Sov entities would conquer LS immediately, with or without caps. LS entities would be wiped out overnight, or forced to join or rent. Possibly, but there would be no more incentive for them to waste time doing so than there is for them to inhabit the low sec systems now, and with swarms of smaller corps and alliances speciallizing in cruiser amd bs warfare would it be worth their time and effort? While commiting assets to fighting off said swarms they would be leaving less assets behind to defend their null sec assets worth a far greater value. Ofc weekly timers on citadels could make it way too easy to defend on multiple fronts but thats a seperate issue. Expansion is incentive enough, as well as removing LS annoyances for HS market access, and cos they are bored. There is no way you can resist the full brunt of NS dropping countless caps on you. LS locals would be annihilated overnight. The rest is just cleaning up. Dont kid yourself as to your chances.
Which is why I also said "no caps and no bubbles." If the resources were worth it then they would already nuke the low sec'ers.
Daemun of Khanid
|
|
Ptraci
3 R Corporation The Irukandji.
2084
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 00:47:58 -
[81] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Supercapitals banned from low-sec (no more transit through or operating out of).
Awww you poor baby. Show me on this ship doll where the nasty titan smartbombed you... |
Vic Jefferson
Knights of Poitot Rote Kapelle
1197
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 00:55:20 -
[82] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Vic Jefferson wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:The other one part is the true HS player. The one who isn't someone's alt. This guy sure as hell isn't the type to adapt or at least haven't really demonstrated it. What will he do when the swing goes in? I...I just don't know what to say. It must be so hard for an obligate high-sec player to adapt to not having income which overshadows most of the rest of the game. Why, with all the expenses and dangers that go a long with living in HS, HS income should be competitive with the rest of the game, right? What do you do if they decide to pack up and leave? Because while Vic Jefferson and Frostys Virpio don't really give a **** if some high sec pubbie scrublord quit EVE, CCP somewhat has to care. I'm not even sure of what I would do if I was in their shoes by now because a **** load of the customer base might be entirely present only because of the current imbalance and I really don't know how to replace them if they go. CCP either already has taken a decision and just does not say it or has to take one over this. At that point, it will make it's bed and have to lie in it. Both our position of not relying on HS for our gameplay mean we don't have the point of view of someone who does. I really don't know what Joe pubbie #123 will think after he is told HS incursion HQ sites now pay 2 million ISK and 200 LP, all his lvl 4 mission happen in LS and every single lvl 3 mission is changed in way to prevent blitzing in any way, shape or form. It sure as hell would change the income curve tome something that makes more sense according to the theory tho.
I dunno Frostys. I think this is unnecessarily dramatic, and sets up a little bit of a double standard.
I mean, they introduced the New Rorqual, which pulled the carpet out from under high sec miners, and they don't seem that apologetic about it. I agree 100% that mining should be much, much more profitable in other areas. It may be a matter of time before they realize that mining rats needs to go the same way.
Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?
|
Vic Jefferson
Knights of Poitot Rote Kapelle
1197
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 00:57:48 -
[83] - Quote
Tipa Riot wrote:Lowsec is actually quite good, balanced, from a pure PvP perspective, best space in New Eden imo. Casual, small group friendly. Income-wise it's not that good if you want to actually live there, so this aspect needs improvement. Also I can see that citadels make FW "sov" more or less pointless.
Exactly the groups CCP should be focused on both retaining, and recruiting. It really is a shame they appear to have blinders on when it comes to low and NPC nullsec. People want to play EvE, they just want to play their EvE, not forced into adopting sov as the only legitimate game-mode.
Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?
|
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
5997
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 00:59:59 -
[84] - Quote
Ptraci wrote:Awww you poor baby. Show me on this ship doll where the nasty titan smartbombed you... It was a nasty Revenant, actually.
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Tisiphone Dira
New Order Logistics CODE.
1106
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 02:41:48 -
[85] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:After thinking about it some more, in hindsight I'm not necessarily opposed to some of the changes being suggested. Relocating L4 agents, Incursions and Ice belts to low-sec might be what is desperately needed for EVE. The active player count is moving in the wrong direction and this could very well be due to players becoming complacent in high-sec. You can literally match null-sec ratting income and easily exceed low-sec income through Incursions and L4 blitzing/Burners.
I do think that in order to work supercapitals and possibly even capitals (excluding industrials) need to be restricted or banned from operating in low-sec. Transit might be ok but this could also be heavily abused.
It is so refreshing to see somebody not be dogminded and continually argue a position for 20 pages, instead coming around to a new position. I think your position of supers and caps needing restrictions in low in light of these proposed changes is also reasonable, though what that might entail I don't know.
There once was a ganker named tisi
A stunningly beautiful missy
To gank a gross miner
There is nothing finer, cept when they get all pissy
|
Khan Wrenth
Ore Oppression Prevention and Salvation
758
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 05:15:08 -
[86] - Quote
A lot of people seem to be implying that money seems to be the end-all be-all of managing the populations of the respective security status areas. ISK is one factor, not the only factor that decides where people want to live and operate. And the simple sad fact is, there needs to be reliable and decent (but not best) income in highsec for the simple reason that it's a neutral ground where anyone can go to eek out a living. You don't have to manage diplomacy for your surroundings and the mechanics at play are a lot more basic (like not having to worry about cyno drops). On the idea of relocating level 4 agents, I would very much worry about placing even more ISK faucets squarely in areas where certain groups could congregate and expel others (which I would expect nullsec entities and major lowsec entities to do immediately).
Continuing, I think "decent but not best income" is already where highsec is at. Let me explain that point by addressing the two main things people seem to be harping on about in this thread (and often when it comes to highsec discussions).
About two years ago now, a man posted on the forums about his incursion experience. For all intents and purposes, it was the most optimal it could be. I forget the specifics, but at the time he gave numbers for all the investment for his ship and fittings, his payouts both ISK and LP, start and end times, his setup, etc. And what he found was that under the most ideal conditions, incursions don't pay out all that well. Under perfect circumstances, the real payouts were half of what everyone purports.
(I'd have bookmarked his post if I thought I'd need it to discuss later, but I'd love a refresher on that post - if anyone here happens to have that post bookmarked, I'd love to read it again)
Continuing on, I would like to be taught why people think level 4 missions are such a big deal. I run level 4 missions in my spare time and I never see these amazing money streams materialize. In many ways it seems similar to incursions - the big money people fret over comes from ISK sinks and market sales. LP item sales are a steady ISK sink to obtain the items in the first place. Sometimes the items have to be built (ISK and materials sink). Most of the time, the items need to be transported to a market hub (chance for intercept, content in space). And then the items have to be traded on the market (another ISK sink). The massive "money" that comes from this is from other players - money is shifting, not being generated as the term "faucet" suggests.
Given all the ISK sinks it provides and potential for content (both in material intercept and in mission runner intercept) I don't think it would be wise for CCP to mess with it in any serious way. That's completely aside from any speculation about player behavior and who will or won't leave the game.
Now can someone point me to those reports that say where all the money is pouring in from, in the economy? Because all I hear about is how nullsec is still king of ISK, with ISK payouts being consistent and large. Heck, someone in the "fighters getting tweaked" thread offered up an average tick of 50 million isk. That's a heck of an average tick. My BEST tick ever running level 4's was 20 mil, and that was just back to back really good missions. My average tick is half that at best. And I don't get chances for blue loot either. Odd that again, the "real" income level seems to be half of what people boast.
With all that said, I think that focusing on ISK faucets is worrying about one single attribute for a given space in a very complex game, and it is the wrong attribute for the perceived problem at hand. People migrate to their comfortable risk level and/or involvement level in the game. Right now I reside in highsec. I enjoyed my time in lowsec, but keeping up on constantly shifting politics on who was blue, who was red, who was neutral, and who was kinda neutral but you can fire back if they fire on you first, was getting tiresome. My job right now doesn't allow me that much time to keep up on things in this game. I can still do the occasional roam or op with my corp if I happen to log on at the correct time, but that's my life right now. Removing or nerfing level 4 missions won't change what I can commit to the game, it just makes it very difficult for me to replace my inevitable ship losses.
That's something that messing with ISK faucets won't change though. Some people have the discipline and time to keep up with the low/null politics and skullduggery, some don't. Anyone who hasn't yet stepped foot into lowsec isn't going to be forced, either. Remember this is a game - people do play it for fun on some level. If you take away what brings them in, they don't have an incentive to stay. Encourage them to explore, don't beat them with a bat and tell them they had it too easy, because you will not get the reaction you were hoping for.
I would make some changes to highsec though. Fix wardecs*, nerf Concord response times, get rid of faction police.
I like some of the ideas that have been tossed around for adjusting lowsec rules, because I do believe the game benefits from having diverse spaces. So, I'd be on-board with the idea of prohibiting supercaps (maybe even all caps?) and cynos in lowsec, which might encourage more roams and general PvP content in that zone. Maybe. At the very least I'd like to see that experimented with as a trial to see if it helps at all.
At the end of the day, nullsec has the majority of ISK, all the best toys, and space you can claim and expel others. That already makes it unique and enough incentive to draw people in who want that style of play and the rewards it brings. Highsec is more stable and reliable. We should focus on what we want lowsec to be and really specialize it to make it shine.
Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
|
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
3500
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 06:34:03 -
[87] - Quote
Vic Jefferson wrote:People want to play EvE, they just want to play their EvE, not forced into adopting sov as the only legitimate game-mode. Some people, yes, but apparently the majority of non-highsec players just wants to join a big group and being told what to think and do.
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
Salvos Rhoska
2395
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 12:42:00 -
[88] - Quote
Daemun Khanid wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:Daemun Khanid wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:Daemun Khanid wrote:Scrap fw. Make lowsec nullsec sov system w/o caps and bubbles and with lower isk generation potential. Then lowsec is null sec sov for smaller corps / younger toons without cap skills. Maybe make citadels a little easier to kill in low sec to make control of systems more fluid and active. Adjacent Player Sov entities would conquer LS immediately, with or without caps. LS entities would be wiped out overnight, or forced to join or rent. Possibly, but there would be no more incentive for them to waste time doing so than there is for them to inhabit the low sec systems now, and with swarms of smaller corps and alliances speciallizing in cruiser amd bs warfare would it be worth their time and effort? While commiting assets to fighting off said swarms they would be leaving less assets behind to defend their null sec assets worth a far greater value. Ofc weekly timers on citadels could make it way too easy to defend on multiple fronts but thats a seperate issue. Expansion is incentive enough, as well as removing LS annoyances for HS market access, and cos they are bored. There is no way you can resist the full brunt of NS dropping countless caps on you. LS locals would be annihilated overnight. The rest is just cleaning up. Dont kid yourself as to your chances. Which is why I also said "no caps and no bubbles." If the resources were worth it then they would already nuke the low sec'ers.
Do you mean making it NPC Sov, or Player Sov?
No caps/bubbles will in no way stop NS from crushing LS. Nor will "LS swarms". LS has a tiny population/resource base compared to their NS neighbors.
You will be evicted, blued or rented, almost overnight in order for said NS neighbors to move their borders/control right up against HS.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
Salvos Rhoska
2395
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 13:03:05 -
[89] - Quote
Ptraci wrote:Arthur Aihaken wrote:Supercapitals banned from low-sec (no more transit through or operating out of). Awww you poor baby. Show me on this ship doll where the nasty titan smartbombed you...
I agree with Arthur. Caps have no place in LS, nor do cynos.
LS content doesnt require caps, and JFs are abusing the hell out of cynos in LS.
This involves two problems however: -The current asset recovery system which moves ships to LS. -How to move current gate incapable caps out of LS.
The former is difficult, as it may result in assets being moved to hostile NS. The latter is simple and already resolved. They can simply cyno out to NS (although there might be some that are stranded due to distance). Somekind of "grace" is possible to allow them to get out of LS.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
Coralas
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
53
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 13:57:50 -
[90] - Quote
Khan Wrenth wrote:A lot of people seem to be implying that money seems to be the end-all be-all of managing the populations of the respective security status areas. ISK is one factor, not the only factor that decides where people want to live and operate. And the simple sad fact is, there needs to be reliable and decent (but not best) income in highsec for the simple reason that it's a neutral ground where anyone can go to eek out a living. You don't have to manage diplomacy for your surroundings and the mechanics at play are a lot more basic (like not having to worry about cyno drops). On the idea of relocating level 4 agents, I would very much worry about placing even more ISK faucets squarely in areas where certain groups could congregate and expel others (which I would expect nullsec entities and major lowsec entities to do immediately)
The game doesn't teach someone how to hunt down another player ship, which leads to the observation that the game doesn't teach someone how to avoid being hunted down. ie PVP doesn't start ongrid, it only ends there, and its a major flaw that the PVE doesn't have enough of the similar elements.
What always happens with this debate, is that it gets utterly derailed by the self-entitled that want to run missions 'as is' even though its an utter cancer on new players (for ****s sake some of those missions are 14 years old). Whilst you can be anything, I think people join to be privateers, or space heros or space villains and that the game doesn't actually lead them there, and then lots of people accept the game as "slow".
IMO there could be vastly more lowsec, vastly less highsec, and the purpose of highsec could easily be to house market hubs and allow people to earn replacement cruisers (stealthy or otherwise) and to get missions into lowsec (since they have escalations, they have the mechanisms for this), for which stealthy cruisers generally succeed at, given that the hunting tools are also the survival tools, they are just as good at either purpose.
That entire highsec mission running game is so old its boob job has sagged.
As far as mining goes, they should change the name exhumer to, exhumed. The game avorion has a salvage mechanic that is far closer to the mark - ie if one goes to a scrapyard in avorion, aiming the bloody salvagers by observing the wreck has a huge impact on output. The netflix model of mining has to go.
IMO lowsec is the key to a bringing this game out of 2005, and far more radical solutions are actually required than anyone is actually proposing here.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 26 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |