| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
m3rb3aSt
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
    |
Posted - 2008.05.02 14:26:00 -
[61]
Really, I think that lowsec does need a boost. Having icefields only be in low sec, along with removing any ore other then veld from highsec would do it. |
Inifred
|
Posted - 2008.05.02 16:12:00 -
[62]
Since I don't mine I guess that part wouldn't matter to me, but I know plenty that just wouldn't play anymore. Maybe it would be good riddance, but CCP still has bills to pay. Good idea that I doubt will ever even be discussed during coffee breaks at CCP. |
Vigilant
Gallente
Vigilant's Vigilante's
|
Posted - 2008.05.02 22:49:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Samacia
Edited by: Samacia on 02/05/2008 14:12:03
Originally by: Apoctasy
actually just remove ice fields from highsec.
This would have the desired effect your looking for, but, it'll never happen.
Are you kidding me?!!?
ICE is the life of 0.0 alliances. Without ice they would have no POS.
Pos shutdowns and territory takeovers would ensure like crazy.
Plus piracy in lowsec would abound when alliances try to ICE mine in lowsec. The alliances would have no way to control the lowsec territory. There are no bubbles they can use.
They would take sec hits trying to keep non-pirate non-alliance members out of there ice systems in low-sec. Hilarity would ensue!
The Top 10 Alliances would go ballistic on the forums. CCP wonFt go for that.
DING DING  Someone understands economics of EVE. Lots of high secuirty materials goto low security and null security combat.
Everyone depends on everyone else, minus the Macro / Farmers. |
Harley Gonzo
|
Posted - 2008.05.03 00:02:00 -
[64]
Edited by: Harley Gonzo on 03/05/2008 00:11:51
Originally by: Fifth Horseman
You er....
...for the cheap seats at the back, RISK is the problem, not REWARDS.
Do you realize what risk VERSUS reward means? There's valuable stuff in every system. But if its not worth the risk, it isn't worth anything. When I say lowsec needs something VALUABLE, I'm saying it needs something thats still valuable even after you factor in the risk. That's why removing ice JUST from highsec wouldn't do jack squat, cuz everyone can get just as much ice as they need in 0.0.
Believe it or not, it is possible to survive in lowsec. Sure it requires a little foresight and not being a noob in general, but it's very doable. Fact of the matter is, people don't do level 5's, its not worth it. People don't go to lowsec for the purpose of exploration, at least not enough to populate it. IN TERMS OF RISK VS REWARD, there's nothing of value in lowsec.
Last I checked, you can BUY pos fuel off the market. So don't worry, this wouldn't force you to go brave the scawy piwates in lowsec. But it would mean that SOMEONE would have to go there, and go there often, otherwise noone gets pos's.
You can't hold lowsec because the rules are different. A different set of rules means you have to play differently. So obviously, 0.0 tactics will not work. If they did, there'd be no point to lowsec whatsoever, and CCP might as well just remove it, and security status, from the game. |
Bloody Rabbit
Jita Miners
|
Posted - 2008.05.03 04:14:00 -
[65]
Originally by: Harley Gonzo
Edited by: Harley Gonzo on 26/04/2008 03:01:23
Lets say, remove ice fields from BOTH highsec and 0.0?
This would REQUIRE the use of lowsec to support 0.0 alliances, would create lowsec alliances, and populate lowsec in general.
let the flames begin!
I like the idea of no ice in High or 0.0 but at the least take ice and hide it in hidden belts in High sec and still take it out of 0.0 all together.
No real reason to make it easy for the "hard core" players in 0.0 as they are hard core. |
Harley Gonzo
|
Posted - 2008.05.03 04:31:00 -
[66]
Hmm, yea how bout, remove ice from 0.0 completely, put crappy ice in public belts in lowsec, put crappy ice in hidden belts in highsec, and then put a CRAPLOAD of hidden belts in lowsec, with good ice. That'd be fairly balanced. |
Fifth Horseman
|
Posted - 2008.05.03 12:47:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Harley Gonzo
Do you realize what risk VERSUS reward means?
Yes, do you?
You seem to almost understand that people aren't doing L5, explo and whatnot
But you're really struggling with the whole RISK thing. Your mind is, well, stuck, on this rewards thing.
For those who can be bothered putting up with the crap hole you've turned lowsec into, the rewards are fine as they are.
For the rest, who simply cannot be bothered with the endless and constant barrage of elitist **** thrown at them in lowsec, the rewards EQUAL ZERO. They are completely valueless.
If you GUARANTEED a HG Snake in lowsec for every rat killed, they still wouldn't come.
This is twofold.
1. All the pies would have the Snakes.
2. Snakes would be worth NOTHING.
Ok, try to keep up, here is the sentence that ends your argument, it's coming up right now, strap in, because 4th time is the charm.
ANY reward you put in lowsec is claimed by the pies until it is worth nothing anymore, thus nobody comes to lowsec because until it worth nothing, the pies will kill EVERYBODY to defend what they suddenly declare to be THEIRS.
It really has got absolutely diddely squat to do with REWARDS in lowsec, the RISK is all the problem. The people turned lowsec into the wasteland that it is, not CCP, and there is basically nothing CCP can do in terms of rewards to change the landscape in lowsec, all they could do is changed the rules & risk.
Besides, the very last thing you pies want is a place where bears come, because you wouldn't be able to do a thing about them. The rules that enable their presence would end your ability to BLAST HELL OUT OF EVERYTHING THAT MOVES. For evidence, look to highsec. Loads of bears you can't touch. Rewards in HIGHSEC are poor compared to everywhere else, but the RISK sure is a hell of a lot less.
And everybody is there. And you're still trying to figure out why. |
Harley Gonzo
|
Posted - 2008.05.03 12:53:00 -
[68]
Edited by: Harley Gonzo on 03/05/2008 12:59:02
Edited by: Harley Gonzo on 03/05/2008 12:56:26
Edited by: Harley Gonzo on 03/05/2008 12:56:04
So what you're saying is, If all the ice gets moved to lowsec, Only pirates will have pos's and everyone else will take theirs down?
Yea, I suppose you're right, that would happen. <- SARCASM LOLOL
Why don't you actually GO to lowsec, you know, man up and fly around for a bit. It doesn't seem like you've been there before. Oh and if you do go, dont bring your t1 active shield tanking laser myrm, it won't go over well.
The POINT of this idea is it's something that EVERYBODY NEEDS. So no, pirates wouldn't claim it all, and even if they did, they'd only be claiming it by saying its theirs, there are no game mechanics in lowsec to allow a pirate to lock down a system or a belt and prevent other people from getting to it. |
Fifth Horseman
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 12:50:00 -
[69]
I can see you have zero opportunity to see things any other way and you must resort to meaningless sarcasm to evade dealing with the real issue.
You may have the last word. Fire away. |
ViolenTUK
Gallente
Vindicated Exiles
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 15:28:00 -
[70]
NO-ONE would move to low sec because the ice fields were moved there NO-ONE. Yes i have stated in this thread that high sec dwellers would rather take down their POS's than venture into low sec. You MUST accept this. |
|
Ankhesentapemkah
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 15:35:00 -
[71]
As CSM candidate, I do not believe into nerfing highsec.
I do believe in significantly boosting lowsec.
Read more in the following threads.
http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=764063
and
http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=763232 and my website http://evajobse.net for my other issues.
|
Harley Gonzo
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 23:35:00 -
[72]
1. Fifth Horseman, you started the sarcasm, don't cry when it comes back to you. At least I gave you valid counterpoints along with my sarcasm. Read what I have to say and think about it with as unbiased opinion a carebear can have (yes, i know, it probably wont be that unbiased, but go for it anyway) and then reply with reasons and explanations WHY my idea wouldn't work.
2. ViolenTUK, same goes to you, EXPLAIN TO ME why you think every pos owner in eve will give up their pos? You think BOBs gonna down all their pos's cuz they don't want to go to lowsec? Like I said before, I don't think you realize how important pos's are. Specifically in 0.0. Pos's control territory and allow things like jump bridges, cyno jammers, and system scanners. Major alliances are not going to give these things up just to avoid lowsec.Also, a dysprosium moon makes whoever mines it over 1bil a WEEK. You'd give up a 1bil a week income just to avoid lowsec?
3. Ankh, this is not a CSM advertisement thread. Please go to whatever thread you're supposed to be begging for votes in and do it there. If you actually have input on the topic, then give it, but you've already lost my vote for being an idiot. |
ViolenTUK
Gallente
Vindicated Exiles
|
Posted - 2008.05.05 00:56:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Harley Gonzo
2. ViolenTUK, same goes to you, EXPLAIN TO ME why you think every pos owner in eve will give up their pos? You think BOBs gonna down all their pos's cuz they don't want to go to lowsec? Like I said before, I don't think you realize how important pos's are. Specifically in 0.0. Pos's control territory and allow things like jump bridges, cyno jammers, and system scanners. Major alliances are not going to give these things up just to avoid lowsec.Also, a dysprosium moon makes whoever mines it over 1bil a WEEK. You'd give up a 1bil a week income just to avoid lowsec?
I already have explained it to you although with your reference to 0.0 it is clear you were not listening as I was referring to empire space. None of your arguments are valid for empire. Remember that all high security pos's are really useful for in empire is ME research which is very useful but not as important enough to risk the gain from cutting at the most 10 percent mineral value verses the massive risk involved securing low sec.
Most importantly you donFt seem to realize that pos ownership and maintenance is purely by choice and if faced with the massive risk of changing current empire mining and security for empire corps to low security pos's will be dropped. It simply isnFt worth it. Copying and invention can be accomplished without a pos since empire station slots for invention and copying are cheap and available and this is where the money is.
|
Souvera Corvus
Gallente
SPORADIC MOVEMENT
|
Posted - 2008.05.05 01:58:00 -
[74]
The particular part of low-sec we happen to live has no issues with population. The thing is of course that everyone who is there is looking for something to kill. They're not mining, they're not mission running, they're not exploring, they're looking for something to kill.
Moving ice from high-sec won't change this. There are too many highly capable pirates in low-sec for any sort of activity there to be profitable, the difficulty is that whatever carebear does for their money, as it now stands, they'll die too often for it to be worth it for them.
As plenty of others have pointed out, stop trying to nerf high-sec because you're too lazy to move to a different area or low-sec or 0.0.
The only answer here is a change in players behaviour, such as less 24/7 camping of low-sec chokepoints and a more economic view of PvP involving protection rackets, extortion and ransom rather than sheer murder.
Its more work to be sure but it'll produce a better low-sec than these constant calls to nerf/boost this/that.
Just a thought. |
MukkBarovian
|
Posted - 2008.05.05 05:15:00 -
[75]
Lets talk aobut players maing low sec better. Hypothetically you could get a bunch of guys together to be anti-pirates. You could promise protection to anybody in whatever systems you chose to try and control. There are pirate corporations who make an attempt at controlling systems and from what I've seen they dont do too poorly.
If you could get your message out and have people beleive what you were saying, there would be some number of noobs and more adventurous miners/mission runners/ratters who would come to your system. I dont know how many but there would be some. That would draw pirates from all over. Easy to get pvp  , but unless you had a huge number of guys and resources, whatever location you chose would eventually get swamped by pvpers. And the non pvpers would pack up and go home.
And if you had enough people to constantly hold a system against heavy intrusions, why arent you out in 0.0 enjoying the pvp there and making tons more money?
|
Commoner
Caldari
Emergent Chaos
Bedlam Consortium
|
Posted - 2008.05.05 07:48:00 -
[76]
Edited by: Commoner on 05/05/2008 07:52:06
Edited by: Commoner on 05/05/2008 07:48:44
The problem is that Ice mining in highsec is mostly/only done by macroers (virtually no profit in it) and because it is extremely easy since ice roids do not deplete, so designing a macro for it is simple. So basically we've got huge alliances living off macroers sitting in highsec belts 23/7.
What happens if Ice was removed from highsec?
1) Less POS spam, since running them would become an economic hazzle because of decreased supply and static demand.
2) More expensive T2 items because of invention costs.
3) Pirate warzones as people would tally up to mine that precious ice, Alliances would begin to compete.
4) PEW PEW in lowsec over ice belts.
i likes :)
The worst pvp'er in EVE :
 |
Ja'kar
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.05.05 10:01:00 -
[77]
ANY reward you put in lowsec is claimed by the pies until it is worth nothing anymore, thus nobody comes to lowsec because until it worth nothing, the pies will kill EVERYBODY to defend what they suddenly declare to be THEIRS.
Sounds just like .0 - A long time ago in eve you uses to get great big mining ops in low sec with minners in apoc's and others in bs and other ships guarding them, thus sometimes they died and other times they lived and the pirates moved on. But then high sec payed out to much isk and risk vs. reward was pushed towards empire. so you see there is little or no real reason for mas of ppl to go into low sec. you do get corps out there with pos and crap and from what I see they do ok
Point is if bears had to goto low sec they could learn to adapt to pvp, pay pirates for the time to mine and have a lot more fun doing it.
Also I can tell you pirates can be killed!
MAFIA Website
|
IgorIVVasiljevic
Minmatar
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.05.05 11:31:00 -
[78]
I was going to write exposition, analyze it and suggest solution,... but I think for those who wanted to understand... I will wrote down just the could-be-solution:
Organize the low sec as high sec: The lower the security status of the player is, closer to 0.0 he must live.
That way the overskilled, overexperienced pirates and underex. underskilled mindless gatecampers or blobers will have to live close to the dangerous space of powerful alliances.
The bigger the criminal, the deeper hole he must find.
Those who will stay in higher low-sec systems will have to pick there targets with care and newbies will have a lot more chance to learn to live and have fun (Pvp) in low-sec.
Everybody could have more fun. Carebears in low-sec, pirates will have more targets in low sec, alliances would have to divide forces to fend of ˝killers˝ and maybe the fleets would have to be smaller(because they have limited numbers and because the number of good killers(gangs) in their space will become higher.
And killers would have as much pew-pew as they could wish.
Maybe, Lp.IgorIV |
Harley Gonzo
|
Posted - 2008.05.05 17:16:00 -
[79]
Edited by: Harley Gonzo on 05/05/2008 17:17:20
Originally by: ViolenTUK
Originally by: Harley Gonzo
2. ViolenTUK, same goes to you, EXPLAIN TO ME why you think every pos owner in eve will give up their pos? You think BOBs gonna down all their pos's cuz they don't want to go to lowsec? Like I said before, I don't think you realize how important pos's are. Specifically in 0.0. Pos's control territory and allow things like jump bridges, cyno jammers, and system scanners. Major alliances are not going to give these things up just to avoid lowsec.Also, a dysprosium moon makes whoever mines it over 1bil a WEEK. You'd give up a 1bil a week income just to avoid lowsec?
This is frustrating.
THE MAIN IDEA OF MY POST IS THAT ICE WILL BE REMOVED FROM 0.0 AS WELL AS HIGHSEC.
I frankly couldn't give a crap about why removing ice from highsec wont work, im only saying remove it from highsec so all the 0.0 alliances dont blob highsec even more.
Violentuk, commoner, souvera corvus, please rethink my idea, but including 0.0, removing it from highsec is not the main point of this idea, please stop responding to only half the idea. Obviously the idea doesnt work if its only half done.
And Igor, i like your idea, but ONLY if you HAD TO BE -10 to enter 0.0. Cuz even if they implement a system like that, there still wont really be any point to being -10.
I already have explained it to you although with your reference to 0.0 it is clear you were not listening as I was referring to empire space. None of your arguments are valid for empire. Remember that all high security pos's are really useful for in empire is ME research which is very useful but not as important enough to risk the gain from cutting at the most 10 percent mineral value verses the massive risk involved securing low sec.
Most importantly you donFt seem to realize that pos ownership and maintenance is purely by choice and if faced with the massive risk of changing current empire mining and security for empire corps to low security pos's will be dropped. It simply isnFt worth it. Copying and invention can be accomplished without a pos since empire station slots for invention and copying are cheap and available and this is where the money is.
|
Souvera Corvus
Gallente
SPORADIC MOVEMENT
|
Posted - 2008.05.06 00:51:00 -
[80]
If you moved ice from 0.0 in addition to high-sec and put it all in low-sec I think that we'd see the major alliances moving into 'claiming' low-sec ice systems with everything that entails. We'd see the huge infrastructure arrive along with the assets to take care of it, such as big capital fleets.
Instead of seeing an increase in the population of low-sec, I think you'd find that the available space for small-gang PvP/piracy would shrink as the major players would squat in the ice systems and that carebears would recognise that there's even more people who'd shoot them there and stay away.
We'd see ice prices rise as the supply dwindled and was largely monopolised by the few alliances with the muscle to control it. High-sec POS'es would become a thing of the past as people gave up and moved onto less painful ways of spending their game time. R&D facilities in Empire/low-sec would see even longer queues,T2 prices would go up and whilst you may have more people in low-sec overall, you'd just have encouraged the entrance of alliance politics and warfare into low-sec which isn't what you're looking for I think.
You'd effectively be creating a situation where the major alliances would have a reason to come to low-sec, extending their 0.0 playfield.
Some posters have made the 'move all L4's to low-sec' argument. Problem here I think is that carebears will abandon L4's in favour of chaining L3's ad-nauseum. I've heard of this happening already. We cannot force people to PvP if they're dead-set on avoiding it and maintaining a high profit margin. They'll adapt to anything CCP does in this regard and they'd be right to do it.
I think that the only way that low-sec will see an increase in population is if pirates recognise that they have to adapt. Sheer murder does not encourage people to come to low-sec. Extortion, racketeering, licensing and farming just might.
The other thing that I would do to aid this process is to increase the value of the ore-types in low-sec (if you're in MH, there's no point mining in 0.4-0.1 when you can get much the same ore risk free in 0.6) so that such arrangements become more profitable for all concerned and increase the value of the exploration sites that may be found there.
The main thing is that pirate approaches have to change though. Its player-led solution with no hint of a nerf bat.
|
|
Cpt Fina
Mutually Assured Distraction
|
Posted - 2008.05.06 01:50:00 -
[81]
Harley, i fully agree with the idea of a or several unique low-sec resources, not found anywhere else in space. I don't however think that ice is that resouce since it is such a vital one for such a big part of the game.
I'd rather see components/material for new luxury goods and new necessities for new gamemechanics to be found, and only found in low-sec. Boostertechnology or gasmining is, or was supposed to (dont know the details) be exclusive for low-sec but the end product (boosters i guess) isn't demanded to any great extent.
The introduction of an unique low-sec resouce, that'd be used for some popular item(s), would introduce dynamic reward for the area. The price of the resource would settle at an equilibrium at which the benefits of extracting it would cover the expected expenses (or increased costs) from risk.
And the poeple who say that no-one would move to low-sec if such a resource were to be implemented do not speak for the whole community. Hell, even I would hop in a barge if I could mine a mineral at 200m ISK/ hour.
|
Newbear
|
Posted - 2008.05.06 04:58:00 -
[82]
I say remove ice all together and let towers be powered by the love in our heart. Or a tower reactor that just burns isk streight from your wallet, why bother with ice that we have to buy with isk anyways? Isk and Ice is so similar both 3 letter words. Streamline the process and let the isk sink suck!
Click here for my High Security POS Service
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |