| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Windows 2k
   |
Posted - 2009.12.08 19:36:00 -
[31]
I approve this message
|
Kerfira
|
Posted - 2009.12.09 08:42:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Kerfira on 09/12/2009 08:42:57
 Originally by: Wacktopia
No, hi-sec is not secure....
I was fairly certain that someone would not get the general idea and state the bleeding obvious.... You're it!
Originally by: Wacktopia
Please explain why you think that low-sec missioners, miners and ratters should not be 'secure' but travelling traders should be?
Quite simple! To get more people into low-sec, and to make low-sec into the intermediate (measured in danger) area between high-sec and 0.0 it is supposed to be.
Originally by: Wacktopia
Actually, you can be pretty secure in null-sec. If you're in a decent alliance or friends of one or in a NRDS area then you are probably safer than low-sec.
Which is exactly the point! It SHOULDN'T be that way as low-sec should be in-between high-sec and 0.0 in danger.
Originally by: Wacktopia
EVE is supposed to be one big shark pool.
True, and it will still be. Now it'll just have the decreasing protection level it was supposed to, signified by the decreasing sec. level!
Originally by: Wacktopia
All in all, an ill-thought-through idea.
You're saying that mainly because you haven't thought of what it would mean!
More secure low-sec = More people in low-sec for us to hunt!
Your post is the knee-jerk, no thinking, "I want no change!" reaction I expected! Today, EVERYONE advises noobs to stay away from low-sec, and it's ingrained in almost EVERY player that you just don't go to low-sec. Thus, very few targets!
It is imminently fit for purpose to kill off the cheap gate-gankers to benefit the people who actually hunt down their targets!
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
|
Mr Opinions
|
Posted - 2009.12.18 13:41:00 -
[33]
(TL;DR: You can't make low-sec pvp at gates/stations safe for thru-traffic because of the way the EVE servers are setup, so this proposal is pretty good, actually.)
Originally by: Kerfira
It would remove the choke-points of low-sec,
This is actually the main thing preventing lowsec from being much more populated --- choke points which are dictated by the technical limitations of the EVE server architecture. Even if the devs wanted to provide detailed information about the goings-on outside a station or on the other side of the gate, the fact that the neighboring system is on another node prevents this, in practice. This is why there are imperfect workarounds that have been added like the invulnerability timer during undock or the pseudo-cloak at gates -- workarounds which aren't sufficient to get most of the hi-sec population actually to set foot in low-sec.
What this proposal does is to admit, flat out, that combat at these points in lowsec does more to deter pvp than to promote it, and to stop bandaging an aspect of lowsec that would be better off amputated. Eliminate combat at stations and gates, get even more pvp everywhere else in system.
|
Helicity Boson
Amarr
The Python Cartel.
The Jerk Cartel
|
Posted - 2009.12.18 13:56:00 -
[34]
I think there are a lot of people in this thread that never set foot in low sec, because they are so scared of gatecamps.
I can tell you know that if there were half as many gate camps as these people *believe* I will eat my proverbial hat.
And making it so there is no fights on stations and gates is pretty ******ed, because it means there is no fights -period- unless someone WANTS ONE by purposefully going to a belt or planet.
If you want consensual PVP, you are in the wrong bloody game, go back to WoW and do some battlegrounds.
|
Odessima
Caldari
The Black Rabbits
The Gurlstas Associates
|
Posted - 2009.12.18 14:43:00 -
[35]
I propose that all non-consensual PVPers should automatically eject officer loot upon being targeted and not shot at! My proposal would keep everone happy......
Oh wait that would be like Eve on Autopilot.
|
SoMeDuDe904
Empire Assault Corp
Dead Terrorists
|
Posted - 2009.12.18 15:11:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Intense Thinker
I have 17m can I help?
HAHAHAHA, it might be early in the morning but that is still funny no matter how many times i see it.
any way, like so many of you are arguing, eve is a sandbox and that would destroy the very idea CCP tried to make. too many players, such as my self, wouldnt be able to live because no one in lowsec it seems fights other than on station or on a gate, with the exception of ammamake belt lll - 1.(theres always some one in there.
all im saying is if your not smart enough to get away from a small gate camp in a frigate, you should probably live in high sec and stay there for a while.
|
Seishi Maru
The Black Dawn Gang
|
Posted - 2009.12.18 15:45:00 -
[37]
Would be as stupid idea as target painting dreads.
A much better solution would be to HALVE the dps of gate guns, but make them double dps for each double crimminaly flagged ship at gate. That means. If there is 1 pirate at gate.. sentries do half dps. Full dps for 2 pirates. Double dps for 4 pirates.. quad dps for 8 pirates... etc..
Result? Boosted solo piracy and nerf HUGE gate camps in low sec (since would be impossible to tank when you have 16 pirate ships at a gate for example).
|
Flying ZombieJesus
|
Posted - 2009.12.18 15:55:00 -
[38]
I heard that they're going to boost the amount of radar sites that spawn in lowsec, make them accessible with the directional scanner, and change the loot drop type to straight isk injections.
Also, I heard that gateguns will no longer fire due to aggression or criminal flags, but will now fire on lolfit ships and players with a lack of decent pvp skills.
|
Mr Opinions
|
Posted - 2009.12.21 15:49:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Mr Opinions on 21/12/2009 15:50:30
Without commenting on various attempts to derail this thread, it should be taken more seriously. Look at the population of lowsec atm, most of it is very low since there is nothing there except for the pseudo-ffa pvp --- pvp is great but it would be nice if there were more going on in low-sec other than that or the occasional cap jumping in or out.
Forcing low-sec pvp away from gates/stations (except for suicides), would make it analogous to driving through some crack-infested ghetto in your car; if you're on the highway (and your car doesn't die on you) you're good. If you get off at the wrong exit or otherwise leave the main "path", then it's just like the current situation in low-sec, i.e. come prepared or risk being wtfbbqpwned.
Another change I would make to low-sec would be to make sec status hits (away from gates or stations where concord can obviously see you) require that the person attacked go to some office in an npc station and "report" the KM, e.g. to the bounty or insurance office. Failure to do this within, say 2 hours of the offense, would mean no sec status hit at all. This way you could have gang wars in lowsec without "police" involvement or even deals/ransoms where part of the payment is not reporting the KM.
|
Czert ElPrezidente
|
Posted - 2009.12.21 17:01:00 -
[40]
I think it is very good idea, it will make safe routes to stations and stargates.
If nothing, it will bring more traders to stations, from which I think will profit everyone.
And when players will know that is safe to travel from a to b, then they might think, they can try to fly some missions, or to mine.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |