| Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
FinnAgain Zero
Roving Guns Inc.
RAZOR Alliance
   |
Posted - 2010.09.29 17:32:00 -
[121]
It also shows the nature of the beast. In lowsec there's often not a reason to put down stakes and claim a patch of dirt, other than to temporarily camp a gate (or hunt belts) to get some targets before a bigger force notices you and tries to farm you. Unless and until there's a reason for people to set up shop in lowsec and park there for a while, there's really no change that we'll see. The best we can do is to herd targets into pirates' guns by forcing people to travel through lowsec, but that's an artificial and kluged solution.
If, however, there was an actual point to holding lowsec space (say, FW participants who 'claim space' in lowsec earn discounts on POS operation costs and earn loyalty points, or what have you. Pirates earn the right to fire on anybody who enters a system without taking sec status loss. Drug manufacture clouds are moved from isolated pockets of nullsec to lowsec, etc...) Then there might be an actual reason for corps to make a claim to space in lowsec. Because, after all, if people aren't willing to value the space and fight for it, you're not really going to increase the number of people who want to be there and be fighting.
------------------------------------------------
Hohohoho, Mister
Finn, you're going to be Mister Finnagain! |
Emily Ray
|
Posted - 2010.09.30 16:26:00 -
[122]
 Quote:
Law enforcement players
As it sounds this is players who have a high security status and like that but also want to PVP. As I write this most players donÆt see bounty hunting other players as a real or even side profession within the game. In order to change that I think Player Pirates should have a bounty on them (on top of player created bounties) this should be based on the size of ship they are flying and how bad their security status is, and to make life more interesting the bounty should double if you can kill them when they have GCC.
this would encourage suicide by killing with alts
|
FinnAgain Zero
Roving Guns Inc.
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.09.30 17:03:00 -
[123]
Bounty schemes of all sorts are infinitely open to abuse; any time you can be both the victim and the killer, and make ISK off of it, players will find a way to game the system.
Transferable kill rights (that you can post on contracts) might help, but who knows.
------------------------------------------------
Hohohoho, Mister
Finn, you're going to be Mister Finnagain! |
Aelius
Caldari
Mnemonic Enterprises
|
Posted - 2010.10.06 13:58:00 -
[124]
An idea:
Each pirate that law enforcers kill adds to some type of concord bounty.
Each pilot that pirates kill adds to some type of pirate npc corp reward.
(reward values are calculated by ship value/moddules destroyed/podkill implants to avoid exploits)
_________________________
CSM Candidate for 2011 (soon a pretty photoshop sig)
Aelius 2011 Candidacy Guide Lines |
Darek Castigatus
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
|
Posted - 2010.10.06 14:48:00 -
[125]
Edited by: Darek Castigatus on 06/10/2010 14:48:49
Originally by: Aelius
An idea:
Each pirate that law enforcers kill adds to some type of concord bounty.
Each pilot that pirates kill adds to some type of pirate npc corp reward.
(reward values are calculated by ship value/moddules destroyed/podkill implants to avoid exploits)
And this prevents alt based exploitation of the bounty system how exactly??
http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sig.php |
Aelius
Caldari
Mnemonic Enterprises
|
Posted - 2010.10.06 16:10:00 -
[126]
Originally by: Darek Castigatus
Edited by: Darek Castigatus on 06/10/2010 14:48:49
Originally by: Aelius
An idea:
Each pirate that law enforcers kill adds to some type of concord bounty.
Each pilot that pirates kill adds to some type of pirate npc corp reward.
(reward values are calculated by ship value/moddules destroyed/podkill implants to avoid exploits)
And this prevents alt based exploitation of the bounty system how exactly??
The rewards cannot be higher than the actual player isk loss
_________________________
CSM Candidate for 2011 (soon a pretty photoshop sig)
Aelius 2011 Candidacy Guide Lines |
Darek Castigatus
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
|
Posted - 2010.10.08 17:38:00 -
[127]
Originally by: Aelius
Originally by: Darek Castigatus
Edited by: Darek Castigatus on 06/10/2010 14:48:49
Originally by: Aelius
An idea:
Each pirate that law enforcers kill adds to some type of concord bounty.
Each pilot that pirates kill adds to some type of pirate npc corp reward.
(reward values are calculated by ship value/moddules destroyed/podkill implants to avoid exploits)
And this prevents alt based exploitation of the bounty system how exactly??
The rewards cannot be higher than the actual player isk loss
which still does nothing to stop a player podding himself with an alt and claiming the cash.
http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sig.php |
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.10.09 10:00:00 -
[128]
Originally by: Aelius
Originally by: Darek Castigatus
Edited by: Darek Castigatus on 06/10/2010 14:48:49
Originally by: Aelius
An idea:
Each pirate that law enforcers kill adds to some type of concord bounty.
Each pilot that pirates kill adds to some type of pirate npc corp reward.
(reward values are calculated by ship value/moddules destroyed/podkill implants to avoid exploits)
And this prevents alt based exploitation of the bounty system how exactly??
The rewards cannot be higher than the actual player isk loss
As teh Insurance Exchange Rate (or insurance Fraud) has amply demonstrated, the "isk loss" for losing a ship is a very arbitrary value.
If I kill a pirate in a ship with only basic insurance i will get more than killing a pirate in a platinum insured ship?
Bounty is paid on pod kills, not ship kills, so if I, the pirate, lose a ship to someone, can I get podkilled by a friend/alt to recover some of my losses?
What is the value of modules? market price? Mineral contents? (I suppose that the value of ships will be the mineral content used by CCP.)
If we use mineral content meta1-4 and maybe even 6+ modules will be worth less than meta 0 modules.
|
Soporo
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.10.23 16:12:00 -
[129]
A lot, and I mean a LOT, of Empire people want to pew pew in Lo. They also want to be able to rat/mission back up their sec status quickly.
Make agression security hits less onerous, MUCH less. Same with ship kills. Raise the hit for pod kills though. Lower the GCC some (and make it more accurate).
This alone will generate a lot more LOSuck activity.
|
Vandiilo
Gallente
Intuition Economics
|
Posted - 2010.11.05 18:16:00 -
[130]
Simple way to improve low sec is get rid of gate camps. I would live in low sec if it weren't for lolgatecamps. Buff the sentry guns, tinker with session changes/ cloak/ invulnerability mechanics, whatever. Gate camps are bad. Only bad players camp gates. Get rid of gate camps and more people will use low sec.
|
Exploited Engineer
|
Posted - 2010.11.05 18:56:00 -
[131]
Originally by: Genghis Prime
The first could be to remove the jump highways and force people to travel through low sec when moving around the Empire as discussed elsewhere on this forum.
Forcing isn't quite in the spirit of a sandbox game.
However ... if going through lowsec would allow players to shave a couple of jumps off commonly used routes, there would be an incentive to go to lowsec without anyone actually being forced to do so.
Also, beefing up the rewards for doing stuff in lowsec would help. Right now, there's hardly any difference between mission rewards in a 0.5 and a 0.4 system, while there is a huge difference in the risk involved.
|
Tsual
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.11.11 15:18:00 -
[132]
Edited by: Tsual on 11/11/2010 15:25:39
Edited by: Tsual on 11/11/2010 15:20:10
Originally by: Sinister Dextor
Low Sec is fine, stop trying to 'improve' it. And lets be honest, the only way to get carebears into Low Sec, is by turning it into High sec, nothing else will do.
I'd say low sec is the a good fusion between low income of high sec and low security of null, in so far it can be considered to be the hardest and most deadly environment for players and corporations out there.
In a way it is "the worst of both worlds", a place never to be assimilated by high sec or null sec way of live.
In so far thinking of worsening it might eventually give a good suggestion for "improving" it.
Okay enough with mad arrab like babbling.
Before anyone ask I'm a total carebear, so don't hope for too much pew pew suggestions.
I've read some suggestions so far but I'd say although they sound good they are not very exciting, a lot of them are bit clichT at the moment
 criminal underworld (gangs online?)
smuggling (infusion with stalker/privateer gameplay),
pirate agents and pirate stations (burning seas in space fresh from the carribean is what ccp's vision has to be since 2003)
low sec being borders between empires (can I get storm troopaZ with blAstaZ then?)
certain ships only buy able in low (good so while you drive around in your pimp machariel can I pimp my typhoon with paint?)
So far the low sec suggestions seem to walkt three pathes
turn it into a pseudo version of high sec just with better income
turn it into a pseudo null just without the hassle of politics and alliance land grabbing
turn it into some place where players can play some game other than eve
to be honest I've yet to realy see any suggestion that will work and give low sec any incentive to populate it.
To be honest I've got no suggestion that won't do that also, and I don't think I can offer one but I'll try anyway.
|
Tsual
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.11.11 15:22:00 -
[133]
The first question that has to be asked, how did low sec become low sec, not only game mechanic wise but also background wise, I won't say anything new anything exceptionally which hasn't been said before.
Game mechanic wise it is there to provide a training ground for small corporations and alliances to consolidate before moving into null, a place that is a bit rougher then high sec, less save and gives players opportunity to learn new survival techniques.
In so far it was a total success, players that can't stand low sec would most likely be a failure in null. And those who can stand low will quickly see hey it's better in null and move out, in so far low can also be considered a population filter.
That worked as long as null wasn't too crowded and there was still a little bit of space to conquer, explore and exploit without too much politics to care about.
Null has evolved, when politics became a driving force null sec owners suddenly had a need to refill ranks quick, they couldn't wait for some arbitrary filter to provide them with forces, recruitment became head hunter job and the forum the filter, statistics and tables full of numbers replaced the need for some game zone that acts in some membrane like way, in a way the recruitment board has superseded low sec.
Background wise in eve where there is a multinational ultra powerful militaristic police force financially backed by the mayor empires through Concord, meaning the direct enforcement directive, how can it be possible that a lawless space like low sec is even able to exist?
The same way as in the real world, fiscal and political reasons.
Fiscal as having the direct enforcement directive established in a certain system will cost billions if not trillions a year, so a solar system that hardly provides a million a year in taxes and is not part of any trade route is hardly worth the monetary pressure.
Political as when concord is democratically controlled by all empires - it has forces in - then still vetoes, which no uno like organisation can really exist without, will not always but sometimes stop necessary decisions.
Low sec can be considered to be the hypocrisies of Concord and DED, here both fail to control and ensure anything not out of inability rather due to the very nature that both are made of.
The grinding machine of the amarrian expansion would be put to a screeching halt through inner circle diplomatics yet in the same way increasing security of some fringe system of conflicting political interest will be vetoed if it hasn't been already curtailed to the same screeching halt.
Although I doubt any of my conclusions are the same one ccp came to when they designed low sec and you can be sure I came to the totally wrong ones some possible conclusion can be made about low sec:
ccp has tried to manipulate this filter by lowering the income in low sec and thus create a push towards null, in so far they have turned a wheel on a mechanism that has slowly but steadily been replaced through tools provided by the community. In the same way changing income, establishing some totally new market or some game mechanic that doesn't exist outside of low sec won't necessary increase it's population.
Storywise the introduction of some pirate agents and bounty hunter guilds that only exist there might be clichT and eventually look less like an interesting new story development and more like some b-movie. If it fails then it would be better to not fail in some obvious way cause it sucks rather end up a worse failure as twisted ending of some other story development.
If carebear is about doing what you know you already have won, and pvper about knowing what does hold a possible win, lowsec has to provide more of both and at the same time make it harder to have any of the two à and that didn't work in the past, doesn't work currently and will most like not work in the future either.
|
Tsual
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.11.11 15:28:00 -
[134]
So any Visions of my own? Hmm no not realy well so far I got a idea that doesn't need much new game mechanic just mostly using existing ones however doubt it is going to be established_
Personally an idea of limited control over a system and a limited ability to increase the profit is most likely something that would move lowsec again in the direction of being a training ground for current day null.
And a right for the controlling group to shoot first and answer questions later without having to deal with security hit would give the system a slight might makes right feeling of null without making it entirely null.
However each of the pathes would mean that something is gained but something else is lost compared to standart low sec space.
For the possibilities to increase the profit that might be in three directions
in form of ôhigher payingö agent missions (harder targets in the missions)
in form of ôhigher amountö space resources (better ores and drops)
in form of ôhigher amountö of planetary and moon production
For the controlling faction it should only be possible to achieve two of the above while the third will stay at current low sec level. A suggestion what three extreme combinations might be and what they mean:
For higher paying agent missions and higher amount of space resources you have seen the light of police intervention and help. Though the system is far from safe all pod pilots will find here a place where they can ensure a reasonable living standard to deal with the harshness of low sec space. Agents provide a lot of money for various pod pilots, those support a industrial backbone that helps to bring in money necessary to support a strong military backbone. Just the population has not really started to move in here, maybe you should have considered increasing the standard of living for the average workforce, well neither you nor concord lives on those colonies. Yet with each passing day it starts to become obvious that by cooperating with DED you might end up in a jurisdictional conflict. While sentries are buffed in the sector your right to shoot anyone decreases until you can shoot only those with negative five or worse security standing, while shooting anyone else will get you a security hit.
For higher paying agent missions and higher amount of planetary and moon production the controlling faction would work with the aim of creating increasing the living standard of the simple worker the controlling corp stands for helping the local population and thus ôfactionalismö. Sacrificing space based profit in order to help the non pod space based population. Although now that you secured the system and the unwashed masses look up to you as a guiding light in such dark times where the government is far away you wallet is not as you will need to import a lot of resources for keeping this state, even worse secret services of other empires will have an eye on you and some day you might suddenly find yourself on the wrong end of the faction militia's weaponry.
For higher amount of space resources and higher planetary and moon production the controlling faction would work in allegiance with ôprofitö. Security of space is neither an interest nor savety of people working here, ruthless economical exploitation of the system is the main aim here. Problem is you forget to repair the sentries and gleaming over all this numbers you forget to check the immigration of pirates starting to settle your system and no everyone is so in bliss of richness to even care about telling concord about their barges being mindlessly slaughtered by sociopathic pod pilots out for wantom destruction. System becomes more like null. Security hit when killing another player decreases. Sentries are less dangerous until becoming a mere joke.
|
Tsual
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.11.11 15:38:00 -
[135]
Corruption isn't a system, corruption is a state, a state means someone is in power, in so far power corrupts à in straight forward logic that is true, I'm not sure it is that simple.
After all no one will be corrupted because there is money, however everyone can be corrupted because he wants or wishes for something.
I don't think my idea is realy complete or usefull in the way I presented it, but it might be a possible way to give the carebear side some reason to get to low sec while not making it a pure carebear paradise.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |