EVE Search - Low Sec rewards: It should exceed null

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Low Sec rewards: It should exceed null

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Hennata	Posted - 2010.09.24 22:51:00 - [1] People keep repeating the same old argument: "If you buff lowsec rewards, power blocks would come." SO WHAT. Let them come. Unlike null sec, it is extremely unlikely that any single power block can dominate a area. They can't hide in their bubbled cynojammed dead end system farming isk. There is massive defender's advantage in null, and that is why a power block can dominate any particular large rewards. In low sec everyone that want the piece of the action get can there quickly without needing a JF or titan Bridge, none of this flying into the middle of nowhere to hit a timer. For incursion, to gain the rewards on needs to put stuff on grid and thus vulnerable. If some power block wants to farm then everyone else can kill them, unless they can bring more numbers than the rest of eve, as opposed to bored folks that would get the middle of nowhere to shoot static objects that really shuts down the sanctum-ing. I'm sure their is thousands of pilots in highsec that wouldn't mind getting into fights if it doesn't involving flying far far out into null or hours chasing to just get rewards of some crappy t2 mod drops or annoying to covert lp. Some local pirates might complain that they can't no longer do fun things like smartbomb gates all day. However, even ninja looting a battle is far more rewarding than that kind of activity.
Fkn Arson 0ne Percent.	Posted - 2010.09.24 23:02:00 - [2] Originally by: Hennata For incursion, to gain the rewards on needs to put stuff on grid and thus vulnerable. If some power block wants to farm then everyone else can kill them, unless they can bring more numbers than the rest of eve, as opposed to bored folks that would get the middle of nowhere to shoot static objects that really shuts down the sanctum-ing. I'm 90% sure the underlined reason is why those power blocks are aptly named, larger numbers than the rest of eve (in this case, the small high sec corps). So yes, they can bring more numbers in to defend and take down the incursions, of course that's if it is profitable enough for them to. May seem more profitable to buy the loot that is won than spend the time and forces necessary to take it forcibly. Originally by: Hennata I'm sure their is thousands of pilots in highsec that wouldn't mind getting into fights if it doesn't involving flying far far out into null or hours chasing to just get rewards of some crappy t2 mod drops or annoying to covert lp. I believe the majority of those thousands don't enter low-sec/null-sec because they don't want to get into a fight, and are happy spending hours in missions/trading/whatever in highsec. Originally by: Hennata Some local pirates might complain that they can't no longer do fun things like smartbomb gates all day. However, even ninja looting a battle is far more rewarding than that kind of activity. Some of the smaller pirate corps perhaps, personally, I'm imagining a static incursion in Rancer, can you saw awesomesauce?
Steve Thomas Minmatar	Posted - 2010.09.24 23:23:00 - [3] I think part of the problem is that for all intents and purposes low sec is little more than a speed bump between empire and Sov space. by this point the only thing that would bring more people into low sec is to either make it all FW space (and seriously buff the FW rewards and overhaul FW mechanics so that theres no "Nutrals") Redo industry/mining/PI so that theres things you can ONLY get from null sec, and the need is high enough that you bascialy need be there in force to get it. Make lowsec Empire/Concord space Make Low sec Sov clameable . . . . . . . . a (Long) Guide to Pi
Emperor Cheney Celebrity Sex Tape	Posted - 2010.09.25 00:34:00 - [4] Originally by: Steve Thomas I think part of the problem is that for all intents and purposes low sec is little more than a speed bump between empire and Sov space. by this point the only thing that would bring more people into low sec is to either make it all FW space (and seriously buff the FW rewards and overhaul FW mechanics so that theres no "Nutrals") Redo industry/mining/PI so that theres things you can ONLY get from null sec, and the need is high enough that you bascialy need be there in force to get it. Make lowsec Empire/Concord space Make Low sec Sov clameable You're last 2 proposals both equal eliminating low sec entirely (one replaces it with empire, the other with null). FW rewards are already very high. Even including ship losses, the rewards of level 4 FW missions far exceeds level 4 highsec missioning, and lowsec 4's and 5's also provide great payout in excess of highsec. The reason lowsec is so unpopulated is, those players who are willing to risk their ship are generally more attracted to nullsec. Re-examining our assumptions, is this even a bad thing? One great thing about lowsec is how empty it is while remaining very accessible.
Hennata	Posted - 2010.09.25 01:08:00 - [5] Most highsec carebear I know don't mind losing a set of +3s (not that you'd lose them in low) and a T2 fitted battlecruiser, but they do mind having crap empire standings that cuts them off from space that can't be fixed without spending hundreds of mil in tags and even more in mission time. FW and L5s is just expensive in those ways. Lowsec L4 is a joke since unprobeable fits gimps income compared to a loot as you blitz best lp store marauder. When they say rewards, it just isn't there. Lowsec, due to its impossibility of defense, is the MOST DANGEROUS PVE environment no matter what you do. Compare that to a Carrier blob in a C4, and you can see what the risk/rewards are just broke.
Emperor Cheney Celebrity Sex Tape	Posted - 2010.09.25 04:03:00 - [6] Originally by: Hennata Most highsec carebear I know don't mind losing a set of +3s (not that you'd lose them in low) and a T2 fitted battlecruiser, but they do mind having crap empire standings that cuts them off from space that can't be fixed without spending hundreds of mil in tags and even more in mission time. FW and L5s is just expensive in those ways. Lowsec L4 is a joke since unprobeable fits gimps income compared to a loot as you blitz best lp store marauder. When they say rewards, it just isn't there. Lowsec, due to its impossibility of defense, is the MOST DANGEROUS PVE environment no matter what you do. Compare that to a Carrier blob in a C4, and you can see what the risk/rewards are just broke. I've been in FW for over a year, and done hundreds of millions worth of ISK in L4 FW missions, as well as plexed and blown up players in the enemy militia. I'm still not KOS in enemy space due to standings. I also took a break from FW to do level 4 missions in Khanid lowsec. I got ganked twice in my battleship and still came out way ahead, profit wise, compared to doing level 4's in highsec. Lowsec is profitable, and yes, I've seen from people who join corp and then leave in a literal huff and cry, that many if not most highsec players are in fact afraid of space death more than they lust for space money.
Orange Lagomorph	Posted - 2010.09.25 04:32:00 - [7] I don't understand why carebears with stupidly expensive ships avoid lowsec. CONCORD or no CONCORD, you're probably just as likely to get ganked in highsec, and possibly moreso. As long as your lowsec mission hubs are safely removed from bottlenecks and pirate coves, you should be fine. Then again, I'd never fly a stupidly expensive ship just to do missions, so yeah.
Mire Stoude The Undesirables	Posted - 2010.09.25 04:51:00 - [8] Low-sec is where all the sane people hang. Please don't make suggestions that would change that.
Marak Mocam	Posted - 2010.09.25 05:33:00 - [9] Originally by: Orange Lagomorph I don't understand why carebears with stupidly expensive ships avoid lowsec. CONCORD or no CONCORD, you're probably just as likely to get ganked in highsec, and possibly moreso. As long as your lowsec mission hubs are safely removed from bottlenecks and pirate coves, you should be fine. Then again, I'd never fly a stupidly expensive ship just to do missions, so yeah. If someone can pop a T2+ tanked faction battleship before concord shows to nail them... That's a serious group of well armed battleships that will tally up around the same value. Well over 120k EHP takes a while to get through and concord responds fairly decently. Hell, look at hulkageddon -- it's popular due to the ease of blowing up mining ships. When have you ever heard of anything like that working on "kill the L4 faction battleships!" -- you might find 10 kills and over 200 losses before everyone called it quits on the attempt. The faction battleship kills tend to be from similar tactics as can flippers. Someone who sneaks in and steals loot. The mission runner gets ticked and goes for the target just to find 3-6 of their friends showing up to legally blow their brains out WITHOUT concord getting involved. So "stupidly expensive..." That's not so stupid when you can outlast a batch of other battleships due to CONCORD. To the OP: The rewards for operating in lowsec are already higher than they are in highsec by a good margin. Any adjustments to that won't help. It's not operating IN lowsec that's a problem. It's actually getting through "this camp is taken!" gatecamps. Fly anything over a frigate and your chances drop. BC size on up; use a scout and that means multiple accounts most of the time. If there is a camp, park and "do something else" until it's gone. Brilliant... Don't play due to a gatecamp and you think folks will log in just to see IF they can play or not? Highsec = log in and do what you feel like, not invest chunks of time seeing if someone has the next gate in your path camped or not. After someone's first gatecamp, most learn NOT to go back into those systems. If it were easy to get in and out but RISKY flying there, you'd find a lot more folks trying it but gatecamp = don't fly big ships and small ships... There are zip rewards using them in lowsec that you can't beat in a battlecruiser or larger in highsec -- outside of certain types of exploration sites, which tick off lowsec folks... Something about covert cloaks and unprobable ships. If you want to fix lowsec population/traffic, figure out how to make flying there risky but getting in/out fairly easy versus how it is now.
Antihrist Pripravnik 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2010.09.25 07:18:00 - [10] Edited by: Antihrist Pripravnik on 25/09/2010 07:22:15 Edited by: Antihrist Pripravnik on 25/09/2010 07:19:05 Originally by: Hennata People keep repeating the same old argument: "If you buff lowsec rewards, power blocks would come." SO WHAT. Let them come. Unlike null sec, it is extremely unlikely that any single power block can dominate a area. Confirming that powerblocks can't dominate lowsec and take all high-end moons (that are the only profitable thing in lowsec atm). Or not. Quote: If some power block wants to farm then everyone else can kill them, unless they can bring more numbers than the rest of eve, Yep. 0.0 alliances can't make huge blob fleets. Especially guys in the north.
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2010.09.25 07:39:00 - [11] Originally by: Marak Mocam snip If you want to fix lowsec population/traffic, figure out how to make flying there risky but getting in/out fairly easy versus how it is now. this, TBFH
Orange Lagomorph	Posted - 2010.09.25 08:11:00 - [12] Edited by: Orange Lagomorph on 25/09/2010 08:12:39 Originally by: Marak Mocam If someone can pop a T2+ tanked faction battleship before concord shows to nail them... That's a serious group of well armed battleships that will tally up around the same value. Well over 120k EHP takes a while to get through and concord responds fairly decently. Deploy frigates to bump battleship repeatedly. If battleship attacks frigates, battleship dies. Bring lots of friends and start shooting battleship (frigates continue bumping). If everyone gets CONCORDOKKENED before battleship is destroyed, acquire fresh ships and repeat as necessary. This is extremely easy to do in 0.5-0.7, less so in 0.8-1.0. But most 20-40bn ISK mission battleships end up running in the low end of highsec, for obvious reasons. Honestly, when did some of you start playing EVE? Last year?
rekcuf bmuD	Posted - 2010.09.25 08:26:00 - [13] Ever heard of lvl 5 missions? Yeah...
Bunzan Cardinal The Athiest Syndicate Advocated Destruction	Posted - 2010.09.25 08:47:00 - [14] Edited by: Bunzan Cardinal on 25/09/2010 08:47:57 i dont think they should make low sec pve rewards more the nullsec rewards. I think they should make them pretty damn close to nullsec rewards though. Yes you can do missions, but seeing (good) plexes and battleship rats with atleast 200k bounties (and with a decent spawn rate) i think would be a step into the right direction for fixing low sec.
Kerfira Kerfira Corp	Posted - 2010.09.25 10:35:00 - [15] Edited by: Kerfira on 25/09/2010 10:36:55 To make low-sec viable, it needs to be what it was intended: An area of space that is somewhere between high-sec and 0.0 in risk. The way this could be done would be by having CONCORD show up at gates and stations (with their normal high-sec firepower), but NOT anywhere else in low-sec space! Travel would thus be safe, but activities would not... Pirates would have to track down their targets, not just be cheap gate/station-campers. Very easy solution, but will of.c. be totally objected to by afore mentioned cheap gate/station-campers 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.
Orange Lagomorph	Posted - 2010.09.25 10:45:00 - [16] I agree. Lowsec rewards should be damned close to nullsec rewards. There are no genuine hardships built into nullsec. The only "hardship" comes from players fighting over territory, and while lowsec residents don't fight each other over territory per se, lowsec has even more hardship potential ù because you can't secure territory there, turtle up and activate carebear mode.
Emperor Cheney Celebrity Sex Tape	Posted - 2010.09.25 10:55:00 - [17] Originally by: Kerfira Edited by: Kerfira on 25/09/2010 10:36:55 To make low-sec viable, it needs to be what it was intended: An area of space that is somewhere between high-sec and 0.0 in risk. The way this could be done would be by having CONCORD show up at gates and stations (with their normal high-sec firepower), but NOT anywhere else in low-sec space! Travel would thus be safe, but activities would not... Pirates would have to track down their targets, not just be cheap gate/station-campers. Very easy solution, but will of.c. be totally objected to by afore mentioned cheap gate/station-campers That makes lowsec into, basically, highsec that you can't (safely) pve in, removing one of the only populations with an interest in lowsec: pirates. With it, you remove one of the only reasons to be in lowsec. Fortunately, under your proposal, it will at least be safe to autopilot through. What I am learning from this thread is that a lot of people don't have any experience with lowsec but, nonetheless, have ideas on how to "fix" it.
Kerfira Kerfira Corp	Posted - 2010.09.25 11:12:00 - [18] Edited by: Kerfira on 25/09/2010 11:14:06 Originally by: Emperor Cheney Originally by: Kerfira My post... That makes lowsec into, basically, highsec that you can't (safely) pve in, removing one of the only populations with an interest in lowsec: pirates. With it, you remove one of the only reasons to be in lowsec. Fortunately, under your proposal, it will at least be safe to autopilot through. What I am learning from this thread is that a lot of people don't have any experience with lowsec but, nonetheless, have ideas on how to "fix" it. Cheap gate-ganker spotted... I DO have low-sec experience, but when I pirate I scan people down in their mission or exploration pocket, or kill them in belts (though not many people there)... It is not that difficult to do... 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.
Mal Lokrano Gallente The Executives IT Alliance	Posted - 2010.09.25 12:00:00 - [19] I am all of boosting lowsec, but I highly doubt the OPs idea would work. All you would have are the large 0.0 alliances taking over lowsec systems, and doing the same now. You would pretty much have to make both 0.0 and highsec totally worthless in both isk making and fun in order to make lowsec popular, and by then the game would be either horribly broken or dead. _____ When going to a party with wine, women, and song. Always ascertain the vintage of the first two. Your friendly neighborhood pod liberator.
Orange Lagomorph	Posted - 2010.09.25 12:08:00 - [20] Originally by: Kerfira Cheap gate-ganker spotted... Just stop. Removing the ability to camp gates and stations free of CONCORD intervention is a completely ridiculous notion.
Wet Ferret	Posted - 2010.09.25 12:11:00 - [21] The answer is to remove warp bubbles from NPC nullsec so it becomes an extension of low-sec. Low-sec doesn't need buffed, we just need more of it. And that, in a nutshell, is my sig.
Brian Ballsack	Posted - 2010.09.25 12:19:00 - [22] Three words explaining why you are wrong mr OP, Mobile warp disrupter. Bubbles makes 0.0 travel far more dangerous than low sec, hell they even have sentry guns on gates there. Why do people with no experience concerning the subject matter continue to whine about stuff they know nothing about ?
Kerfira Kerfira Corp	Posted - 2010.09.25 13:01:00 - [23] Originally by: Orange Lagomorph Originally by: Kerfira Cheap gate-ganker spotted... Just stop. Removing the ability to camp gates and stations free of CONCORD intervention is a completely ridiculous notion. Wow... Just spotted another one Explain just WHY it is 'a completely ridiculous notion', because it isn't! It'll make low-sec the area it was intended, ie. between high-sec and 0.0 in risk. It'll remove the major impediment to people actually DOING stuff in low-sec, ie. that they can't GET there to do it safely. AND, it'll make real pirates have more targets, while removing the cheap gate-ganker. Total WIN for everyone (except of course previously mentioned cheap ganker) 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.
Flynn Fetladral Brutal Deliverance	Posted - 2010.09.25 13:04:00 - [24] To be honest, I don't think it should be about 'buffs' or that it should be better than null. Low sec should offer something different from High-Sec and Null-Sec. It needs to be more defined, and offer something different, not try to be like null, while offering lest return, or trying to be like high-sec with more risk. It might be nice to do something which promotes more pirate vs law keepers, have influence system which gives bonus to groups aligned to pirate or police entities that allow these groups to get benefits like drug production. Whatever, it just needs to offer a different gameplay more than just say you get x2 more isk than high-sec.
heheheh Phoenix Club	Posted - 2010.09.25 13:13:00 - [25] If you find it hard to travel around low sec, you need some practice.
ArmyOfMe Pastry Productions Inc.	Posted - 2010.09.25 14:13:00 - [26] now that 0,0 have santcums etc just give low sec pirate agents like they should have from the start
Hennata	Posted - 2010.09.25 18:18:00 - [27] Consider the standard PVE operation with a powerblock. Lets say 400 pilots operating at once in a normal day. In nullsec: Spend a dozen to camp the cynojammed entrance pipe with a bubble array and the hundreds behind them can farm in perfect safely outside of some afk cloakers what not. If a blob comes, having caps means the attacker would have to pay very high costs against even a semi active defense, and the early warning means every farmer docks up and no expensive carebear dies anyways. In lowsec: The lack of single entrance and infinite spawn sanctums means the 400 pilots would need to spread out over many different systems and one can not defend a fleet of pimped marauders with a small pvp gang. The 400 pilots would totally be vulnerable to fast ganks since it can not be focused on a singular point with only one entrance point. Quote: Confirming that powerblocks can't dominate lowsec and take all high-end moons (that are the only profitable thing in lowsec atm). POS warfare is one thing, PvE operations is another. If you spawn 10/10 over 30 random systems in lowsec, there is no way you can control them all even if you have 2k members. You can only control as much as you have pilots, and any random ad hoc fleet made out of random guys in local can evict larger alliance if they have temporary local superiority. It is not like POS where you have to hold for weeks to pay off, you can get pay off in minutes in PvE. Being accessible to highsec means anything with the members can take a PvE spot even without a formal corp/alliance/logistic structure. All you need is to fleet them up and keep them from shooting each other. Quote: Three words explaining why you are wrong mr OP, Mobile warp disrupter. Bubbles makes 0.0 travel far more dangerous than low sec, hell they even have sentry guns on gates there. Bubbles make roaming gangs harder to run, which inversely mean carebearing is easier since it offer strong defensive advantages. If you can't travel to the carebear system before dying, it means carebears can't die.
Orange Lagomorph	Posted - 2010.09.25 18:25:00 - [28] Originally by: Kerfira Wow... Just spotted another one No. I am not a pirate and I don't spend much time in lowsec, let alone camping gates and stations. Your arguments are logically fallacious; you are attempting to discredit those who disagree with you by accusing them of bias. Your accusations are baseless, and you're making a fool of yourself. It's a bad idea because the vast majority of mission-runners avoid lowsec. There may be a fair amount of lowsec exploration ù I'm not too sure about that. Regardless, introducing CONCORD protection to stations and gates will halve pirates' available vectors to commit piracy. They deserve to be buffed, not nerfed. ------------------------- Also: People, it's power bloc. Powerblocks are those square things in Super Mario Bros. that sprout Fire Flowers.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2010.09.25 18:38:00 - [29] àI've always found that stations and gates are where you the safest while in lowsec already, so why would you need to boost the protection of these areas? Then again, I fly nimble(ish) ships. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Orange Lagomorph	Posted - 2010.09.25 18:46:00 - [30] Originally by: Tippia àI've always found that stations and gates are where you the safest while in lowsec already, so why would you need to boost the protection of these areas? That too. Heck, we're living in the era of the T3 Nullsec Tour BusÖ. Avoiding gate camps is easier now than it's ever been.

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.