Mikkaras
Amarr
Comprehensive Logistics And Warfare Supply
   |
Posted - 2010.12.04 10:44:00 -
[1]
 Originally by: Ospie
Originally by: Pesets
No, the purpose of having security status below -5 is that you are KOS in hisec as well as in lowsec. He was talking about negative SS players being KOS in lowsec, so it makes sense. "Separating boys from men" is not a game mechanic and only exists in your imagination.
What? Do you even know the implications of being an outlaw? It means you can be shot without gcc everywhere, whilst the only implication 0 to -4.9999 has is that faction navies will shoot you, in lowsec people will still need to take gcc to engage you. Also stfu about kos when you clearly have no idea what it means.
It appears to me that he said the exact same thing as you said regarding the way things currently stand regarding KOS from -5 to -10 sec status. Under the OP's proposal, in lowsec any negative sec status would make you KOS. Pesets was pointing out that the reason this was different from the -5 to -10 KOS is because that applies in highsec as well.
Originally by: Mike deVoid
I like your proposal in general, the ecosystem analogy is pretty powerful. However I have a few points/questions:
* I'd take out the part about the carebear-farm. It's confusing and the only thing it adds is wordcount. Drawing a link between lowsec and a system foodweb ecosystem works great, especially if following directly by the RL coyote anecdote.
I agree, it's a somewhat confusing digression, and may offend those who liked Smurfs. ;)
Originally by: Mike deVoid
* I don't think you've come up with an unexploitable BH system. Upon ship death there are potentially 2 payouts: BH payout and insurance payout. A pirate could easily use a buddy (or an alt) to pop an unfit BS thus collecting the insurance and BH payout. This will be a net profit for the pirate. I suspect you'd have to lower the BH payout a long way in order to close that loophole, making the whole BH profession rather pointless.
Deny purchased insurance payouts - limit payout to the basic, free "40% of hull value" level, even if the hull has additional insurance purchased. Do this in lowsec when a negative sec status character's ship is killed, and preferably do it in high sec for any character under GCC for attacking others, regardless of sec status (although this is a separate issue related to the profitability of suicide ganking).
40% + up to 50% is still less than the ship's purchase price, at least theoretically, and should make farming their own bounties at best a break-even practice, and therefore non-viable. (Would this remove the bounties, though? That might make even a nearly break-even situation useful, so further measures might need to be taken...)
Originally by: Mike deVoid
* I don't support the 'no local in lowsec' idea being folding into this proposal (or at all actually). Briefly the reasons for this are: we already have this feature in WHs; you'd make the skill requirements for carebears in lowsec MUCH higher as they'd have to learn how to use dscan; we'd still have local in nullsec; it doesn't fit the THEME of the proposal which is 'make BH a viable profession in order to revitalise lowsec'
I agree, empire space should continue to have local. But what about an option which would allow someone to not connect to local if they so desired? Not sure what the full pros and cons of that would be, but I think it's worth considering.
|