EVE Search - @CCP - will you ever again intervene with travel routes?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

@CCP - will you ever again intervene with travel routes?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.01.15 17:09:00 - [1] I was wondering how big of a chance there is, that we would see the high sec border between Gallente Federation/Caldari State being reduced to a low sec border? Same goes for the high sec border between Minmatar Republic/Amarr Empire. Has there ever been any brainstorming/discussion about this whole area of: - warring/opposing factions sharing a high sec border - Jita pulling more and more trade from the smaller hubs support Public Idea Tracker \| 24hr PLEX
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.01.16 05:00:00 - [2] Edited by: Tres Farmer on 16/01/2011 05:01:38 Originally by: Goose99 Yes, the economy should be destroyed to benefit a handful of yerrr pirates. YARRRR!! Separatation of Caldari/Amarr market from Gallente/Minmatar market != destruction of the economy. Originally by: Pushme Pullyou It's a bit of a moot point now JF's are in game - I JF my stuff to lowsec near Jita, cyno right outside a station with a giant docking range, if I get attacked I just dock, if not fly straight out, no border crossing required, minimal risk to the freighter (if cyno guy doesn't know what he's doing and puts you in bump range and you twang off the station). Back when CCP last dabbled in what were once trade routes, this wasn't an option - now it is. If they did put nullsec NPC space between borders it would only penalise people that don't have JF's, and I don't suppose penalising the less well off cross-section of the player base is something CCP would be particularly interested in. JFs cost fuel, 1 more account to run and have 30% of the cargo capacity of a normal freighter. Why should there be full scale trade between warring factions? Why should there be unrestricted travel between warring factions? As for "penalizing" the playerbase.. Incursions are happening and Eve is supposed to be a harsh, cold place. Originally by: Pushme Pullyou In what way was it effective? if you mean it killed Yulai as a trade hub then yes, you're absolutely spot-on. If you mean it killed the notion of trade hubs, and spread trade out evenly, then Jita's existence and popularity exposes the lie. The thing is with eve is that it partly reflects the real world in some senses - the real world has rural areas and urbanised trade centres, and for the exact same reasons, so does eve - this is something shaped by the player base, not by CCP - the fact that Yulai got nerfed and Jita immediately sprang up in it's place is evidence to support that. Jita is just Yulai mk II, and if you kill Jita, there'll just be another one pop up somewhere else. All high sec: Jita to Dodixie 15 jumps Jita to Amarr 9 jumps Jita to Hek 19 jumps Jita to Rens 25 jumps Yulai was 'killed' by removing the highway gates, but high sec was still left in one big block. It is only natural that one single superhub formes in one big block of space. Originally by: Quemist I wonder what the effects of this would be besides being awesome. Mission runners already stick to their own faction for the most part anyway. Sprinkling in a bit of null might be fun for FW as well. New players are going to die anyway but adding another warning box might be ok. That's exactly the question, what would the effects be and has CCP ever thought about it? support Public Idea Tracker \| 24hr PLEX
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.01.16 08:04:00 - [3] When CCP is removing JBs in Null, shouldn't they remove high sec borders between warring factions in high sec too? support Public Idea Tracker \| 24hr PLEX
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.01.16 10:02:00 - [4] Originally by: Venkul Mul Originally by: Tres Farmer When CCP is removing JBs in Null, shouldn't they remove high sec borders between warring factions in high sec too? Out of curiosity, ~~it is~~ is this a stealth whine about the hypothetic possible removal of the JB or about the lack of targets from gatecampers? In both instances it is essentially a whine. The removal of the JBs is lodged, just not the when. Read the CSM Minutes again and personally I'm fine with it, as the population out there has it to easy to source all the slave work from empire space. As for whining about low targets on gatecamps.. way to go my dear. The above part is about trade concentrating in Jita.. and that way too fast and way too much (QEN 3/2010, page 14, table 7.. every hub is loosing population, but Jita is winning). Why is everyone so afraid of having two big blocs of high sec space instead of just one? If you create enough low sec connections between the two blocs (at least 3 times more than there are now) you have many possibilities to slip through if you really want/need to. support Public Idea Tracker \| 24hr PLEX
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.01.16 10:41:00 - [5] Originally by: Siigari Kitawa Sorry if I'm late to the party, but did you say Jump Bridges are being removed? Originally by: CSM Minutes DEC/2010 3of3, page 8 The CSM was somewhat divided on how aggressive CCP should be with any nerfing. However, one CSM suggested, with respect to the nerfing of jump bridges, ôget rid of them.ö Greyscale: ôAnyone disagree with that?ö CSM response varied between ôNope,ö ôNahö and a simple ôNoö. Greyscale: ôSweet!ö û meaning that option will then not be discarded when the topic of jump bridges will be on CCPÆs table. It is suggested that killing JB's and adding a cyno spool-up might be the core of a solution to the force projection problem. And spool-up plus a minor range nerf could handle the issue of Titan JB hotdrops as well. support Public Idea Tracker \| 24hr PLEX
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.01.16 10:52:00 - [6] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire snip Oh my god. No. It is just plain wrong. There are many ways to fix Jita and proposing 0.0 or low sec borders are just plain wrong for empire inhabitants. Making it fun for some to have easy kills on empire inhabitants is just plain wrong. Silly kills? If you don't cross the border you won't get killed. If you're in a small fast ship you won't get killed. If you fly longer routes around the most prominent camps you won't get killed. And btw.. this is not Hello Kitty Online, this is Eve, a cold harsh place. Why should factions at war with each other have a high sec border? To support trade with the enemy? Yeah right.. Originally by: Jenny Spitfire If you want to fix Jita, just slap a 70% trade tax on sales and 10% trade tax elsewhere will cause Jita to depopulate overnight. It is like in real life, if spending goes out of hand, slap a nice big tax and the demographic and behaviour will somehow change. I don't want to fix Jita. A hub is ok from an economic point of view, there will always be congregation.. it's just one hub that sucks up all trade there is in New Eden is plain wrong. If CCP were to implement this, the load on Jita would get a bit lower (the cap of 1,600 now and maybe 2,000 later will be all the time reached during the next year) and another hub in the other bloc would take it - probably Hek. We'd then have two bigger hubs, no false thoughts there. support Public Idea Tracker \| 24hr PLEX
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.01.16 13:08:00 - [7] Edited by: Tres Farmer on 16/01/2011 13:10:37 Originally by: Venkul Mul Originally by: Greyscale ôSweet!ö û meaning that option will then not be discarded when the topic of jump bridges will be on CCPÆs table. "Lodged", yeah. "that option will then not be discarded" is several light years from "it is lodged, we only need to decide when". Ok, I exagerrated. But from the wording of the whole passage it sounds not many at CCP are happy about the state of affairs that are JBs. I also merely used it as 'opener'. Mea culpa. Originally by: Venkul Mul Originally by: Tres Farmer Why should factions at war with each other have a high sec border? To support trade with the enemy? Yeah right.. Why should factions at war allow pirates to occupy the routes used for the war effort? 10 minutes sweeps (with random variance) of the gates by the controlling faction navy to keep them clear for the passage of reinforcement and supplies. Show me ANY war border zone where travellers and traders can nilly willy fly around as they please.. Man, out there in zero-zero they don't even let neutrals fly around in their space when there is peace. Originally by: Jenny Spitfire That whole reasoning you gave seems to intend on segregating players in their starter nations and only to penalise them from progressing on should they decide that they have started wrongly. Instead of getting the chance to pack and move, they need to sacrifice and restart in a new place from scratch because they can only relocate if they fly in a small ships. They can also fly with an Iteron5 full of their stuff along one of the backwater routes, if they really want to (survival chance probably around 30-60%). How much stuff are we talking here? A Freighter full of Velators and Civilian Mining Lasers? How big is the migration of Noobs? 5 Jumps around their starter system? Also what stops them from selling all their stuff on one side of the fence and buy new stuff over the border (You said they left for good and wont come back)? Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Reading the argument for the second time again seems the intention is to make it difficult for empire inhabitants to move around. There seems to be no other intention other than what I have mentioned. The intention is indeed to cripple AFK travel from one end of high sec to the other. Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Also empires at war have high sec. border because they own the system and they control it. If they own a system and not control it then it becomes low sec. I do not see how this can relate to support trade with the enemy. It is about sovereignty. The Empire factions reach out into low sec space. And if you want to trade with the enemy you don't do it over the official high sec border. Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Originally by: Tres Farmer I don't want to fix Jita. A hub is ok from an economic point of view, there will always be congregation.. it's just one hub that sucks up all trade there is in New Eden is plain wrong. If CCP were to implement this, the load on Jita would get a bit lower (the cap of 1,600 now and maybe 2,000 later will be all the time reached during the next year) and another hub in the other bloc would take it - probably Hek. We'd then have two bigger hubs, no false thoughts there. Not really. If it was to be implemented and another mega-hub forms, then apply the same higher tax rate on those system and behaviour will change. Tax is a very powerful tool with regards to influence behaviour and it is one of the best tool that has ever invented. It is probably good enough to be almost divine. Then you just push the hub around.. there will always be hubs. That's the same silly solution which had been executed on Yulai. If you cut high sec in two parts instead, there will always be 2 big hubs afterwards. One might be a bit bigger, no doubt.. but 50% of the high sec population will not really bother to reach it and go to the other. support Public Idea Tracker \| 24hr PLEX
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.01.16 13:46:00 - [8] Originally by: Grimpak Originally by: Tres Farmer If you cut high sec in two parts instead, there will always be 2 big hubs afterwards. One might be a bit bigger, no doubt.. but 50% of the high sec population will not really bother to reach it and go to the other. problem nowadays is that like 50% of the population is caldari Seems 20% of those have left the State already Population Sector Systems Pop Q1'10 Pop Q2'10 % of total Caldari 326 233733 229278 33.0% Amarr 913 153958 147762 21.2% Gallente 388 136246 129046 18.5% Minmatar 280 99980 95762 13.8% Whiskey 2499 15808 16846 2.4% Zero-zero 3294 76739 76999 11.1% total 7700 716464 695693 100.0% % of the total population in Empire space: Amarr+Caldari: 54.2% (1,239 systems) Gallente+Minmatar: 32.2% (668 systems) support Public Idea Tracker \| 24hr PLEX
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.01.16 14:11:00 - [9] Originally by: Space Pinata Don't go to Jita.. You might want to read the whole thread, not just some buzzwords. support Public Idea Tracker \| 24hr PLEX
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.01.16 15:27:00 - [10] Originally by: Grimpak snip wasn't talking about residence but actual racial background. one of the main reasons why jita became what is today is that when bloodlines came, many went achura. ...and guess where was the nearest system with good level3 agents when people finished the tutorial. Aye, and my reply to this was about the actual population distribution and that if Caldari make 50% of the whole lot, 20% of those (at least) must have left the State as actually only 33% live there support Public Idea Tracker \| 24hr PLEX
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.01.16 15:49:00 - [11] Originally by: Space Pinata Edited by: Space Pinata on 16/01/2011 14:11:35snip Nerfing the trade routes won't lead to more profitable trade, you'll just have completely isolated economies. Everything manufactured locally. Well.. I wouldn't call that locally, just because the big bloc of Empire is broken into two smaller blocs. And why shouldn't there be a bit more profitable trades afterwards? How do you suppose stuff makes it from one bloc to the other, when AFK-AP is gone the way of the Dodo? I encourage you to check out the 'local' markets of Solitude (16 jumps through low sec) and to compare prices for stuff being traded there with Jita.. then come back and complain again about 'isolated' economies please. Originally by: Space Pinata And if there's one thing we can all agree on, it's that we want a long, boring trip to be even loner and more boring right? Why don't we just remove warp to 0 again? Well, Warp-to-15km with current gate mechanics was and still is utter crap tbfh. Even the gates itself suck, as they're mostly there to create places of interaction, everyone (except capitals) needs to pass. My vision for making space big again involves short-range-jumpdrives for everyone + an overworked scanning system + way more content per solar system, but that's on no ones table right now, so I might as well forget about it. support Public Idea Tracker \| 24hr PLEX
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.01.16 16:27:00 - [12] Originally by: nugget906 Has it occurred to OP that the Empire factions are not actually at war? Other than low level proxy war (FW). That Concord is keeping the peace, and maintaining heavy security presence in border systems to this effect? Installing low/null between empires would completely contradict background story, while adding nothing of value to the game. It is a solution in search for a problem, or rather, a bug in search of a host. Hm.. no more war? Damn, was has this universe come to? Ok, forget about this then. No war, no two blocs, no two big trade hubs.. my mistake. Damnit. support Public Idea Tracker \| 24hr PLEX
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.01.17 02:38:00 - [13] Originally by: Tres Farmer Originally by: nugget906 Has it occurred to OP that the Empire factions are not actually at war? Other than low level proxy war (FW). That Concord is keeping the peace, and maintaining heavy security presence in border systems to this effect? Installing low/null between empires would completely contradict background story, while adding nothing of value to the game. It is a solution in search for a problem, or rather, a bug in search of a host. Hm.. no more war? Damn, was has this universe come to? Ok, forget about this then. No war, no two blocs, no two big trade hubs.. my mistake. Damnit. Can we have another war for those factions then please? I mean, after those Sanshas are done with whatever they do.. What happened to that private invasion of Amarrian Heir Uriam Kador 2 years ago? Aren't there more people of that mindset running around somewhere with some bigger fleets at their disposal? What about those Minmatar that shouldn't fall so fast according to some backstory? When are they supposed to fall then? support Public Idea Tracker \| 24hr PLEX
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.01.17 04:39:00 - [14] Originally by: mkmin Originally by: Tres Farmer high sec border between Minmatar Republic/Amarr Empire. Was pretty sure that the only highsec route from minmatar to amarr right now was through gallente and then caldari space. Unless there's another one that my AP hasn't been sending me on. Set a route from Amarr to Rens.. Will get you on a 20 jump route from Domain over Devoid/Derelik to Heimatar completely in high sec (0.6 being the lowest sec you will encounter). support Public Idea Tracker \| 24hr PLEX

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.