EVE Search - Metrics for the lowsec "population problem"

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Metrics for the lowsec "population problem"

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Dro Nee	Posted - 2011.02.12 17:47:00 - [1] Edited by: Dro Nee on 12/02/2011 17:49:01 We have all seen the threads claiming that lowsec needs to be fixed because nobody goes there. Solutions range from increasing rewards, reducing abilty to gank, or making unique features/rewards available only in low. In theory, each of these solution aims at bringing more people to lowsec, but I have always wondered if population is really an issue. A quick purusal of QEN population reports compared to #of systems in a given security range(regular not true-sec rating and according to eve explorer)seems to show that lowsec has a higher population density than null. So while lowsec characters make up 8% of total population (and nullsec 34% of pop), according to Q2-2010, the number of lowsec systems is a mere 641 compared to 3304 null sec systems. This means that using 712,000 as the population (q2-2010) lowsec population density is +20ppl per system by comparison. Even accounting for the disparity in numbers between Q2 and Q3 of that same year, Q3 states total population during Q2 was 623,917 (which might be based upon counting all accounts vs. active accounts), gives lowsec about a 13 character/sys advantage. Obviously, this data contradicts the statement "lowsec is lifeless", at the glittering generality level, so there must be some other metric that people use when making the claim. The question becomes what those metrics are and, perhaps more importantly, if increasing lowsec population is any real "fix" to the lowsec problem (or even if there is a problem at all )
sableye principle of motion	Posted - 2011.02.12 17:54:00 - [2] Edited by: sableye on 12/02/2011 17:54:43 alot of those in low security are parked alts watching gates and also peoples cyno characters. ----------------------------------------- View The North Star! In All Its Glory!!
Ger Tomard Caldari Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan	Posted - 2011.02.12 17:59:00 - [3] Data seems to be dead on, lots of people in my lowsec systems. The value of lowsec is inconsistent only four jumps away lowsec is empty due to distance from market hubs.
Dro Nee	Posted - 2011.02.12 18:01:00 - [4] Edited by: Dro Nee on 12/02/2011 18:02:25 Originally by: sableye Edited by: sableye on 12/02/2011 17:54:43 alot of those in low security are parked alts watching gates and also peoples cyno characters. So its your opinion that lowsec has a higher number of scout alts and cyno characters than null space? If we figure 1in5 lowsec characters are scouts/cyno's and that all characters in null are....something else... it would make low and null have about equal population density, but does this mean that null space has a population problem equal to that of low sec?
sableye principle of motion	Posted - 2011.02.12 18:11:00 - [5] Originally by: Dro Nee Edited by: Dro Nee on 12/02/2011 18:02:25 Originally by: sableye Edited by: sableye on 12/02/2011 17:54:43 alot of those in low security are parked alts watching gates and also peoples cyno characters. So its your opinion that lowsec has a higher number of scout alts and cyno characters than null space? If we figure 1in5 lowsec characters are scouts/cyno's and that all characters in null are....something else... it would make low and null have about equal population density, but does this mean that null space has a population problem equal to that of low sec? it depends on area of course but in my living in many 0.0 areas over the years it is pretty dead out there in alot of systems in 0.0 with mainly pass through traffic and not always alot of that. I'd also think that low security probably does have more scouts than 0.0 because mostly your pretty safe in your own space its the low security bit were you may get shot and killed by pirate snipers and also people in empire will use them as wellf or when they occasionally have togo low sec. ----------------------------------------- View The North Star! In All Its Glory!!
Ger Tomard Caldari Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan	Posted - 2011.02.12 18:13:00 - [6] Originally by: sableye Edited by: sableye on 12/02/2011 17:54:43 alot of those in low security are parked alts watching gates and also peoples cyno characters. WIDOT FCs will disagree with you, they blob syndicate lowsec on a hourly basis.
Nnam Pir Gallente	Posted - 2011.02.12 18:34:00 - [7] I've found that as an Industrial/Mining pilot, I'm almost required to have a second account just to be effective on my own in alliance space in nullsec either as an escort when I'm moving materials around or to tank rats during mining. That kind of necessity kills the fun for an Industrial pilot. I doubt CCP considers this an issue, since they get two subs a month for it instead of just the one. I keep feeling more and more that it's go Combat or nothing, and that Industry will only ever be for second-class pilots or alt accounts. Perhaps if they did more to combat Macro-miners then more players would see profitability in Industry. I'm not an expert on that sort of, "if they did this then perhaps it would affect this stuff that way," though.
Ger Tomard Caldari Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan	Posted - 2011.02.12 18:37:00 - [8] Nnam Pir, cry about your own stupidity elsewhere your off topic. Lowsec is healthy and fine.
Herping yourDerp	Posted - 2011.02.12 19:04:00 - [9] -.- lowsec is worthless because the risks are more then in nullsec but rewards are much much less. want to fix lowsec, you need to stop the yarrtards. Piracy in low shouldn't be a "kill everything that moves" it should be selective targeting, you don't have to attack the rifter that jumps in you dont have to kill the dominix, loot drop isnt much or anything but when that bestower full for salvage and tags comes through trying to take lvl 5 mission loot to jita kill it
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2011.02.12 19:18:00 - [10] From my experience lowsec has systems with high body count and empty or near empty systems like 0.0. People claim that low sec is dead because there is little "target" activity, i.e. they like to kill other players and finding a target is difficult. If someone mine in low sec he try to do it in gravimetric sites and warp away when he see probes; people that do missions use unprobleabe set up or cloak or stay aligned and warp away when they see probes; industrialists stay at POS or stations; traders usually don't go there. On the opposite side of the coins there are plenty of PvP guys that want an easy target, easy to find, easy to kill, easy to brag about. So the mantra is "low sec is empty/dead [because I can't find enough targets to be satisfied]". PvPers have trained the other players to avoid risky situations as they overhunt, Darwinism at work, nothing strange there. The only exception is FW where people go to fight against other players.
Aerilis Gallente Percussive Diplomacy	Posted - 2011.02.12 19:20:00 - [11] Double the density of all asteroids in low-sec.
captain skinback	Posted - 2011.02.12 19:21:00 - [12] most of the people in 0.0 are bunched up together with allot of empty systems. lowsec has a few people spread really thin across the systems.
Ger Tomard Caldari Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan	Posted - 2011.02.12 19:24:00 - [13] Originally by: Aerilis Double the density of all asteroids in low-sec.
Shintai Gallente Arx Io Orbital Factories Arx Io	Posted - 2011.02.12 19:25:00 - [14] Lowsec whiners is like a bunch of highsec miners. 20 hulks mining the 4 astroids. And claiming astroids in highsec needs fixing. Plenty of targets. Just shoot one another. Instead of waiting 9 people behind a gate for the 2 people coming through every day. The association starts to stick. Lowsec=whiners. And people that cant handle PvP but needing easy mode vs miners. -------------------------------------- Abstraction and Transcendence: Nature, Shintai, and Geometry
Aunty Nora	Posted - 2011.02.12 19:34:00 - [15] Originally by: Herping yourDerp -.- lowsec is worthless because the risks are more then in nullsec but rewards are much much less. lol
Dro Nee	Posted - 2011.02.12 19:50:00 - [16] Just to make a note- I have altered my original post to clarify the purpose of this thread. I am not interested, at this point, in "fixes" and "solutions". Merely the data, and interpretations of that data, in making the claim that lowsec has a population problem/ needs incentivizing to increase population. I am also keeping track of the points made here that are based upon intuitions/experience, but that might require more data to be measurable. If I can find the thread where we can post "stats we would like to know" (have not looked for it yet), I will be posting the information request there.
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2011.02.12 19:58:00 - [17] Originally by: Dro Nee Edited by: Dro Nee on 12/02/2011 18:02:25 Originally by: sableye Edited by: sableye on 12/02/2011 17:54:43 alot of those in low security are parked alts watching gates and also peoples cyno characters. So its your opinion that lowsec has a higher number of scout alts and cyno characters than null space? If we figure 1in5 lowsec characters are scouts/cyno's and that all characters in null are....something else... it would make low and null have about equal population density, but does this mean that null space has a population problem equal to that of low sec? I'd say nullsec has a worse population density problem. but the problems are different from lowsec, no reason to not fix lowsec! a big lowsec problem is the hunter/prey ratio, it is just so out of balance, and most people don't like to act until it is in their favor. then again a good bit of that is a blob/counterblob/solo mentality. where in null, if you have more than a few people in system you start tripping over each other. there is also the hunter/prey issue, but that is mitigated by the fact that most 0.0 systems are just so far from anything that I don't really want to go roaming out into 0.0. plus most ratters are pretty good about warping to somewhere safe (pos/outpost/ss+cloak) that it isn't worth me bothering. also I know if I do start attacking someone I gotta make it quick or they will come blob me. also in 0.0 with intel chats, jump bridges, and pos cynos you don't need as many scout/cyno alts.
Dro Nee	Posted - 2011.02.12 20:00:00 - [18] Originally by: captain skinback most of the people in 0.0 are bunched up together with allot of empty systems. lowsec has a few people spread really thin across the systems. So do you suggest that the population problem is merely a problem of preception on the part of people/forum warriors? Or is the population a problem, but one that is disguised in 0.0 given bunching? Either way, do you think that population is a good metric for determining health?
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2011.02.12 20:06:00 - [19] Originally by: Shintai Lowsec whiners is like a bunch of highsec miners. 20 hulks mining the 4 astroids. And claiming astroids in highsec needs fixing. Plenty of targets. Just shoot one another. Instead of waiting 9 people behind a gate for the 2 people coming through every day. The association starts to stick. Lowsec=whiners. And people that cant handle PvP but needing easy mode vs miners. if that is what lowsec players really wanted they would just go around suicide ganking hulks all day. and/or suiciding haulers or lv4 runners. plenty of targets out there
Dro Nee	Posted - 2011.02.12 20:18:00 - [20] Edited by: Dro Nee on 12/02/2011 20:20:03 Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton I'd say nullsec has a worse population density problem. but the problems are different from lowsec, no reason to not fix lowsec! a big lowsec problem is the hunter/prey ratio, it is just so out of balance.... I should make clear that I am not anti-boosting lowsec. I, personally, am interested in how we arrive at the conclusion that it is broken. It seems, to me, that we must know why we consider that part of the sandbox broken if we want to make any useful and meaningful changes. Knowing this information also lets us measure, in the most objective manner possible for EVE lol, the effect of any changes that may come down the pipe from CCP. If you cannot measure your progress, you have no idea how far you have (or have not) come. As for pop density in null being worse than low: do you think pop density is a viable metric for evaluating health? If so do you feel that null needs a boost as well (but perhaps different kind of boost from low)? As for hunter/prey ratio: If the hunter/prey ratio was the same...but the majority of the population lived in low regardless of this ratio... would you still consider the hunter/prey ratio as something that needed fixing? edit- mah grammuh
Ai Shun Caldari	Posted - 2011.02.12 20:21:00 - [21] Originally by: Dro Nee This means that using 712,000 as the population (q2-2010) lowsec population density is +20ppl per system by comparison. Even accounting for the disparity in numbers between Q2 and Q3 of that same year, Q3 states total population during Q2 was 623,917 (which might be based upon counting all accounts vs. active accounts), gives lowsec about a 13 character/sys advantage. Wait. Are you saying there are 712,000 accounts active in null sec? And 623,917 in low sec? Or are you simply dividing the number of accounts by the number of systems and assuming somebody will be there? Late night, too much good food and drink and an early morning thanks to a rogue client and there is no source data listed - so I may have missed something.
captain skinback	Posted - 2011.02.12 20:28:00 - [22] Originally by: Dro Nee Originally by: captain skinback most of the people in 0.0 are bunched up together with allot of empty systems. lowsec has a few people spread really thin across the systems. So do you suggest that the population problem is merely a problem of preception on the part of people/forum warriors? Or is the population a problem, but one that is disguised in 0.0 given bunching? Either way, do you think that population is a good metric for determining health? i dont really think it matters. it would be great if there were more people in lowsec and nullsec but the problem with that is more people more blobs. if there was more pve in lowsec and if it was easier to cope with being ganked it better up the game for everyone.
Ozmodan Minmatar Massively Mob Massively Alliance	Posted - 2011.02.12 20:37:00 - [23] Originally by: Ger Tomard Nnam Pir, cry about your own stupidity elsewhere your off topic. Lowsec is healthy and fine. Huh? What game are you playing? Certainly not on the server the rest of us play on. I have not seen any solution that really fixes lowsec, but that does not mean it does not have major issues. I think that is why lowsec remains the step child of this game, even CCP has no quick fixes. Learners permit still current
Dro Nee	Posted - 2011.02.12 20:38:00 - [24] Edited by: Dro Nee on 12/02/2011 20:40:28 Originally by: Ai Shun Originally by: Dro Nee This means that using 712,000 as the population (q2-2010) lowsec population density is +20ppl per system by comparison. Even accounting for the disparity in numbers between Q2 and Q3 of that same year, Q3 states total population during Q2 was 623,917 (which might be based upon counting all accounts vs. active accounts), gives lowsec about a 13 character/sys advantage. Wait. Are you saying there are 712,000 accounts active in null sec? And 623,917 in low sec? Or are you simply dividing the number of accounts by the number of systems and assuming somebody will be there? Late night, too much good food and drink and an early morning thanks to a rogue client and there is no source data listed - so I may have missed something. According to the QEN for Q2-2010 the total number of characters in EVE was 712k. The population for Q2 was different in the Q3 report of the same year (623k) but its possible that the Q3 counted only active accounts and Q2 counted characters on inactive accounts. According to Q2 tracking of character locations (high,low, null, wh)8% of characters resided in lowsec and 34% resided in null. I took that number of people and divided by number of systems in that security range (given by eve-explorer) to get the population density for both lowsec and null. Hope its clearer now. Cheers for bringing it up QEN list can be found here : http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/QEN
Jenny Spitfire Caldari	Posted - 2011.02.12 20:41:00 - [25] Actually, I think low sec can be made more popular. Just allow random Concord intervention then more people will try to live in low sec from high sec. To be honest, I would be the first to do so if it happens. --------- The making of the new Jenny Spitfire
Nova Fox Gallente Novafox Shipyards	Posted - 2011.02.12 20:45:00 - [26] Metrics? I think its more of the issue of preception. And honestly it is the most dangerous of the three spaces its not a place for any group of lonlies to hang out. Now make it attractive for corporations to set up shop and not get ran over by the nearby allaince and you might have something but even then there is littel from stopping a bored allaince rolling over any corproation in the way of thier logitsitcs. Pre-order your Sisters of ≡v≡ Exploration ship today, Updated 20JAN11
Myra2007 Millstone Industries	Posted - 2011.02.12 20:55:00 - [27] Lowsec isn't broken. Some people would like to change it around completely but those are usually not the actual inhabitants of lowsec. The people who live there (and as mentioned that group isn't as small as people make it out to be) may have ideas to make it better but the reason they live down there is because they want to. Lowsec offers a certain eve lifestyle that is different from both 0.0 life and hisec but it's not for everyone. -- Originally by: Professor Slocombe I will only buy tickets if the prize is your stuff and you leave Eve. Forever. You irritating self obsessed cretin.
Ai Shun Caldari	Posted - 2011.02.12 21:04:00 - [28] Originally by: Dro Nee According to Q2 tracking of character locations (high,low, null, wh)8% of characters resided in lowsec and 34% resided in null. I took that number of people and divided by number of systems in that security range (given by eve-explorer) to get the population density for both lowsec and null. Ah, yes. Thank you, that does help. Now to go browse and see what the source documents say about time zones. I suspect it will ignore them.
Feilamya Pain Elemental	Posted - 2011.02.12 21:27:00 - [29] Edited by: Feilamya on 12/02/2011 21:27:45 Originally by: Dro Nee statistics Lowsec isn't lifeless, and everyone who lives in lowsec or goes there from time to time knows this. The reason why SOME lowsec dwellers are whining, is that lowsec is populated with the "wrong" kind of life, i.e., life that shoots back and comes in blobs. These people are raging because they are close to the bottom of the food chain, and there is not enough plankton for them to feed on. Basically they are carebears, because they have no inner drive to move upwards in the food chain by their own efforts.
Dro Nee	Posted - 2011.02.12 21:51:00 - [30] Originally by: Nova Fox Metrics? I think its more of the issue of preception. And honestly it is the most dangerous of the three spaces its not a place for any group of lonlies to hang out. Now make it attractive for corporations to set up shop and not get ran over by the nearby allaince and you might have something but even then there is littel from stopping a bored allaince rolling over any corproation in the way of thier logitsitcs. Why do you think people have this perception? Is it because of the 10000's of posts on forums/chat channels? Is it because, as some people say, people are spread out too thin across the systems? Or is it something else/ combination of issues?

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: 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.