Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Pou Tau
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 20:00:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Pou Tau on 17/06/2011 20:01:10 2% increased SP gain in 0.1-0.4 4% increase SP gain in 0.0 or less
|
shady trader
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 20:19:00 -
[2]
Been suggested before and there is one little flaw with the idea.
That will happen is that people will set up a jump clone in 0.0 NPC station or low sec. And before logging off, will jump to it and stay in station.
I expect the bonus will be off set by the fact people will not willing to use high value implants so either they will never undock in lowsec or stay in hisec were their implants are safe. Macrointel, the place were the nature order of the universe does not hold sway. Pirates and ore thief's are congratulated by carebears for the actions. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 20:37:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Pou Tau Get people out of highsec
Why?
|
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy Black Sun Alliance
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 20:47:00 -
[4]
This is a dumb idea. mainly because it does not increase activity in low and null sec. all it does is increase station potatoes in those areas.
If this idea takes I want to propose that ccp mandates that all pvpers have to mine 2 hours a day... or that all first names in game have to be "John".
|
Sig Sour
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 21:11:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
Originally by: Pou Tau Get people out of highsec
Why?
Because the game keeps expanding on ways i cant shoot you.
|
Bienator II
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 22:36:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Sig Sour
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
Originally by: Pou Tau Get people out of highsec
Why?
Because the game keeps expanding on ways i cant shoot you.
valid point (but i don't think the suggestion would help much in this regard)
|
Rinia Altir
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 22:45:00 -
[7]
Here's the big problem when it comes to getting people out of high sec.
Part 1) Losing ships costs too much much money to outweight the level of isk gain outside of high sec. It mostly comes down to luck. If you get jumped, you're going to be out gunned and outnumbered. If you never get spotted by some odd luck, you will gain some extra isk. However, if you do get jumped, you are going to lose isk more than gain.
Part 2) If 0.0 or low sec were soooo much more profitable than high sec that it became profitable even with losses, those who are already established out there would gain such an advantage that they could never be brought down. The gap would be just too large and ruin the economy in a very bad way.
What's a good fix? I don't know for sure, but yeah for extra 2% SP gain I might just shuttle on accross the border and log out in a .4 station at the end of the day. Using a scout alt first, of course.
|
Ava n'Daara
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 23:17:00 -
[8]
I would love to come out of highsec but I can't afford to replace/maintain a set of +5 implants so that's simply not going to happen anytime soon. The bonus you propose is insignificant.
I think if you want more people out of highsec, CCP would have to get rid of attribute-based skill gain (and thus attribute implants). Closest compromise I can think of along the lines of your suggestion would be to remove attribute implants but give an affective attribute bonus of 5-5*sec (so you'd effectively have a +5 set in 0.0, +3 in 0.3-0.4, and +0 in 0.9-1.0). I don't see this happening. Ever.
|
Covert Kitty
Amarr ISK Solutions SRS.
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 23:22:00 -
[9]
Quote: I might just shuttle on accross the border and log out in a .4 station at the end of the day. Using a scout alt first, of course.
You would use a scout alt to bring in a shuttle? :P
j/k, I don't entirely oppose the OP's suggestion, I just feel like there should be a better way.
Personally I think highsec is just a dumb mechanic to start with. Enable concord on stations and gates, but not anywhere else. That would be far more interesting.
|
Alara IonStorm
|
Posted - 2011.06.18 00:47:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Rinia Altir Here's the big problem when it comes to getting people out of high sec.
Part 1) Losing ships costs too much much money to outweight the level of isk gain outside of high sec. It mostly comes down to luck. If you get jumped, you're going to be out gunned and outnumbered. If you never get spotted by some odd luck, you will gain some extra isk. However, if you do get jumped, you are going to lose isk more than gain.
Why do people think it is money, it is lose mails mostly. Anyone can afford to fit out a Rupture but jumping into a ten man camp and not getting a good fight as well as an embarassing mail puts people off. It is the same with PVE, there is a permanent Record with stats and everything that says you can't die.
Say whatever you want about people that think that way but it is a big reason.
|
|
Dark Sabre
|
Posted - 2011.06.18 01:05:00 -
[11]
lol funny thread.
Perhaps alternitavely 0.0 should come to hi-sec... think of it as an incursion.. randomly selective, constelations can be invaded by 0.0 players through wormholes.. while there is a wormhole in the high sec constelation connecting to 0.0 the concord presence is eliminated to create a mock 0.0 environment.
This would force the high sec players to band together to eliminate the wormhole from the constelation to end the "0.0 incursion"...
Meh lightbulb moment, what do u guys think.
|
Rinia Altir
|
Posted - 2011.06.18 01:13:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Rinia Altir on 18/06/2011 01:17:40
Originally by: Alara IonStorm
Originally by: Rinia Altir Here's the big problem when it comes to getting people out of high sec.
Part 1) Losing ships costs too much much money to outweight the level of isk gain outside of high sec. It mostly comes down to luck. If you get jumped, you're going to be out gunned and outnumbered. If you never get spotted by some odd luck, you will gain some extra isk. However, if you do get jumped, you are going to lose isk more than gain.
Why do people think it is money, it is lose mails mostly. Anyone can afford to fit out a Rupture but jumping into a ten man camp and not getting a good fight as well as an embarassing mail puts people off. It is the same with PVE, there is a permanent Record with stats and everything that says you can't die.
Say whatever you want about people that think that way but it is a big reason.
Seeing as I am one of the high sec dwellers this whole topic is about, I'm a pretty good source. I 100% don't care about kill mails. It literally comes down to comparing the cost of losing ships at certain intervals for a small % more isk gain.
If I had an endless supply of money, I'd be in low sec or 0.0.
However, your point may still be valid for some people; I just doubt it's the majority.
Edit: I do pop out and do some roams every once in a while, but there's so much more money to be gained doing something else. And doing it whout the hassle of random gangs of turds just looking to get their jollies by blowing up someone's ship for no better reason than to make the victim's day a little bit worse is perfect when some relaxation is the plan for the night. Despite managing to avoid said turds nearly 100% when I'm outside of high sec, I am fully aware of them.
|
Fournone
|
Posted - 2011.06.18 01:22:00 -
[13]
The reasons why people stay in high sec: 1. low sec a. too deadly b. not worth risk c. difficult to protect 2. nul sec a. no room for little guy b. too much politics c. has to get through low sec d. supercaps e. blobs f. has to blue half and reed the other half 2. w-space a. almost all wormholes claimed b. have to kill occupants to own it c. almost impossible to tear down occupants pos
All of these I have heard from players and fnd true in my gaming experience. Also I am tired of people trying to force people out of high sec (you aren't but some do) becuase they want high sec people to play the game thier way. Let high sec people high sec, low sec people low sec, and nul sec people nul sec.
|
Elvis Preslie
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 19:18:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Barbara Nichole This is a dumb idea. mainly because it does not increase activity in low and null sec. all it does is increase station potatoes in those areas.
Ok, try using adjectives other than dumb or are you too dumb to? I agree with you that it wouldnt get people out of high security, however, this is being debated in another thread. PLEASE STOP posting threads here without reading to see if the idea is already in discussion. People are suggesting CCP put ICE only in low/null security in another thread, which would most likely increase traffic in null security.
but the question really is why do you want more people in low security? Low security is where people go to make their own government, to make their own police force. I sense you guys just want to be able to kill anyone anytime just for fun, which is what is besides the point of null security.
|
Rek Seven
Gallente Zandathorn Industries
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 19:33:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Rek Seven on 21/06/2011 19:35:19
I've only every lived in high sec and wormholes and that's good enough for me. Why would a new player like me want to go into knows null sec?
|
Malken
Celestial Apocalypse
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 19:36:00 -
[16]
simple, make the 4-5 systems closest to empire space uncampable and move chokes further in. by setting multiple access points to the first couple of 0.0 systems from different empire systems anyone camping must have 3x-5x as many people camping the entrance systems wich would be much harder for any group.
would make the first step into 0.0 a chaotic land of glory and profit and a new goldrush for either pirates/empire groups mining/ratting without having a single chokepoint camped by 5moms and 50 others with bubbles and so on.
"Sorry, Your Sov Options are Unavailable due to a PSN Outage."
|
Elvis Preslie
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 19:37:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Barbara Nichole This is a dumb idea. mainly because it does not increase activity in low and null sec. all it does is increase station potatoes in those areas.
Ok, try using adjectives other than dumb or are you too dumb to? I agree with you that it wouldnt get people out of high security, however, this is being debated in another thread. PLEASE STOP posting threads here without reading to see if the idea is already in discussion. People are suggesting CCP put ICE only in low/null security in another thread, which would most likely increase traffic in null security.
but the question really is why do you want more people in low security? Low security is where people go to make their own government, to make their own police force. I sense you guys just want to be able to kill anyone anytime just for fun, which is what is besides the point of null security.
|
Goose99
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 19:44:00 -
[18]
In some system deep within the blue ass of large alliances, you don't see a hostile for weeks on end, much less getting killed by one. In Highsec, and number of greys can gank you.
Get ppl out of nullsec.
|
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 19:46:00 -
[19]
CCP does not want many people in 0.0.
They nerfed the anomalies in order to shrink the blobs there.
|
Aqriue
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 20:10:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Ava n'Daara I would love to come out of highsec but I can't afford to replace/maintain a set of +5 implants so that's simply not going to happen anytime soon. The bonus you propose is insignificant.
I think if you want more people out of highsec, CCP would have to get rid of attribute-based skill gain (and thus attribute implants). Closest compromise I can think of along the lines of your suggestion would be to remove attribute implants but give an affective attribute bonus of 5-5*sec (so you'd effectively have a +5 set in 0.0, +3 in 0.3-0.4, and +0 in 0.9-1.0). I don't see this happening. Ever.
Would agree with the attribute implants, but I had an idea instead to use any station you deem you home as the HQ of where you store PI POS fuels and data cores which take the place of implants. The POS fuels and data cores are consumed at a certain rate and require maintence (like refueling a POS) to keep it stocked up, at the flip side you do not loos training time while not loosing expensive implants. AND DING! DING! DING! Huge new isk sink is created, more people would be buying PI POS fuels and data cores to pewpew without implant loss and more ships are destroyed in the process without loosing out on training time. But most would disagree, there has to be some huge risk and herpderp consequences of a point/click/wait RT skill plan which I swear CCP put all the risk and didn't relize the consequences of how boring it is that they loose most new accounts after 3-6 months and rely instead of their vet clique to just open another account
|
|
Thorn Galen
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 20:38:00 -
[21]
I love the way PVP'ers try to rationalise that their manner of enjoyment and gameplay is better than that of PVE'ers.
You go ahead and blast each other to bits, it's what you are very good at. You have loads of space to do your thing.
So do PVE'ers.
Et cognitus, ergo et sum. Therefore I am, I think. (Drunken Yoda version) Am I thinking? (Very drunk Yoda version) |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |