Because that's not something that happens. Borders between most countries are closely guarded, especially between sworn enemies.

join test
concord's not getting in the way of them hitting freighters
300 + so far?

Hint: All those expensive mods? They'd be jumped directly to a lowsec station one jump out of the target empire's highsec space, and you'd find it even harder to gank them.

Also maybe these new systems that border hisec should be strategically devoid of stations to make it harder for jump freighters to move things? Or perhaps the ability to setup a pos on one of these border areas would create a strategic harbor worth defending from pirates, while the owners of this tower can charge tariffs to cyno at their safe haven.

Gate camping =! True piracy

Take a look here, Not quite the same but with the same effects on hauling.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=164340&find=unread

How about a faster route between hubs via low sec, possibly via faction war zones (20% of the time or similar?)
-
removing a secure route between empires would be an interesting experiment as it might lead to more insular (within specific empires) game play, if that would be a good thing or not is debatable.

So they jump to the gate, or an lowsec system bordering highsec that already exists. or to a pos. Thier own of course, not some trap set up by bored pirates. Or a safespot in an empty system with a webbing alt or two.

It'll take more than this kind of thing to shift the highsec masses into low. Thi just concentrates things in jita more, gives extra money to black frog and the like, and encourages even more people to mission in caldari space, surely?

Note: To make this whole idea work at all, there would have to be a pretty significant rework to the distribution of resources in the galaxy. Right now, there aren't a lot of resources that can only be found in specific quadrants of the empire. Something would have to be shifted around a bit to actually make transit over the borders to be worthwhile in the first place...

Currently if you look around in Low Sec and also 0 sec its around 95% of time the same "old story". Some wannabe pirates sitting around at stations, near gates in belts or another place somewhere in the system.

your idea wont have the consequences you hope to achieve.

Perhaps you should consider posting with your main char, as a npc corp char wouldn't last 10 mins gate camping in the manner your suggesting he would be, while attempting to "pirate".

gate guns should stay as is.

one of the primary reasons people avoid low sec is because of the "everything must burn" attitude on the low sec side of the gate.

Yes, that's pretty much exactly what I was thinking. Amarr empire has a lot of minerals A and B, and not much of C or D, and amarr ships use a large proportion of A and B, but only a little C and D. Vice versa for Minmatar, etc.

So you can make amarr ships (and lasers and such) easily in amarr space, but if you want a rifter or projectile ammo, you pay a (small) premium, or go get it yourself across the border.

Wait, so newbies should only ever do anything in the space of the race they started as?

What?

I think a bigger divide between Caldari/Gallente and Amarr/Minmatar High Secs would be good. That said, The allies would maintain a close link with one another. Amarr/Caldari and Minmatar/Gallente would still be connected by High Sec. I also see no reason why there would not be a link between Amarr/Gallente and Caldari/Minmatar that was still High Sec.

You should still be able to travel from Jita to Dodixie, or Amarr to Rens, via highsec. But it should be a massive journey. That would make the shortcut through Low Sec much more attractive. If I had to make 35 to 40 jumps to get from one hub to the other, or 8 or 10 including a couple through Low, I would grab myself a Cloaky Transport Ship and head on through low and cash in.

This probably wont have the effect you are looking for. Trying to force players into a type of game play that they don't want to play rarely works. Yeah for some there might be increased profit opportunities, but overall trade in game will decrease. Opportunities will decrease. Could even lead to some people unsubbing.

Also, if this does get implemented expect a sudden surge in demand for transport ships, and good luck catching those.

A cloaky hauler, aka a Blockade runner is almost impossible to catch, infact I only lost 1, but that was due to my own dumb actions. First, enough light tacklers, an't going to do **** if it warps off before it even closes range to catch said ship, second and agility fitted Blockade runner takes 3.4 seconds on average to get into warp, seeing this is low sec and not null sec, you can't place warp disturber bubbles. so I can warp to zero and jump on threw and you would only notice that something was even there was cause of the flash at the warp gate. Also it takes roughly 1 second to get into cloak, and if you get decloaked for me anyways I takes only 5 seconds to burn away, or 3 seconds to simply warp away and recloak, and you will never find me again, blockade runners are one the single handed up most annoying thing to catch cause it has the FASTEST align time in the game short of a pod.

wow, just wow, so nobody would bother un-docking a freighter for 4 mill profit. mining ice would pay better.
you misunderstand how haulers are used, and what they typically carry.

and afking from amarr to jita would take longer than a 1/2 hour, i think maybe youve played the game so long in one style you don't quite understand how things actually work on the other side. a decrease in trade inter region would make your ships and modules cost more.

t2 items would climb up in price and you wouldn't actually make any more isk pirating or hitting freighters, infact it would cost you more to achieve the same number of "kills" which seems to be pointless overall. I still say you should join test or observe there gate camps and how they select targets.

depending on the nature of the item to be hauled theres 4 or 5 ships that are in favour.
bulk low cost items - frighter / jump freighter
interesting things - orca corp hanger (will change soon)
transport ships.
haulers

then tengus / t3 with cloak mods and fly the whole thing more or less cloaked the whole way.


Oddly you'd probably hurt null space more than high sec space. they depend more on jita to buy and sell there goods than most people in high sec.

It's not about the lore, it just doesn't make sense to not guard the border with your enemies. I mean, it makes logical sense, but it's such a stupid thing (not) to do that one would think an interstellar community would have figured out by the time they took their first steps as a planetary civilization. EVE is loosely based on our own world, so if you want evidence just google "Ice Wall" or take a look at the border between Israel and, well, any of its neighbors.

Also, as has been stated before, this wouldn't have the effect you expect. The first thing that would probably occur is a market schism, and all 4 highsec empire zones would be left to fend for themselves. Do you honestly believe that lowsec pirates care for how much you have in your hold? They will blow up anything they are able to and then see if they made a profit, just as they do now.

Yes i read it, its pointless replying because its hard to stay on topic with your idea of splitting the 4 regions with ls space.

The reason i dislike your implementation of the idea is that for you to get to play your comparatively narrow playing style in that you want to destroy lots of freighters and haulers, it becomes nessacary to nerf both 0.0 and high sec.

A lowering in the total amount of trade taking place is infact a bad thing. 0.0 thrives on the income provided by moon goo and a number of other goods such as surplus high end mins such as morphite.

while id love jita to become some what less central to the whole trade scene, the fact is if you pick up some weird mod or have some items you want to get rid of and get a decent price, its the place to go to ditch it all.
and possibly come back with a bunch of other stuff you want.

until such time as that can be replicated in other trade hubs to at least the same degree, your idea would pretty much kill the game, trade would die off, and any projected increase in possible hauler kills would be just that, "projected".

the one part of your plan you fail to include is worm holes. the other day i stumbled upon a wh from high sec that dropped me 30 + jumps deep into Fountain.

When i lived in a WH, it was normal to see secured heavily armoured caravans moving goods between null / low to high sec via this method.

in fact this method if you can find suitable routes beats nearly all other methods. both in jump fuel cost and time.

Making it more dangerous to trade only seems like a good idea if you camp gates tbh. It would make the economy even more open to manipulation and definitely would increase prices by a wide margin.

Jita would still reign supreme as the trade-hub of choice and everyone else would either have to fly their cheap ships through massively camped gates, or pay more wherever else they happen to be at the time. Basically it would punish people for picking the wrong race. All of this is bad.

Also, this doesn't only change hauling for trade. It also effects hauling for personal stuff. Moving a dozen ships is already long dull and painful, moving them through pirate infested low sec is horrific. The net result is that it encourages not only people to never leave high-sec, but also to never leave amarr/jita/dodixie/rens. Joined a new corp ? Well you can either fly your ships through the biggest choke points in eve, or you can lose a minimum of 20% of everything you spent selling them. It didn't work out ? Well you can either sell up again, or run the gauntlet again.

In terms of PvP, this idea makes any empire pvp basically impossible. Run a locator agent on a target, and oh no there's a hundred pirates between my three dudes and him. So no pvp for us. Oh they all jump cloned into amarr space? So I guess this whole war is useless now.

If there are easy kills to be had, then people will take them, and just because you're only thinking about trading doesn't mean thats the only thing its going to effect. It would make eve feel like a much much smaller place, with incredibly cruel boundaries policed by jerks. It ensures that most if not all routes between trade hubs are impossible to traverse for everyone all the time.

'Pirates' as used to exist are a complete myth. You are thinking of 'privateers', but I'll let that go. And they did not outnumber the merchantmen ever. Nor did merchant ships travel alone, ever. Pirate ships were small and fast, and survived by every now and again picking off a straggler. The value of a ship and cargo taken would pay every man on a pirate ship for a year. There was no such thing as pirate infested waters, because the pirates had to constantly be moving, because the navies would come and kill them if they stayed still. They also needed a friendly harbour (no harbour would ever accept a freelance pirate btw because all sailors of all navies hated them, that's why you needed to be a privateer so you could use allied ports, and of course without a harbour you couldn't sell the hundreds of tons of cargo you stole).

Compare that to the results in eve. Pirates would be static, because there would be choke points. They need have no fear of being killed, because they can fly whatever ships they want in as many numbers as they want. They can immediately contact friends to reinforce them. Seeing a big fleet with escort ships approach wouldn't make them scatter, it would mean they got a more fun fight. They have a friendly port wherever they want them, because the game lets anyone dock in low sec. It is exactly the opposite of the romantic ideal of piracy you have. Far from the lone pirate against the masses of merchants, it would be masses of pirates against lone merchants.

this would be a big kick in the knackers for mission runners. when certain items rocket in price due to lack of supply, but their own income doesnt increase because bounties are static and the items they acquire through LP stores saturate the local market and lose value.

likewise, nocxium will lose value in amarr and caldari space, but become invaluable in minnie and gal space. interesting, but not agreeable.

If this were to be implimeted then they should also include a standings requirement for low sec POSes as well, to prevent easily jumping to a small anchored tower in a border system.

as one person once told me these wise words. We need to find a way to buff null-sec and low-sec without nerfing high sec, cause lets be honest with eachother, there will always be carebears that want nothing to do with the lower sectors. I'm sorry to say Ted, but this isn't the right way, cause you infact did NOT buff low or null-sec in anyways, but you nerf the hell out of high-sec to the point where major high sec corps would all but quit, traffic would come to a stand still, and your tower will come crashing down.

I'll I hear is let's isolate and separate the high sec regions making the life of a merchant even more difficult then it is.
If you isolate high sec like that freighters are ganna get less used. Right now you hardly see a freighter pilot fly flew lowsec at all.

The reason people don't fly through low sec very often is because most of low sec is not on the way to any significant markets. Null sec empires are markets, but they are not open to casual traders (not blue, shoot it). So of course nobody goes there, because there's no reason to.

If and when the four major empire hubs were separated by lowsec, there would be an EXTREMELY good reason to go there with a freighter or indy ship, and people would do it all the time (carefully).

This is sort of like my middle-sec idea. If 0.4 - 0.6 systems were all converted to middle-sec, then you'd have to go through middle-sec to get to other parts of highsec. All of a sudden, highsec would be contained in a few major "continents" instead of one single main region.

if you haven't heard of it before, my middle-sec idea is to make a part of space have illegal acts responded by a faction navy rather than CONCORD, making illegal attacks on players much more difficult than in lowsec yet not impossible to survive.

forums ate my text :/

I think that solo pvpers should be able to operate, but so should solo cargo-runners and other soloists. I think middle-sec would be a necessary step to getting a lot of highbears used to the increased danger of lowsec without thrusting them headfirst into it. And some people don't wish to deal with as much danger as you get being in lowsec, nullsec, or uncharted space. They may be willing to be active in middle-sec. It's basically just more opportunity for the individual player to choose their own risk level. And it goes without saying that the reward potential should scale with the risk.

Also, not sure if you were making a point about this or not, but small ships die much too easily to gate guns and player-owned stations. I think stargates should have a variety of turret sizes with varying DPS vs tracking. I think it should be possible to speed tank the gate sentries somewhat. A small frigate shouldn't have difficulty avoiding the large gate sentries. If it's really slick, it should avoid the medium sentries. That leaves only the small sentries hitting it and at somewhat reduced damage. Then it would be possible for it to be remotely repaired and stay in the fight. Similarly, I think that small POS turret DPS should be significantly reduced. A large POS fully armed with large turrets is unable to take out a well-tanked battleship if it has at least 2 logi focusing on it. But a large POS with small turrets will pretty much insta-pop even an assault ship, giving almost no time for logi to react.

Not if more Navy spawns for every illegal attacker. I didn't give details on my middle-sec idea, and you just assumed it wouldn't work.

I've already argued with this idiot about his idea. He's a butt hurt bad pirate who can only blob in lowsec or insta pop frigates. He's garbage and should be ignored.

so basically this would make low-sec relevant. I support this idea and ccp should take notice.

oh and brand new low-sec trade hubs!!! omfg

so anti pirate corps would become relevant as well?

I accept new ideas and what not, but you're essentially FORCING people to go through lowsec to get to the other side. You're wanting to bottle neck the industrial capacity, and the moving of assets. This will only support the PvPers. You're essentially changing the game from a sandbox style, to a set play style which CCP is absolutely against.

There needs to be a balance, and as of right now, there really isn't a balance in Low-Sec. It's not as profitable as it used to be, not a lot of people go there. So, I do support the idea of changing lowsec, but what you're suggesting is preposterous, and completely left winged.

Like I said, I support changes to lowsec and nullsec. Lowsec should be slightly more profitable than high sec, and that nullsec needs to be more profitable than high/low. There needs to be a reason to FIGHT for it.

i would hate to burst your bubble but ccp intended you to fly through lowsec to reach the other side. the sec of a system herp a derp should odviously go down the closer it gets to a faction it is at war with... but that would make sense.

well i'm sure it would be something similar to popular systems used for logistical reasons by 0.0 alliances. however due to the need to sell and interact/trade between factions would arise you will get something like mini trade hubs in lowsec.

Words created by a master online wordsmith

This has been suggested countless times since the beginning of EVE. There's a reason why it hasn't been implemented.

I don't really know what the reason is, but there is one! Otherwise, it would have happened.

The flaw in the idea is easy to see.

The entire concept relies on the assumption that being victimized is somehow fun for someone other than the mouth breathing baby eaters doing the victimizing.

This won't create any more targets, it will just force prices to rise universally as all shipments are either guarded or run with more expensive ships. That's why there are hordes of bored campers on all the lowsec pipes now... They have ruined any real profit potential, and most of EVE simply avoids them now. This change would simply restrict trade to machocists who don't mind dying defenselessly, or to those who can keep the pirates off. The vast majority of those who find fun in profiting off trade would do something else or just quit.

The changes to lowsec that would get bears in there involve there being some way to secure their safety so they can do what they want to do (protip: they don't find it fun to be hunted to extinction), not limiting their options to force them into being targets. As much of that fun revolves around making profit, limiting their potential for profit while making them a Target at the same time makes the game as a whole less fun for them.

I understand that the pirate finds it fun to attack defenseless ships for profit, and if they can ruin someone else's time online in the process that is just a bonus. Most of their targets do not find this sort of game play fun, and restricting their options to pressure them into it will only cause them to leave the game entirely rather than accepting a role as your prey.

Perhaps CCP should just implement NPC freighters that bleat in local when shot for the pirates to prey upon, with the value of their cargoes decreasing in systems where they die more, and increasing in systems where they die less to encourage the "pirates" to move around and hunt rather than sit and camp. All the better if the NPC freighters sometimes spawn NPC mercy escorts, with the strength of the escort being determined by the value of the cargo being protected. This would give them their easy, defenseless targets for profit spiced with tears, and maybe encourage a few more souls to try and enter lowsec space where the gankers have moved off to more profitable hunting grounds.

First off this suggestion is going to reduce economic activity. This is pretty much indisputable and it is something you strong imply in your first post. Reducing economic activity is not a good way to promote economic activity. It simply is not logically consistent. And it isn't fun. Having to spend more for ships and modules means people have to grind more for the isk, especially noobs who have more limited resources early on.

Second, you seem to be speaking out of both sides of your mouth. On the one hand a less risk averse player can make lots of isk by using a blockade runner, but blockade runners will be caught (snicker) by gate campers. Yeah, a smart bombing gate camp might stop them, but then again, if I see alot of people in system with lots of ship losses and pod losses I warp to gate at range, look. If clear warp off and warp back at zero and jump. If there is a camp, log at a safe come back later when gate is clear and continue on. If I wanted to be a real d*ck, I'd stay logged on for awhile and warn everyone about your camp.

You misspelled smaller. By having the empires separated the noobs world view will shrink not expand, at least initially.

"Safe harbors" are just silly. What kind of safe harbor? A pos? Have you tried to cyno in on a POS lately? You have to light the cyno a minimum distance from the shields now then slow boat in. Given that cynos are visible on both the overview and the universe map you basically are broadcasting: "NICE FAT TARGET HERE!!" And given super cap proliferation cynoing in on a POS in one of these border systems is going to be very, very risk with a very expensive ship. In fact, this idea would really, really help Goon's Miniluv. They have the manpower and the organization to watch for these safe harbors.

And an escort is just nonsense. In case you haven't noticed the primary form of combat in Eve is blobbing. You bring a 50 man escort you'll likely get dropped by an equal sized or larger hostile fleet. And you aren't going to have an escort for cargo that is worth chump change....no, you'll likely have valuable cargo. Again Goons and their Miniluv would eat this up with a spoon.

Industry does not become more dynamic with less competition, it is exactly the opposite.

why not just take a few corp-mates, or the whole corp... find the system(s) of your target for trading routes... setup a base of operations. war-dec the people in the system [bypassing all issues with CONCORD/HS] then run an interdiction campaign against them, and in Dec, bounty them also if an option...etc...

This you could do right now with existing mechanics... why not this? rather than changing the maps and all that?

T2 materials come from null sec, but he was talking about T2 items...i.e. modules which are made almost exclusively in hi sec. Null sec production is pretty much dead except for those things that require null sec (i.e. caps and super caps). Really, look at this article:

http://themittani.com/features/vision-thing

You keep saying this, but it is a dubious assertion. Lets consider another situation where there is less "inter regional trade" Gasoline blends in the U.S. In many regions there are regional blend requirements. That means if there is a sudden unplanned outage at a refinery in California you cannot ship gasoline in from say Idaho to cover the short fall and keep prices from spiking.

And this will, if anything, make it even easier to do.

Careful what you wish for, this might have just the opposite effect. At least of people in null, having a single market hub might be exactly the outcome. Go there and get everything you need vs. trying to go to different regions.

No, they don't. In fact, that would be stupid as it would drive up rents at stations and manufacturing slots in stations would become hopelessly clogged. When I was doing invention and manufacturing for isk, I was located at least 30 jumps from Jita. Nice quiet system where one could put up a research POS and with plenty of stations to build in and low rents.

Ok, so then you risk losing the Mach, a 1.3 billion isk ship (using Jita's current prices). Sure not as bad as losing the JF, but it still hurts.

There you go again talking out of both sides of your mouth.

On the one hand the POS with a bumping Mach is a safe harbor...on the other, it isn't cause large alliances might fight over those POS towers. And the second notion is silly. They aren't going to fight over the towers, they might fight at the tower as one group counter drops another, maybe.

Oh for God's sake....

Now it isn't just adding more low sec space, but now re-working freighters and jump freighters as well to mitigate the very effects you were initially saying were a good thing.

Yes, and there could be 1 blend of gasoline. My point, which you missed, is that having regional blends results in higher prices and price volatility. Economically, these are not "good things".

I don't see it as a problem. You are assuming it is a problem...i.e. you are making a problem out of a non-problem. Just because you don't "like it" doesn't make it a problem.

One would do it. And since you aren't going to be jumping around with crap cargo it might be lucrative as well. Grab a few buddies and RF the tower.

Half of what people do in this game is just to get some good tears.

I'm not talking about ores ffs.

I'm talking about everything. I used gasoline as an example. But what you are advocating is making each region more economically isolated. In fact, what this could do is make Jita and the Forge like it is now, but on steroids. Why? Because people in null don't want to be arsed running all over hi sec from trade hub to trade hub. They might very well, go "F*** it, Jita it is cause I know I can get pretty good if not the best prices and pretty much everything I need in sufficient quantity is there, and I can jump it back the various null regions." Sure getting it from Jita to Fountain might be a bit of problem, but then again maybe not considering the network of alliances and allies on that side of the map. Amarr might get a boost...maybe.

You have already noted this isn't a problem. For two reasons:

1. It is easy to get from anywhere in hi sec to Jita via hi sec and autopiloting.
2. Because of 1, prices tend to equilibrate--i.e. a guy can buy in bulk in Jita move it to where ever prices are high and make a profit. Competition over time will bring down prices in the area where there is a shortage.

Your solution will break both 1 and 2.

You may make the very problem you are complaining about worse.

When i saw this thread, i immediately thought about this Eve comic :
Concord
Credits goes to Wight Ithira. His thread

Factions War or not, Concord keeps securing the peace in galaxy for every capsuleer. Their new doctrine will be released Dec 4th 2012.
Capsuleers == $$$ == dev get paid == patchs every 6 months.

Basically, when we, Europeans, take our cars to visit others countries, we aren't ganked by pirates. But pirates are ganked by customs/faction police.
If we push further (let's say, East), we have a chance to be ganked by the Ex-DRF, or TEST. (Amarrians religious )

Eve reflects the world, let's keep our WTO (SCC) as it's now.
If you want to be a high sec pirate, Learn the rules, then find some way to avoid them.

I suggested this not long after I started playing eve 3 + years ago and got so flamed I never thought about it till now.


I must say I do like this idea, but to be fair u have to add enough crossings its impossible to completely shut down with camps.

Oh man that is one of the best ideas I've ever heard. Eve is by far too safe, and I say that as a carebear myself. I live in lowsec now and its everybit as safe as my last home in .5. Esp. now that I often fly 2b+ ships. Everytime I go to dodi I get at least targeted. Sure there needs to be a kiddie pool for the noobs and such, but in a game like eve you shouldn't be able to truly profit without taking huge risks.

As for how realistic this is, its a game. If realism was so interesting we'd all be outside. Though I do think a storyline could easily incorporate this idea. If I were a powerful gov/corp (as if there is a difference) I could see insulating myself from other powers by stretches of no mans land.

Man I'm going to share this post. What a great idea.

This won't make low-sec matter. See.... This is a game. It happens to be one that tolerates a certain sadistic element, and as a result we have a lot of that element running around. Mostly they congregate in lowsec where they can do their thing without consequence and in ways where they experience no real risk.

I'm a carebear. I'm not risk adverse, I simply control the risk I expose myself to so as to actually be able to enjoy my time online, as being the explodee in your little domestic abuse fantasy is not fun. There are a few that find playing those cat and mouse games amusing.... And they are out there already, bearing it up while evading you and having fun while doing it.

Here is the main point you seem to miss: carebears don't find sitting in a station all night fun, and they don't consider simply not exploding fun. They want to make Isk, run their mission or whatever they are there for in the first place. They are not there for the 'thrill' of sucessfully docking when hunted. You know what else isn't really fun? Escorting carebears while they do that. Pvp escorts generally can't help much with pve activities, and rarely do escorted bears get hunted to give the pvp enjoying escorts something to do, so those bears really don't have escorts as a real viable option. So those sadists get to either disrupt the fun of a single unescorted bear, or the fun of several of his friends.

It simply isn't fun to be hunted for most of the bears you want to shoot. Which is the point of course, its not fun for the sadists to shoot at people that find it fun to play that cat and mouse game, they want to inflict pain on those whom it actually hurts. It's not that they assume camps can't be evaded or avoided.... That's just not a game they find fun in any way, at all.

The changes you want won't bring about a new wave of targets, it will just upset the markets and drive up prices.

Look at the map. Going from Sing Laison (where I used to make stuff) to Rens and Hek entailed a significantly larger number of 0.5 systems. Systems that anybody looking to gank a freighter would use. Going to Amarr or Jita on the other hand had only one/two real choke points Uedama, Niarja. Looking at the region of Sinq Laison vs. Heimatar the latter has 26.3% more low sec systems. So yeah...Minmatar space sucks in terms of trade.

My argument is you are going to make things more like Minmatar space. Or at the very least Jita and Caladari space and Amarr and Amarr space may become even more clogged while Gallente space takes a hit and Minmatar takes the biggest hit.

Try again, this time ease up on the ceteris paribus assumption.

It is possible, but unlikley, because your reasoning above is lacking--i.e. it is relying too much on ceteris paribus.

No **** Sherlock, I'm not saying it isn't like that already. I'm trying to warn you that it might become worse.

If your beef is with Jita, buff null sec production. Null sec has everything in terms of raw materials for massive production, but the actual production process is horrible and not cost effective compared to hi sec.

Also fix nullsec industry while your at it.

It wont have the effects you are claiming. It may even have the opposite effects, and will drive up prices and destabilize markets, at least initially. In the end prices in general will be higher.

If you want more people in low sec, make low sec more interesting. Make it so people want to go there. Give them incentives to go in there and do stuff. Don't make it barrier to be overcome because then most will shrug and not go there, and those that do will go for the easiest/safest method...blockade runners.

I don't trade, I just run missions, and occasionally explode when I decide to try my luck against some sadist stealing my mission objectives.


That said, this change would raise my operating costs by causing price increases across the board due to the rise in operating costs/skill requirements of those who do trade. It would also restrict my movements, I like to try and keep my faction more or less ok between all the factions, and sometimes I move just to face different enemies, and thus get different salvage drops and that sort of thing. I don't mission in one boat, I like to fly different things depending on mood and whim, so when i move station I have to make several trips to move all my ships. In the short term, it prevents me from joining with friends new to the game and are not prepared to join our fleet by crossing through low sec where they will be shot and podded for giggles by the camps.

Yes, I am bad at eve. I don't care for most of its pvp, and pretty much just like to hang with friends and bear it up wherever the whim strikes tonight. Sometimes this means we all just drop into pods and jump 18 gates and buy new ships for the night. Sometimes we decide to max out faction with a corp or agent and hump one station for a month. Who cares? That's our playstyle and its as valid as any other. We should not be forced into the role of your prey solely because you prefer to pvp with people that don't like, and can't defend themselves from, being shot.

Anything that forces my non afk playstyle into lowsec is bad. Kill bots all you like.

Exactly. Those who enjoy the cat and mouse games already have ample opportunity and incentive to join you in lowsec. Forcing others there won't make it fun for them, they will just find something else to do, to the point of leaving the game entirely when all the fun has been sucked from the game due to this sort of change.

Lowsec is similar to the crime depressed areas of large inner cities. Lack of security for business and visitors have created economic wastelands where only those who cause the situation fare well. Everyone else just avoids the area unless they have no choice. The only way to get more targets into lowsec is to stop hunting your prey to extinction.

The point being YOU enjoy that kind of playstyle. When you bear you don't mind being driven off, its part of the sort of challenge you enjoy. Go you!

Others want to be able to do their thing, and don't like having to push a dscan button every few seconds, and don't enjoy the satisfaction of safely making it to a dock instead of completing their chosen activity (which in no way included being someone elses prey). That style of pvp is boring, annoying, and unenjoyable by pretty much every bear everywhere. Since there is no way to satisfactorily dealing with that unpleasantness, most choose to simply avoid it.

Or, there can be no change, my playstyle and that of the biggest part of Eve remains unchanged.


If it makes you feel better I will let you buy me a big stack of haulers and I'll try and run them through the gate of your choice for 10 million a pod. I hate being podded, I promise to cry about it real good. Just be sure the isk clears my wallet first.

The problem is that you are not asking people who enjoy pvp to come pvp you, you are asking for people to be forced into being your victim for economic reasons. You want CCP to be your pimp, and provide fresh meat for your pleasure with economic pressure. People who enjoy that pvp are already there, stacked up waiting for victims and apparently playing grabass with eachother. You like it so much grab a hauler and give them something else to grab.

It isn't that the economic reasons aren't there, its that the reward isn't high enough to be victimized repeatedly. You want a service, pay for it. Find someone who likes to be hit to come scream for you.

Do you know what ceteris paribus means? Your reasoning is fine IF we simply shift the demand curve. Then yes, prices will go down. But that isn't the only thing that happens. Long run supply and demand can change and likely will. So doing a short run analysis assuming just demand changes and nothing else is too simplistic.

In the long run case consider an exogenous increase in demand (suppose there is a patch where mission runners get a boost in income). In this case in the short run, producers will see an increase in prices. This will result in more profits. However, other players will see that increase in profits and enter into manufacturing. This will basically be a shift in the supply function meaning that prices will come back down. Will they come back to the original level? Maybe, maybe not. They could come down but still be above the original level or even below the previous level. Which of these three possibilities obtains depends on the underlying production costs. For example, if the production costs are constant at all levels of production then the price will eventually return to its original level. If it is a decreasing cost then the price will drop below its original level, and if it is an increasing cost it will be above its original level.

Look, you find it boring so what? This is a sandbox and there is plenty to do. Find something else. Other people seem to like doing freighter jobs. Yeah, weird I know not my thing either. But then neither are missions or ratting. Mining bores the hell out of me too. But I have found some ways to make isk and while boring I don't have to grind at it.
And making having a freighter full of (your) loot blown up is almost surely never going to be fun except for the people blowing up said freighter.

Yes, I am bad at eve. I don't care for most of its pvp, and pretty much just like to hang with friends and bear it up wherever the whim strikes tonight. Sometimes this means we all just drop into pods and jump 18 gates and buy new ships for the night. Sometimes we decide to max out faction with a corp or agent and hump one station for a month. Who cares? That's our playstyle and its as valid as any other. We should not be forced into the role of your prey solely because you prefer to pvp with people that don't like, and can't defend themselves from, being shot.

Look at what this guy wrote. This is what many hi sec dwellers think, or variants of it. Avoiding ganks in low sec is not their cup of tea. For those who might actually like a fight we aren't going to do it in a freighter (I challenge you to show me an awesome PvP freighter fit). Until somebody shows up in this thread saying, "OMG, I'd so love to play cat and mouse with a gang of low sec pirates in a charon. Bring it!" This idea strikes me as still born.

Attacking haulers isn't a "fight that matters". He is all but defenseless, and if he was properly escorted to provide some challenge in a fight would not be engaged.

I don't assume that i am typical, just that most of Eve is carebearish to some degree. The fact that there are fewer people in low and null sec by a few orders of magnitude seem to bear that out.

You asked how I would be affected, I told you. I can't help it if you don't like my reasons or find them pointless and easily circumventable.

The solution is easy. Pay me 10% and give me the ship to haul it in and Ill try to get any cargo you choose past any gate you choose. I will be your victim, or you will lose your high value cargo when I sell it at the local station. There is a fight that matters, as you must stop me and grab the ass of whoever else is around. I will even sob in local for you at the loss. You even get a second shot at my pod when I try to leave. It don't get better than that.

Wow...his point appears to have gone right over your head. It isn't that you are willing to go into low sec, but that he'd probably unsub if that was what he had to do to keep playing the game.

They might go, but only in a blockade runner and even then only when they deem it worthwhile. Sorry I don't see the big improvement other than you think the guys currently using freighters will find this much more fun (never mind that one can currently make the Dodixie-Jita run in 12 parsecs...wait no I meant through low sec and use a blockade runner) . This option is already in game...and most people simply don't use it. Precluding the high sec option does not mean people are simply going to switch to the low sec option. Some might, but others will bugger off to do other things.

You know what your problem is, you say these things as if they are 100% certain. However we are dealing with people who will go to great lengths to avoid things they don't like, or find short cuts, or even something else entirely neither you nor I have thought of. Look at my posts, I use words like:

likely,
maybe,
might,
possible.

You use words/phrases like,

will,
absolutely,
totally,
would not exist.[/quote[
[quote=commander ted]If you have a better alternative to minmatar space you are likely to trade their.

Also the number of low sec systems does not matter as long as you have one path with high sec. It's not like your physically going to clog it.

One path makes ganking much easier. Having a higher concentration of 0.5 and even 0.6 systems makes ganking that much easier. So yes, the overall security level of a region matters. This concept is implicit in your very proposal....low sec is more dangerous. 0.5 is more risk than 1.0. Try to gank in 1.0 and Concord is on pretty damn close to instantly, in 0.5 you'll have a number of seconds, with good skills 5 guys in Tier 3 BCs will gank a freighter.

This would effect zero change on anything, least of all pirate traffic. Most serious trade goes on through jump logistics, and via local harvesting and trading. What rare times it becomes more efficient to sell something in Amarr rather than Jita, those markets are quickly taken over and equalized by Jump logistics. Hell, in the time it took you to travel in your blockade runner from Jita to Amarr, somone has already taken the market you were about to fill, and you're left holding the bag. Making it more dangerous to jump would be a drain on the economy, and cause horrible price gouging in every place more than 4 jumps out from Jita.

What needs to happen is a need for local traffic to open up in lowsec, rather than encouraging high-sec traffic to pass through there.

In a universe of jump logistics and rapid manufacturing, simply changing geography makes almost no difference (unless you're Solitude, then that makes a hell of a difference). Actually speaking of Solitude, if what you're proposing happens, EVE will look like a giant version of Solitude. Having actually lived there for several months, I can assure you, this is NOT what you want. Most every thing there costs 2X what it costs in Jita, and its spread out across 6-8 jumps. Just assembling a t1 cruiser costs double what it costs in Jita, and it takes you an hour to fit. This isn't a recipe to fix eve, its a recipe to kill it.

TL;DR: There are better solutions to promote what you want.

I support this Idea. Completely separating the enemy factions would give more weight to the lore of the game. Also reduce the amount of control Jita has over the games whole market.

I would suggest keeping high sec links between Amarr-Caldari and Gallente-Minmatar space though. Since they're allies it makes sense that they would be closely connected.

The point you seem to be missing is that if it was actually fun, someone would already be doing it.

I notice you don't seem keen on giving me a high value target and seeing if I can get it past you to sell at a station of your choice. Put the one sided risk on your back and suddenly it's not such an attractive proposition, and my kill record shows clearly that I absolutely suck at anything resembling PvP. Your cargo would only be at risk if my exploding hull took it with me in the fireball, really.

It's not about the chosen activity. It's about the dynamic of all risk laying with the prey. The pirate does not care about the loss of ship, loss of sec status, loss of time, or anything else that's on the table in this sort of encounter. The bear, in general, cares about all of that, but could care less about being shot down to provide you with a target. Your suggestion is all about getting CCP to provide the pressure on the bear to get them into lowsec where you can shoot at them. It's not about makeing the game more fun for the bears, it's about making it more fun for you at the bear's expense.

Heck, if you want this kind of challenge just put up some buy orders for a maurader or 3 at 1.5 billion ISK and wait for people to try and fill the order for you. You lose if they make it, you win if they don't. If you are a sucessful pirate you will walk away with a few shiny new marauders and a cancelled buy order. Or you will lose your isk. Either way, the risk isn't really one sided at that point, but the hauler won't know that and will still cry for you if you catch him.

So... Its boring to wait for your high value Target, you want fresh meat to be delivered to your doorstep everytime you get hungry.

How about the poor sod who gets to sit in station, leave or log off because eveytime he tries to do what he came for he gets jumped? It's not like he has the option to fight and survive, much less actually accomplish his goal, which I will again point out had nothing to do with being the object of some sadistic domestic abuse fantasy. His options upon seeing anyone appear in local, or if he's super dedicated waiting until he sees probes, is to safe spot and cloak or dock, either way waiting until his huntees decide to allow him to play the game again.

It just does not get more simple--- what you want to happen isn't fun for your intended prey, and therefore making the change you request would not have the result you imagine. Those people that enjoy that sort of gameplay are already out there, bearing it up in low sec and having a good time evading you.

What you want is for someone to play mouse to your cat. There are ways to accomplish this without forcing it upon those who hate it. All you would accomplish are a few unsubs and maybe some market fluxes.

He says it himself, when he isn't denying it. He wants to change the map so that economic pressures push haulers into lowsec. I suppose I could be wrong about him and there is just a more plentiful supply of rosewater and turtlewax for buffing thier hulls to nice luster in lowsec, but I doubt it.

He wants more targets, does not want to waste time finding or baiting them in, and especially not when anything of his is at risk other than a throw away gank ship and maybe some implants. That's all directly from him. He seems to be under the mistaken impression that the people avoiding lowsec like the plague ridden wasteland it is will realize all the fun and excitement they have been missing as his prey, and will be eager and grateful for being shown how much fun victimization can truely be.

He wants to make the game more fun for him at the expense of a group that does not find the sort of gameplay he favors fun. This change would make more money for couriers, at the expense of everyone buying whatever the courier is carrying. That isk won't magically appear as a bonus in the couriers wallet as a prize for a successful evasion, the idea at its most basic levels relies on market upsets, that's where the pressure to create his influx of targets come from.

It's simply a bad, self serving plan to force a playstyle on a playerbase that hates that kind of play. It is a game. People play it for fun. What he wants isn't fun, so people don't do it much. He wants to change things so that the economic pressures will cause more people to take the risk despite it being not fun, so that he can inflict that not fun on them. Somehow this will magically make it fun.

Trade between the empires would be ruled by jump freighters.

AHAHHAHAAHHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAAHHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAH.

Maybe you should try playing eve before commenting on how to fix it....

Frankly, it robs you of any and all credibility. A JF pilot is always full. If he isn't full on what he was contracted to move, usually a JF pilot will pick up a contract or two, or even at worst, speculate and buy ships/modules to re-sell wherever he's going.

JF's were DESIGNED to make logistics simpler. They came to being in EVE after people complained mightily how hard it was to transport things around empire, and from empire to 0.0. They were intentionally and specifically designed to be MUCH more competitive than industrial ships, and essentially relegated all shipping traffic to Jump Freighters. Complaining that this needs to be challenged is like the horse salesman saying there should be a range-limit on cars so that he can sell more buggies. The only reason to use any other ships is when you're intentionally hauling a small quantity of things 'the last mile', or 'the first mile'.

Jump Freighters are cats that cannot be put back into their metaphorical bags. Haulers still do have an important function to perform in eve- hauling minerals the first and last miles to their specific destinations, and making short, safe highsec-highsec hops.

I suggest you go back over the last few posts of Commander Ted and look for the word "force". Its there.

Or train reading to level 5.

That is not what you wrote. You want to force more risk on jump freighters....apparently more than they already have.

Do you own a jump freighter? Just curious, you seem to lack knowledge of flying these ships. You can't cyno into or all that close to a POS. Given the speed slow boating in takes awhile. Bumping is possible, but there is some risk since a bad bump could send you off in a strange direction. Cynoing in far off the POS (say 160km) and using a webber and warping in is another option (or having a well placed bookmark that when you warp at 100 you land in the POS shields) is also an option. Still it is not without risks with the current mechanics. And they are rather expensive ships (a rhea goes for over 8 billion now...Christ....).

At both of you guys:

Just throwing this out there... but with a jump range of 5 light years, there would almost certainly be at least some point through the belt of low-sec systems where you could simply jump from high sec to the other high sec, without going through the belt at all... Wouldn't there?

Seems kinda relevant to the discussion, one way or the other.

I've seen cynos dropped right on top of a gate to high sec, so I don't know why you'd need poses or any of that crap.

A few points.

1) separating factions with low sec would hurt everyone but the strongest of alliances.

2) The area between two countries/factions is there point of defense. They should be heavily guarded areas not no man's land.
The only true to life example of what the OP is suggesting is the border between north and south korea. However, that isn't even a good example because people are allowed through, it just has to well planned in advance. Also, it wouldn't count as low sec. Low sec essentially means there's limited rules. The korean border is more of an anything in that area is destroyed by the governments.

3) Separating factions would break the market. Everything would be very costly.

4) players would simply conform. Everyone would either move to caldari space, or make the best with what they have.

5) would give major alliances like goons way too much power over the market.

7) would kill competitive trading.

8) Major alliances would have too much power and control over Eve.
It's bad enough that they're able to shut down ice mining, and trade hubs in general without any sandbox response from the factions. Thus, with split high sec they would basically be able to claim complete control over gallente high sec.

9) Doing this would probably be the start of the end for Eve. You would lose factional traders, then low end pvpers cause everything cost too much to risk blowing up. Then carebears cause they wouldn't be put in check by said pvpers and would get bored. Market prices would become even higher due to the lack of minerals and salvage. Then one alliance or coalition would try to take advantage of the lack of items available on the market and would weed out smaller alliances.
Those players would quit. Eventually, all that would be left is the strongest alliance with nothing to buy and no reason to buy it.


Obviously, the design Eve currently uses is perfect how it is, but if you're willing to risk destroying Eve, then go ahead and push this issue. However, good luck gettin ccp to listen cause. I'm sure they're well aware this is a terrible idea.

You assume alot of **** will happen for which there is little reason to believe there will. For example, I doubt many with an obelisk will try going through W-space. No local, and needing quite a bit of luck to get an exit near where you want to go. Also, cloaky haulers are not a substitute for freighters. Seriously you ever do hauling, I mean serious hauling like say 10,000 robotics? You know how many trips you'd need in a crane or viator? Game play worth doing? F-ck that! You do it.

And there is good reason to think Amarr and Jita might get bigger.

1. Ice never runs out, so ice products in Caldari/Amarr space wont be an issue.
2. Minerals, aside from high ends, wont be an issue. Why? Many missions have plenty of low ends to mine. Thus the true number of belts in a region has an upper limit dependent on the number of missions being run.
3. There are lots of moons in Caldari and Amarr space...over 14,000 in fact.

Okay, just a quick disclaimer, just cutting down on the size of the quotes to make posts less huge, no attempt to be misleading here.
.

+1 great idea you have here Ted

disclaimer: I still think allowing gases to be held in an Orca ore bay is more important

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=177612&find=unread

Couple of quick points:

You really think people are going to put 5,000 robotics into an iteron V and run it through a dozen or more low sec systems? Really? No. For that you use a JF. Somethings will be moved via claoky haulers, some by JF. The rest, probably not moved except when added to a JF cargo that is too big for a cloaky, but small enough to justify tossing in some other crap.

Regarding wormhole travel:

And if the other end is closed and the one you jumped in from closes behind you? 1.4 billion in ship, and who knows how much in cargo pretty much lost.


No. Why does it have to be immediate or 100%? Really, this underscores your lack of understanding of economic processes. Substituting away from something does not mean it is immediate and 100% except in a very rare case (when goods are perfect substitutes, which is very rare). Still there could be some substitution effect and it could take awhile, and people bordering the appropriate low sec might be able to get some ice via null. But this kind of thing means you might be wrong in your conclusions.

TL;DR: Stop stating things with absolute certainty and going to the most extreme answer FFS. It just makes you look stupid.

And as for POS and manufacturing, I don't need Gallente. In fact Gallente aren't special or great for things like invention or building, they are good for moon mining and reactions in that they get a silo bonus (and in case you aren't aware of this, you can't do reactions in hi sec). A Caldari POS might work just fine. Just a quick look at the Caldari control tower tells me you could have a 2-3 assembly arrays (if you are making components) and 5 or 6 mobile labs with room to spare.

There you go again, stating things with absolute certainty (A side question, if you are this brilliant at figuring out what thousands of Eve players are going to do...why are you posting here and not turning your simply awesome powers towards becoming richer than Warren Buffet or something?). Of course it could happen...or not. As I noted a Caldari POS would work just fine.

Here is a quick hint: if your prices go up due to a general rise in the price level, it doesn't follow that your profits go up. You have to factor in the rise in production costs and a very real possibility of a drop in the quantity you will be producing since demand may take a hit. Fewer economic transactions do not usually make people better off as a general rule of thumb. If the price of the good you are selling is the only thing that increases, then yes, in the short run your profits go up.

Currently if i look arouind in low sec, i find so many gate camp and really i was looking at some camps for some time, and mostly it was always the same.
If something move in that can shoot back the campers cloak or run, if a freighter or anything else that cant shoot back move in, they attack.

You don't need more low-sec. The real problem is that system security is a hard limit.

There's no practical difference between 1.0 systems and 0.5 systems, and then suddenly you jump into 0.4. That makes hi-sec a big area, leaves almost no dangerous waters in between, and reduces all pirate activity to camping a single 0.4 system everybody has to go thru.

It should be more of a gradient. CONCORD in 1.0 should be like today, but everything below that should have less and less patrol ships / sentries, with increasing response times, such that there's small difference between 0.5 and 0.4. Then you have more dangerous waters, but on the other hand, the safest route is less predictable because you don't have this hard limit between hi/low anymore.

Security penalties for engaging other ships should be gradual too, depending on the system security.

I will toss this out there again...

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=164340&find=unread


Different Idea but will have a similar impact on haulers.

personally i think all sov should be more dynamic and should change on various factors/variables.... i think in peace time it would make sence there would be high sec routes connecting the empires but now they are at war... so this should no longer be thecase...

This would definitely boost hauling ISK/hour while being active. AFK Hauling is still possible within a region.

Perhaps only separate by lowsec based on the ongoing war and allies. Hauling from Caldari/Amarr to Gallente/Minmatar gives you no choice but to smuggle through lowsec (active hauling + T2 Industrials + escorting/scouting freighters vs gate camping)

The "Amarr <---> Caldari" and "Gallente <---> Minmatar" regions could still be connected by an infamous 0.5 system chokepoint (AFK hauling vs suicide ganking).

the eve map just needs to be BIGGER for the amount of players we have.

And lag, don't forget lag!

For those not old enough to remember: Empires were in fact separated by lowsec at one point, it broke Eve, and had to be removed.

Tried and failed. /thread

Dear op you are so wrong.

Do you (or any of those wholeheartedly supporting this) know that it was like that back in the ancient beginnings of EVE? And even in times of 30k total subs and 5k online it made travel from one empire to empire impossible.

Now add to the picture HICtors, sensorboosted T3s and Ti3s and the fact that there is now 50k online.

Might as well shard individual regions to new servers. People would hire transports and everyone would just move to Caldari space.


Much more mportantly, idea of piracy not making enough money is laughable. You are either doing it wrong or have a completely skewed picture about how much isk is "decent income".
All relevant pirate corps have their own Titans and couple moms each, with extensive cap fleets, their fleet doctrines are Vindies and Machs and they fly and lose two billion pimped and linked 100mn ab Legions and Tengus solo for lulz. "Successful pirates" are already in situation where if you check their kb data you can see some that even if the derp 5 bil per month for random solo or small gang lulz, their daily camping allows them to have 95% isk efficiency.

If you just want easy isk , get a dozen Taloses or Tornados, go to Niarja or Uedema and stand in line. Never ending stream of flying pinatas.

I dont agree with this idea

The issue with Eve isent highsec, leave high sec alone it works as it is... If you lowsec / null people dont have targets are lonely, furstrated etc, well maybe you sohuld ask yourself why, and not try invent ways to get what you want on the expense of those that like high sec as it is...

Well you have the epic arch newb mission, that be affected, since if i rmember right spans across Gallante, Minmatar, Amaar...

And depending on how the borders are drawn, it affect pyro/kernite and omber/plagioclase

Also is for me i actually try check prices on where i sell my MInerals, it will reduce where i can make the most profit. it will cut the universe 1/4 for me

The idea initself isent bad, i kind of like it, but i wont support something, where pvpers in Low and null, bascially shot themself in the foot, and this is just anouther exuse for pvpers to gate camp and destroy targets that most of the time cant ewen fight back...

I really like to see ideas how low and null be more apealing to high sec people, this isent the way... sorry i dont have any good options how to fix low, i wish i could, but high sec works so leave it alone

It's where all the 'leet gankers can hang out and complain about the lack of defenseless targets after they murdered everyone that poked their head through a gate.

It's a bad idea, because we want a functioning economy in EVE. What you propose would demolish the game unless something changes in the attitude and behavior of the average low sec dweller.

Been there, done that. My first several pvp losses in EVE were exactly what you ask. At a time when I could barely afford a Vexxor I was losing them to Broadswords on a gate, trying to deliver a freaking mission pack.

It's been a few years, I know better now. I've been and come back from Null, I know how to deal. It's simply not worth the hassle. What you ask won't do what you want, it will kill the game for any bear that isn't an isk making alt or bot.

My point was that it would ruin the game for those that are NOT bots.

This harms those that want to actually play the game part of the game, not the part where they are space pinata.

The logic here is very simple. If trading were going to be so easy to avoid low sec despite these changes, why bother? If it does not do anything but make stuff a little harder on folks, what's the point?

Point is that you are soft selling the hardship you want to cause so as to get yourself some fat new targets delivered fresh to your door daily, in such a way that you don't have to do any work for it and the risk remains 100% on the bears you want to hunt that are currently evading you.

You need an chain of events, to reach such a state of affairs.
Today -> something happens -> something happens -> What you are describing becomes a reality.

Ideas about " something happens ":

Incursions gone wild,
Empires turn their attentions inwards,
failing to see the end game tactics of the invading NPC's:
which was annihilating border fortifications and managing partial or overpowering takeover.

GIve or take one or more " something happens "

There is a very serious problem though,
what about all the people, that are just playing for the graphics and chill.

Maybe a limited effect of " end game tactic " (not all boarders are split)

. . . -> something happens . . .

More " something happens " ->

There are occupational opportunities here,
escort missions across disputed territory
( between CONCORD and NPC ).

Territory that does not necessarily permit Players to engage other players,
yet the NPC would. . . or not..

Seperating empires with lowsec would create a more lively and dynamic lowsec. That is fine for the portion of the players that like that sort of thing. Got anything for those that don't? I mean other than some ammo comming our way? Those that like that sort of thing are already there. It's a sandbox game, and some of the pirates are whining because no one wants to come play with them---in a game where play with them means a zero sum fun/no-fun scenario.


I'm not prejudiced. I just don't like playing in an area where my playstyle makes me a fat, easy kill. I don't even like passing through that area, because of the hassle that getting through there 'properly' entails. I can, I just don't want to, and as it's a sandbox, I should not have to.


Adding in a PITA and requiring most travel between game areas include dealing with mouth breathing baby eaters is just simply not a good idea for the majority of playstyles.

My guess is, you'd get downvotes by haulers and upvotes by pirates, whichever side is prevalent on these forums would "win". In any case, I believe the idea to be bad, you're essentially trying to force low sec down the people's throats, which rarely ends well. Give em a reason to leave high sec and I assure you, they'll do so en masse, no silly forced solutions are necessary. True traders will follow wherever the customers are, even deep in null sec.

when I read the first ime, I enjoy the idea.

But after reflexion i'm fear that cool idea will be hijack by Big corporation / Alliance behaviour.

See, to obtain a "safe" transit between two empires, Big alliance may "secure" the path with a lot of ressources at their disposal and make easily difficulties for all other capsuleers to transit without ransonning or worse.

In that case, we didn't speak about piracy anymore but ascendany of big alliance on the High sec game play !

For the love of God stop pretending that you'd get anyone who is currently sworn to not go to low sec other than random nub to actually go there if your idea was implemented.

Black Frong would make a killing and that's it. Already majority of players are concentrated in Caldari space. Your change would make every empire high sec just like Solitude. How many people are currently in Solitude, how many of total EVE population have ever been to Solitude.

You'd concentrate 90% of dedicated bears in Caldari space and nothing more. Ofc that would be a improvement for suicide gankers and salvage ninjas.

this old thread again?

I hate this idea. What really determines what is secure, and unsecure space, is concords willingness to patroll it, and the four empire's support and funding for concord to do so. Without full highsec connectivity between the trade hubs, and other key locations, diplomatic missions, trade convoys, and more, would be highly dangerous, and would result in heavy losses for the empires. Additionally, the Caldari State and Amarr Empire are allied, as are the Minmatar ductape-ublic, and Gallente Cesspit, for them not to have fully policed and patrolled connections between their empires, is nonsensical.

This idea is poorly thought out, not just on a lore perspective, but the damage it would cause to the game, that would affect all areas.

why don't you guyz just roam 0.0 or FW-systems? why do you sit there in lolsec waiting all day for someone coming through "your gate"?

I mean, I see why you have that much time to think over horrible and stupid ideas, given the fact that sitting there and waiting for easy targets isn't exactly that kind of amazing thrill, but why don't you change your playstyle instead of proposing changes to everyones game?

I don't get it. If Highsec bores me too much, I move to another place. Why don't you do the same?

Commander Ted...

I took the liberty of bringing this subject up at the low-sec round table the other day at Fanfest (because i very much enjoy the concept for largely the same reasons you do).
Some of the DEVs adored the idea and expressed that they had toyed with it as a concept. Other DEVs were more lukewarm. The general sentiment among them though was that such a change now would be "too much of a shock to the system" and that they probably won't do it unless they hypothetically make a new game.

HOWEVER... the DEVs did express a desire to make low-sec both desirable for those who wish a more... unsavory... lifestyle without making it too attractive to null-seccers. They basically "want low-sec to be like the ghetto of a city... lots of alleyways, corners, and blind spots that the locals will know and use against massive groups that are used to using main battle tanks on open battlefields" (these are more or less their exact words, not mine). Unfortunately no solid ideas were expressed about HOW they would achieve this... but this is what they WANT to do.

Here's the thing:

Most of those "make lowsec more attractive" - "suggestions" try to do exactly one thing - force people to go through lowsec. The thing this primarily does is: More targets at gates.
Secondary effect might (!) be: more gangs trying to break up camps

Your still terrible suggestion is exactly this - you want to force people through lowsec to produce more traffic at gates, but what the hell do you think those people would do there? Right, they would travel from gate to gate to gate till they are finally back in empire. While I agree that this might provide some "opportunities" for PVP, it's just at the expense of others who would rather avoid PvP.

99.9% of such "suggestions" are exactly this. And this is just another episode of it.

Lowsec doesn't need people forced into it, lowsec needs people who WANT to be in there.

btw: I couldn't care less about running the damsel in 4 empires, I'm excluded to gal/min anyway and there are no plans to change it.

Because your opportunities are highly questionable. Why do you need to force people into lowsec to set up camps for hours?

You can produce such opportunities right now - set up your camp and wait. But no, instead of doing so, you want more easy targets in the meantime, through forcing people into lowsec.. Hell, camp entrance to providence or something like that - you will have plenty of fights easily.

Maybe you got an impression now for why I'm calling you a scrub-camper? Your arguments are all about getting moar eazy targets. Go gank some miners, can't be that hard.

Necroing this crap won't make it happen.

This was the case back in beta. It had to be fixed because it broken Eve. And there were a lot fewer ppl camping pipes back then, btw.

Stuff

My point is to reduce the capability of controlling losec systems by any party, large or small, while allowing players to get lost in the expanse.

Essentially, making losec more valuable, less controllable, and more expansive. Because the biggest problem with losec is not the pirates, but the overwhelming odds for solo-small gang play and large organized outfits. There's no middle ground, because if you do get any kind of operation going, you get a hot drop or pegged by several cap ships.

The size of the engagements quickly escalate, discouraging those who have tried from returning, and encouraging those intent on staying to amass larger and larger numbers.

For someone who wants to see things changed you sure are enthusiastic about shutting down conversation. Maybe you should listen to the ideas of others and try to learn something.

Regarding the idea of lowsec as a place with lots of little "back alleys" and it's own sort of "terrain" I have wished for a long time that the pirate stargates that you encounter through missions and other content were actually gates, and I think this could be a good addition to lowsec. Keep the "highways" of the currently known gates, but add a network of smuggler gates, possibly accessible based on standings, that people familiar with the area could use to circumvent camps and catch up to prey, in a similar manner to how nullsec sov holders use jump bridges.

Your counterpoint is that if you keep it small and force individuals to pass through it, you'll increase content and not force pirates to have to work so hard. I get that.

But from the looks of it, that is how losec currently is, and that system hasn't worked too well until faction warfare came along.

Instead of being funneled into content that they are not ready for, most smart players (read, not necessarily risk averse, but smart enough to equip for what they intend to do) will simply stick to their respective factions, unless they are using alts to do a quick highway run between empires.

Amarr empire, if closed off by losec, can survive without Jita. It lives perfectly fine when Jita is on fire, and it worked perfectly fine when the trade hub highways were thrown out. There will be more market independence, which I personally like, and it will add more flavor, which I also like.

But if your goal is to generate pirate content and conflict, I'm trying to point out that this would not happen. Much as your stating the flaws in my ideas, I'm stating the flaws in yours. Bottleneck losec more, without somehow increasing the need to travel through it, and you'll actually reduce the traffic.

And Jita isn't as much of a need as newer players who haven't been around through the changes in trade hubs would know.

It's been pointed out that your "letting goons permacamp Jita pipe for lulz" idea is a steaming pile. Yet you just kept holding your nose and flinging it at ppl.

I was thinking this lately. And there should be definitely more faction warfare between the empire spaces. But it would be nice if there was 2-3 different 0.5s jump routes through it. Since even the factions were at war commerce should still thrive 0.5s systems already bring enough risk for freighters. IF there was not these jump routes. We would need more industrial ships. That were capable of cloak that were rather easy to train. To also give new players a chance.

I like this idea but not the original terms perhaps. Yet a bump! Eve should give more faction warfare and actually fair fights than pirate coward ganking.

Didn't CCP Soundwave say something about High-sec being too "Homogenous".

I like the general idea but I think the execution isn't spot on. Im of the opinion that there should be much more low-sec systems between the 4 empires but only a handful of hi-sec systems jumpgates that connect the 4.

That way people can still Haul stuff between the 4 empires only it will requier travelling through a choke-point, making it more risker to go from faction space to faction space.

So as said I do agree about the low secs. Perhaps even breaking the 0.5s links between empires and changing them to low sec. Yet this change would affect so many things that its not a simple change to make.

Even if this was true (it's not), why is this a problem?

[

I can tell you right now that my home Empire of Amarr would have a distinct advantage in a separate market system like the one proposed. More pilots on average, more space, more stations. Especially if the Ammatar and Derelick regions are still considered Amarr and aren't separated by losec. Some tweaking and balancing would be needed to allow them to be separate, but not give too many advantages.

If you break the empires up, just by removing one key system on each highway, what stops all the hisec carebears from moving to one region together and just flooding it? Instead of Jita being the trade hub, each region has their own hub but everyone just lives in Amarr space.

Stuff

It can also be seen as forcing faction warfare to take a larger part. Tie a few systems sec status to fw results. Amarr and Caldari kick ass? Make one highway route 0.5. Amarr losing but Caldari winning? Highways secure on the Caldari side.

Next thing you know, hisec industry and trade is more intricatly tied to the war effort.

And borders...

I semi like this idea, the reason I dislike it is because knowing players these in between systems would become like Rancer or Amamake, that's not to say that the idea itself is bad though, 0.5 bottlenecks seem to be rather dangerous anyway if you are carrying valuables.

All in all I do strongly dislike the way eve just 'cuts off', and would prefer a more gradual slide of protection and benefits (blops allowed to jump in and out of 0.5s, killable concord or maybe just have the navy as system defence there instead in 0.4 and 0.5)

Its a tough one.

Earlier today I saw a freighter being escorted by players from the same corporation, this I find is extremely rare in highsec and is possibly because its so safe they don't usually feel the need to have an escort?

Get a bunch of pure hisec occupants and start securing rancer or something. It CAN be done, but the level of dedication and organization required is opposite of what most casual gamers can commit to.

Still, there were players shooting TEST and Goonies and helping Concord. Just because we don't have a lot of time to play, doesn't mean we can.t defend ourselves.

Hisec =/= Carebear

Hisec = Secure

You can find carebears in every type of space, and with the upcoming expansion, you'll find far more in Null.

I've never really known why the highsec empires needed to border one another. The area people do FW in is pretty small too.

I really like the idea of CCP grabbing the four corners of the Empire Space and ripping them apart leaving a ton of lo-sec regions between them.

As a concession I wouldn't mind the radius of the region gates to be made a little bigger - or more region gates to be put up into this new dead man's land. Amamake and Rancer aren't fun - It's kinda "Yeah, I get it" - but meh. There's something about Rancer that is just naff - whereas me losing my massive freighter off of Atlar was kinda fun (in a morbid way) it was a chase of sorts.

And my story of losing that freighter is a case-in-point of why splitting the empires up would be good. My Freighter was on it's way to the Orien Island of High-sec southeast of the Minnie High Sec. It WAS worth the risk - I'd done similar stuff before - in Amamake - risk/reward - read the EVE Kill comments on that kill - Turn Left are ace PVP'ers and I still nearly got my Freighter away!! We play games for fun - and that was fun - the chase had my heart rate up a fair bit. Afterwards loads of people started turning up to see if they could get the lootz too - dunno if there were any fights over it.

So yeah - Split up empire space - Go for it!

This idea gets GG's stamp of approval.

Getting players to actually be sitting at thier computer instead of afking freighters all day making abundant amounts of isk would probably reduce suicide ganking a bit as well. This would also encourage newer players to experience low sec space while exploring different faction space without forcing them to PvP. Its reasonably easy to get through low sec in a frigate.

Although I can see the argument pop up about how easy it is to lose implants via being podded for less experienced pilots and that high sec players shouldnt be forced to use empty clones or update clones when something goes wrong because they're unsure how to get away in their pod quickly

Oh look, your alt thinks it's a good idea. And lol @ "escort."

Yeah? No one cares.

Do you want to get some super awesome tears from a nearly endless source of carebears? Go into an anom system in nullsec (Military 5) with a cloaky. Watch as the tears stream in from all the nullbears, mainly because they can't run their bots or anoms. Nullsec anom systems are quite possibly the biggest concentration of carebears in EVE.

People say that no one has a right to anything in EVE right?

So why do people feel they have deserve an easy, minimal risk target rich environment?

That's what this proposal is asking for in a nutshell.

TL;DR

Carebear
Noun
A word used by generally unemployed/unemployable males to describe anyone who they dislike in a video game, usually teenage virgins or "men" in their 30s and 40s with no life.

Any time anybody is advocating for something that will raise prices for the greater good of everyone else, it is ******* bullshit. That person is advocating higher prices to line their own pocket.

step closer to WOW

WTF are you talking about? Right there in the OP the claim is that the goal of this is to reduce trade. Reducing trade reduces competition.

Now, if you disagree with that probability assessment that is fine, but it would be nice if you said why you think that Jita will lose ground. For example, I used to invent/manufacture in Sinq Laison. If I decided to keep doing that and this change was announced what would keep me from moving to Caldari space if I wanted to avoid these low sec regions prior to the patch that introduces these changes?

We've been over this before.

For example, inventors rarely use station slots as they are already taken up now. Inventors put up POS so they can:

1. Work on PE/ME of their BPOs.
2. Do invention.

The idea that the lack of stations is a constraint is not really valid given the vast number of moons in Caldari and Amarr space.

So, I'm going to TL;Dr the rest of your crap, because you still haven't learned how to use dotlan.

Seems I struck a nerve there.

The problem we're having here is that neither side can back up their arguments with facts, because we're talking about a possible change and not even specific details, and people on both sides are getting way to butt-hurt over being disagreed with.

1. Pirates don't have as many targets as they want isn't a problem, it's the obvious and inevitable result of their playstyle. The change seeks to place pressure on the rest of the game to force victims into their traps.

2. The "problem" has several solutions that require the pirates to be proactive and involves activities that they dislike being involved in. They would rather force that burden onto others rather than adjust their own playstyle to accommodate their own needs.

This could make it worse.

I don't get the issue with this one.

I have thought of this idea before, but it really doesn't make a lot of sense when you really think about it.

The 4 empires wouldn't want to cross low sec to get their goods to or from another empire and risk it. So their natural solution to that would be ensure that their trade routes are more secure. Hence no low sec between empires.

No saying its a bad idea, but it wouldn't be a very natural evolution.

I'd rather they be separated with middle-sec, but I do feel that separating them with lowsec is better than leaving them how they are currently.

Your choice of wording caught my attention. When your talking about the risk-averse, it's carebears. But the ones shooting each other are pvpers ... until they have 'overwhelming force'.

I'm just saying. You're tilting your cards a little there.

I'm glad you're looking for ways to enhance your gameplay -- but there's a problem with how you're doing it. You want to enhance your gameplay at the cost of someone else's.

The Matari and Gallente empires would enforce hisec space between themselves to ensure continuation of trade. Likewise the other two. Atm concord does the enforcing. Separating them all by losec makes no sense storywise.

Separating the 2 factions by losec may affect FW. Or maybe not.

I like this idea. It makes sense. However, if you have to go through low sec to get from one empire to another, this would REALLY shrink the map for new players. That's about the only real con I see and it can be overcome with a little creative thinking.

[quote=Commander Ted]

Having one or two safe routes between empires is an idea, but it would create huge choke.

This idea is always regurgitated by bad PvPers.

Most people don't want to PvP, so some Wow Kiddie "ELITE PVPer" (who runs from any fight that they don't out number the other team 5:1) comes up with the brilliant idea to **** all over the "sandbox" aspect of Eve and force players to play his way.

JITA is not high sec, JITA = low sec in ccp mind,
In fact, ccp is doing this in other ways , so.....

stuff

Also Firetails are cheaper in Jita because Jita has the highest trade volume. Meaning there are more sellers and buyers and depending on the item(s) demand there could to be more sellers than buyers which lowers the price. For example, Jita sells about 100-300 Firetails per day, while Rens will sell only 50-150 per day. Not to mention Jita has about over 2k firetails on the market while Rens has only about 100. If you look at the ratio of Firetails sold per day to what's on the market it's only common that Jita prices of firetails will drop since it only sells about 100-300 but has over 2k on the market.

Well first off there are regional trade hubs. Are they as big as Jita? No.

Second what you're suggesting is basically a way for those who are currently rich and wealthy to take over markets. It'll be like the an EvE version of Wall Street and the Big Banks. Which means everyone will be screwed while the few will benefit. The game will turn from ships in space to rich in space.

Pretty cool idea but I rather see something like this imposed in null sec space maybe not with trade but with more resources.

How can they become as big as Jita? All the sellers/buyers will disperse throughout the regions. You will see an increase of market activity in the local regions but they certainly won't be nearly as big as Jita currently.

Yes while Jita is around 2k sometimes more (or would be if the servers could handle more). So as I said they will increase but no where near the level of what Jita is currently.

By the way do you know what the population levels are? If Minmatar space is more active than others or less active then you have some imbalances. Especially with factional warfare.

Still a bad idea. Overall, it will limit game play activity for some or even many. If what I play between two empires? (Techincally I sometimes do). So if I want to go to another empire space faction with my Battleship or BC. I can a take a chance of flying it through lowsec or B. Buy another BS or BC and established a second HQ in the other empire space, or C. Just limited my stay in my own regional space (basically creating a high sec within a high sec). It will also remove hauling services as there wouldn't be much activity with industrial or freighters.

Some may try A. and B. but only those who have the isk for it.

The major point being made is that low sec is unused and in need of revamp. It would be a good way to incorperate Lowsec back into the game by tieing it into Highsec. Then again i suppose that it is possible for people to remain risk adverse and live in each of the 4 empires without leaving them for their entire eve career.

You still fail to understand that this sort of gameplay is not in the least bit interesting or fun to your intended targets. If it was, they would be there, reaping the already higher rewards of low sec and dealing with the hassle.

Its a serious opportunity for grief and hassle that is for that very reason being completely passed up.

Being the target of ambush predators is not fun, interesting or exciting for the prey.

My last concern would be IF ccp does this what kind of warning should be given out before hand. Would they just move everyone out of the systems that are becoming low sec? Would hate to log in and be in a .2 system that was .7 the day before with a hauling orca trying to burn towards hi sec.

Other than that, As a carebear i +1 this idea

Very well, lets just say the intended targets of your trade nerf then. You in no way want this so that you have more 'content'.

I have read your points. I disagree with them, and feel as if you have failed to truly think through the consequences of making a change such as this.

And yes. I say it isn't fun. My friends say it isn't fun. The hordes of traders not taking advantage of low sec trade opportunities or trying to independently haul items into NPC null say it isn't fun with their avoidance. If it was fun for them, they would be doing it... but it's not, so they don't.

Here is a clue: If you have to strongarm people into doing something, it's probably not fun for them.

The status quo isn't gameplay You Enjoy. For those players making ISK is their fun. Rather than adapt your own playstyle to find your own fun, you want to steal theirs.

Sandbox Ted. It's not just for Ship on Ship PvP.

Interesting idea. However 90% of the ways suggested to make this happen are nothing more than "let's get non pvp ships into pew pew space".

I liked this idea until I thought about it.

Doing so would be unnatural, as some borders (in real life and otherwise), are secured, while others are not.

edit: but more low security is always a good thing ;)

stuff.

No. There will Jitaland, and then there will be the 3 N. Koreas.

My RSB infinipoint Phobos would love to meet those people who think +2, +3, +whatever is a benefit.

You really don't need to propose lore. There seems to already be some storyline in the works for a chance like this. The battle for caldari prime is one, the dread fight between gal and minmatar is another. And a bunch of amarr stuff is also going on. I'd link it again but i don't feel like finding it.

This way it should be possible for example to be an outlaw in amarr space but a beloved citizen in minmatar space.

Ignorance.

Ooooo yay another reason for packs of eve noobs to blob up on a gate and sit there all day just what eve needs -_-


Counter Idea:

Make high sec less profitable and low sec more profitable


ooo wait they are already trying to do that ;) NM someone at CCP must have half a brain after all ;)

Not reading 26 pages of this horrible idea.
But did anyone already mention the fact that new players need to travel between all empires. Sisters of Eve Epic Arc ya know.

freighters take a while to get anywhere and they cannot cloak. it would become impractical to use them for trading between empires. The rewards for trading in another empire would be insignificant because of jump freighters and cyno alts.

besides from kill board padding and raising the entry level for inter-empire trading (but not the rewards), i dnt see what this change would do.

I do live and manufacture in gallente.
I do mine in gallente and amarr.
I do run missions in gallente and minmatar.
I do trade in all four.

What have I missed?


There are people that do not belong to any faction and thus are allowed and legal everywhere. When real world countries are at war, they usually have safe neutral routes anyway.
Someone suggested a softer version with long route through a neighbouring empire to get to the other side, this makes sense for me.

There other event's that happen in low/null that allow a player to make more isk.

The problem is you need friends, there are some things you can do alone, however if you go into null/low with the mentality to do all the things you do in hi-sec, then you're not going to make much more.

Not to mention... MINING IS A JOKE. Really I don't understand why ANYONE does it besides bots. There's just no isk there. You make what 10m an hour? maybe 20m in null? I can make more running lvl 3's. Granted... risk vs reward.... but when I can run lvl 4's and come out with more mineral's per hour then a hi-sec miner.... it just makes no sense of why do it.

I was thinking about a way they could implement this without a total **** storm brewing.
It would have to come over several patches over a long period of time, but systems that would be the "Neutral Zone" between empires would slowly have there security status lowered till they hit there desired status. Any systems that might go from low to high would be done in the opposite fashion.