As I said...

Either the idea works, prices become ruinous, and the traffic through lowsec increases, or the idea fails as all or almost all production stays local, and other than a few people that like to travel things remain as they are.

There is no benefit to this. It's best outcome is it's own failure. Anyone who likes doing what the idea is trying to force people to do is already doing it. This might get you a little more at first, but most will rather leave or do something else if forced to play this way.

The whole point to the proposed change is to create market pressure sufficient to warrant the risk of the now required losec route. As that risk is extreme, so too will the rewards, and thus the cost.

If these changes happened, and worked, every single high/low gate would be camped because the rewards would be worth the effort. Now you have a few lazy campers on more popular gates because rewards are few since the prey is nearly extinct. This would completely change the game, or do nothing at all. I'd bet even the majority of the 2nd and third gates would be camped too, because of those who can run the gauntlet.

The only way to make this work would be to redistribute ores so that there was a shortage in every empire. After that it's all downhill. Prices skyrocket as pirates flock to the easy kills and phat loots. More and more Indies quit as the costs of resources go up even as demand falls from high prices, and probably inside 2 years we are looking at newbie frigates online as even the cheapest ships require hours if ISK grinding to afford.

Or production stays local, and nothing changes except EVE is now a bigger PITA than ever for a select few.

So... Bad idea.

And the PvE vs. PvP balance I'm talking about is the incompatible fits that make anyone doing PvE remotely efficiently laughably easy to kill for the average PvP fit.

In general missioning is in large, somewhat expensive ships with very specific tanks that need cap to run and lack basic tackle. If a pirate pays attention to local rats he can easily know all he needs to curbstomp a missioner in complete safety. This is why missioners are considered stupid if they don't dock the second anyone pops up in local... Which somehow most pirates equate with them 'winning' because they stopped playing. The issues are similar with most other PvE activities as well.

Change that dynamic, and the rest of this changes dramatically with it.

stuff

That is correct.

As I said...

Either the idea works, prices become ruinous, and the traffic through lowsec increases, or the idea fails as all or almost all production stays local, and other than a few people that like to travel things remain as they are.

There is no benefit to this. It's best outcome is it's own failure. Anyone who likes doing what the idea is trying to force people to do is already doing it. This might get you a little more at first, but most will rather leave or do something else if forced to play this way.

The whole point to the proposed change is to create market pressure sufficient to warrant the risk of the now required losec route. As that risk is extreme, so too will the rewards, and thus the cost.

If these changes happened, and worked, every single high/low gate would be camped because the rewards would be worth the effort. Now you have a few lazy campers on more popular gates because rewards are few since the prey is nearly extinct. This would completely change the game, or do nothing at all. I'd bet even the majority of the 2nd and third gates would be camped too, because of those who can run the gauntlet.

The only way to make this work would be to redistribute ores so that there was a shortage in every empire. After that it's all downhill. Prices skyrocket as pirates flock to the easy kills and phat loots. More and more Indies quit as the costs of resources go up even as demand falls from high prices, and probably inside 2 years we are looking at newbie frigates online as even the cheapest ships require hours if ISK grinding to afford.

Or production stays local, and nothing changes except EVE is now a bigger PITA than ever for a select few.

So... Bad idea.

And the PvE vs. PvP balance I'm talking about is the incompatible fits that make anyone doing PvE remotely efficiently laughably easy to kill for the average PvP fit.

In general missioning is in large, somewhat expensive ships with very specific tanks that need cap to run and lack basic tackle. If a pirate pays attention to local rats he can easily know all he needs to curbstomp a missioner in complete safety. This is why missioners are considered stupid if they don't dock the second anyone pops up in local... Which somehow most pirates equate with them 'winning' because they stopped playing. The issues are similar with most other PvE activities as well.

Change that dynamic, and the rest of this changes dramatically with it.

-1 from me for the idea of the op so. Freighters would have to be redone massively, ive seen enough gatecamps in my eve live that i know that they would be screwed to much otherwise

Supported as long as gate camps are nerfed. What about CONCORD at lowsec gates but nowhere else in the system?

Ooo added support. Me likey.

I do wonder why fozzie did acknowledge his presense but hasn't said anything about the content of this thread.

NDA?

Maybe we're going to get this!

Maybe we'll get changed personal security rating too!?! Start new pilots at +1 and everyone negative is a free target in low sec. Everyone positive gives a sec loss.

This would give you some idea of a players intentions at first glance. Since positive sec rating is tough to get.

Maybe from 0 to 1 they appear as neutral so you have to put in quite a bit of sec work to be able to trick people but it would still be viable.

Likely not.

CCP employees never say anything unless they are actually considering it. They are always supposed to be impartial. Also he probably doesn't want to be involved in the arguments in this thread, because picking either would indicate a possible favoritism of carebears or pvp people.

He would never flat out say, "lol, we are never going to do this." because that would not be professional, and he would never say that anything more than saying they talked about it because then he would be quoted by others and lead to false expectations.

then what is the point of this, at all.

The US Mexico border is a RL example of this, its a desolate desert covered with patrol agents and drug cartel operatives who will sew your genitals to your face and put explosives in them after sending your corpse back to your family.

then what is the point of this, at all.

This would buff trading by making it harder

You tell me because I'm struggling to see the validity of this gate camper's wet dream.


Sure, opportunities would be created but you would only be able to capitalise on them in any meaningful way with enormous infrastructure support. So you would lose liquidity. Volatile markets are fine, stagnant markets are not.

What would be nice if lvl 1-3 pirate agents were added. Have them be agents in space and turning in and requesting missions would have to be face to face. Would make just doing them risky and should help add some life to all the low sec that would be added.