Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 59 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
41
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 06:34:00 -
[1] - Quote
So moving stuff from place to place in eve isn't really all that dangerous, difficult, interesting, or that profitable most of the time. Piracy isn't all the profitable either. So why not ad more lowsec between the 4 empires. By more I mean, it would be utterly impossible to get from gallente space to caldari space without crossing lowsec at some point.
This would buff trading by making it harder, weird i know but hear me out. The less freighters going back and forth from jita to dodixie moving ice, the more expensive ice is in the area's where it can't be mined. Faction modules become items that must be smuggled across dangerous open waters. Pirates actively hunt badgers full of ore, trading corporations setup large fleets to escort freighters, etc. When I watch TV and see pirates they are plundering trade routes and making commerce harder, eve pirates don't really effect commerce at all.
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.
Imagine all the fun that can be had when you actually have to be at risk to move things? Sure their is suicide ganking but that only happens if your hauling a stupid amount of things or are just unlucky.
If this change was added i would consider a cloaking hauler to move items myself since I am not as inclined to do research to exploit the market under the current landscape.
Also with this change certain changes could be made to hauling ships to make them more capable of defending themselves, or be more easily escorted and defended from attackers. |
Luc Chastot
Moira. Villore Accords
89
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 06:51:00 -
[2] - Quote
Because that's not something that happens. Borders between most countries are closely guarded, especially between sworn enemies. Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
41
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 06:54:00 -
[3] - Quote
Luc Chastot wrote:Because that's not something that happens. Borders between most countries are closely guarded, especially between sworn enemies.
Closely guarded by concord? You would figure that military presence and a 3rd party police enforcement would be completely unrelated as seen by the current militia situation. Also the gameplay improvement would greatly outweigh any damage to the lore. |
GizzyBoy
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
21
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 07:34:00 -
[4] - Quote
join test concord's not getting in the way of them hitting freighters 300 + so far? |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
41
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 07:43:00 -
[5] - Quote
GizzyBoy wrote:join test concord's not getting in the way of them hitting freighters 300 + so far?
Sounds like extremely boring emergent gameplay.
Wouldn't you rather be a pirate in a armada of warships trying to take down the caravan of cargo haulers? Or maybe you and a small band of frigates are cruising the space lanes looking for a lone trader who has stuffed his cargo hold with the federation navy stasis webs that are in short supply in jita.
Instead of filling the freighter, setting destination, clicking autopilot, then halfway their you get your massive ship bumped like a tennis ball underwater while a group of ships 1 shot you which interrupts you watching tv.
I wanna be a pirate, not some guy who runs around looking for asshats to gank or to play grabass with other so called "pirates".
I wanna be a adventurous trader looking to make my fortune without pouring over data tables and spread sheets trying to manipulate prices by moving **** from homogenous trade hub to trade hub. |
GizzyBoy
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
21
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 09:24:00 -
[6] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:GizzyBoy wrote:join test concord's not getting in the way of them hitting freighters 300 + so far? Sounds like extremely boring emergent gameplay. Wouldn't you rather be a pirate in a armada of warships trying to take down the caravan of cargo haulers? Or maybe you and a small band of frigates are cruising the space lanes looking for a lone trader who has stuffed his cargo hold with the federation navy stasis webs that are in short supply in jita. Instead of filling the freighter, setting destination, clicking autopilot, then halfway their you get your massive ship bumped like a tennis ball underwater while a group of ships 1 shot you which interrupts you watching tv. I wanna be a pirate, not some guy who runs around looking for asshats running missions to gank or to play grabass with other so called "pirates". I wanna be a adventurous trader looking to make my fortune using my wits to navigate dangerous deep space without pouring over data tables and spread sheets trying to manipulate prices by moving **** from homogenous trade hub to trade hub.
I hear somalia is nice this time of year |
Daak Elibrium
Hybra Tech
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 11:50:00 -
[7] - Quote
I like this id+Ža a lot. I feel that Highsec is to secrure as it is. I think people that start playing the game don't really need so much space to learn the ropes of EvE. And those that only likes PvE, could just stay in one section of Highsec and have enough to do. Even if they have to travel to other HighSec-regions there would only be a couple of jumps. Its not THAT hard to survive jumping through LowSec.
I think the Factions will feel more like "real" Factions, with some separation between them. More like "countries" and between them "no mans land."
The possibilites that some corporations will become full-time pirate and that some will be full-time "protectors/merc" etc. sounds exciting, and it would bring some more reason to PvP. The regions between the HighSec regions will probobly fill up with people wanting to PvP, Pirate or defend. Sounds great. It even brings people to communicate more with other players, if you need to haul something you probobly want to hire some protection etc.
Maybe a total of 3-4 jumps tops to get through to another HighSec would be enough, longer than that people might not even want to try.
The id+Ža is great I believe. Just some details to sort out first. |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
802
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 13:22:00 -
[8] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:GizzyBoy wrote:join test concord's not getting in the way of them hitting freighters 300 + so far? Sounds like extremely boring emergent gameplay. Wouldn't you rather be a pirate in a armada of warships trying to take down the caravan of cargo haulers? Or maybe you and a small band of frigates are cruising the space lanes looking for a lone trader who has stuffed his cargo hold with the federation navy stasis webs that are in short supply in jita. Instead of filling the freighter, setting destination, clicking autopilot, then halfway their you get your massive ship bumped like a tennis ball underwater while a group of ships 1 shot you which interrupts you watching tv. I wanna be a pirate, not some guy who runs around looking for asshats running missions to gank or to play grabass with other so called "pirates". I wanna be a adventurous trader looking to make my fortune using my wits to navigate dangerous deep space without pouring over data tables and spread sheets trying to manipulate prices by moving **** from homogenous trade hub to trade hub.
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. |
Omnathious Deninard
Extrinsic Operations
266
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 14:21:00 -
[9] - Quote
I had thought it was silly for warring factions to have systems intermixed like they are. If each faction was set up like a target, with the inter most area being the 1.0-0.8 systems, the next ring being 0.7-0.5 systems, after that the security slowly degrades to empire null sec, with only faction warfare low sec systems intermixing, ex Gallente and Caldari low sec would be mixed, but not with minmatar or amarr. And he whole package would be wrapped in sov null sec. Ideas for Drone Improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1658683#post1658683 Updated 10/10/12 |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
254
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 14:39:00 -
[10] - Quote
Gate camping =! True piracy |
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
44
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 17:11:00 -
[11] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:
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.
Commander Ted wrote:
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.
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
44
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 17:12:00 -
[12] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Gate camping =! True piracy Who says they would gate camp? Secondly their are so many other opportunities to be had pvp wise if more transit was going through lowsec |
Michael Loney
Skullspace Industries
35
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 19:12:00 -
[13] - Quote
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
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
46
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 19:38:00 -
[14] - Quote
Not sure your idea would change anything. So i just have to pay someone to farm level 4's with my alt in fleet and I can go anywhere I please? How about we just ad or rearrange systems? |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
46
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 20:22:00 -
[15] - Quote
Also perhaps remove gate guns from lowsec in order to promote the use of light tackle and small gang fights. All gate guns do is penalize you for starting fights which discourages fun. |
Finn McCaan
1 man and his dog
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 20:46:00 -
[16] - Quote
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.
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
47
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 20:56:00 -
[17] - Quote
Finn McCaan wrote: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.
I think it would definitely be a plus to have insular empires, you would have a stronger sense of "Home" for you and your corporation. In event of a war it would be something a lot more localized. I think it would also build a stronger sense of community between the residence of that area. When I travel from jita to hek the only thing that changes are the stargates and sky color. If their were an actual barrier for me to cross for me to get their I might have a sense of being somewhere else and im not in my home with home being somewhere very far away. It would make eve feel a lot bigger.
Right now If they condensed hisec into 2-3 systems I think the only thing that would change are travel times. |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
804
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 23:25:00 -
[18] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Danika Princip wrote:
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.
Commander Ted wrote:
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.
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? |
Ludi Burek
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
193
|
Posted - 2012.11.21 00:02:00 -
[19] - Quote
Personally, I've always wished it would be like this and wondered why it is not. Given the history of nerfs of mechanics that offer rewards for creative and/or critical thinking, I can't see CCP ever implementing this sadly. It just makes it harder for "casual zombies".
Would be nice to have wild price differences between regions and those who take on the trade possibilities and succeed get handsome reward. Exporting caldari loot from scared bears to other regions would be fun.
Almost makes me mad that all the herpa derps are holding eve back from being this. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
50
|
Posted - 2012.11.21 00:03:00 -
[20] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:
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?
Of course if everything that is transported through lowsec is moved by jump freighter then fuel costs will surely cause a price differential. Also if you have to setup a pos in order to get your freighter through then that pos would make a nice target for someone who wants less competition moving ice. I also figure a good pirate organization would have a good opportunity to use a machariel to bump a jump freighter off a stargate if he deployed his cyno directly on it. Also who is to say that those current systems bordering hisec would border it anymore?
If more people mission in caldari space then ill make more isk from lp missioning elsewhere. If anything jita would begin to deflate since it isn't the cheapest place to buy certain items anymore. Maybe industry would be more biased to gallente space because cheaper fuel costs for a gallente pos. Also this is not a nerf hisec/ buff low thread, hisec will be just as safe as ever.
|
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
50
|
Posted - 2012.11.21 00:38:00 -
[21] - Quote
While I know this change would never force a dedicated hisec bear who doesn't want to leave hisec to leave hisec, I believe that I become a hauling bear if this change was added. Encourage more pvpers to do pve that is effected by pvp, so pvp actually has a incentive. |
Crimeo Khamsi
AirHogs Zulu People
15
|
Posted - 2012.11.21 01:06:00 -
[22] - Quote
I love this idea. I think it WOULD increase piracy, and it would make trade more exciting and rewarding. Probably not exactly in the way intended, though.
In order: 0) Anything that can be made within an empire would be traded by standard indy ships, and not pass the border in the first place. Otherwise: 1) Small, high value things like blueprints and faction modules = covops frigates running them 2) things like t1 modules, PI products, etc. (most stuff) = cloaky 3) Bulky, high volume stuff (but still not available within an empire) = jump freighters
The suggestions above that jump freighters would be used for EVERYTHING are frankly ridiculous. For one thing, jump freighters are very large. Efficiently filling them faster than people could do the same thing with smaller ships would require massively complex logistics skills (logistics in the normal everyday sense of the term). Without heavy hitting Walmart-style corporate freight routing software, eve players with jump freighters would either be late to every market, OR run half empty ships. Either one means they lose competitively to blockade runners and such that can fill their entire holds and that don't need isotope fuel (which has to be passed on in cost to the consumer).
In any case, all of those types of ships (covops frigates, blockade runners, and jump freighters) ALL require specialized skills and knowledge and investment and some risk. Goods that would need to be acquired from a different empire would therefore cost a lot more, and people with those skills and abilities would be able to make a more reasonable living out of them.
Pirates would also be able to make a slightly easier living too, because noobish people lured by the high profits would fairly routinely run regular non covops ships through the line attempting to move the relevant goods, which could be picked off.
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... |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
50
|
Posted - 2012.11.21 01:17:00 -
[23] - Quote
Crimeo Khamsi wrote:
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...
I think that their are already a number of critical items that can't be easily moved that are exclusive to certain areas. Namely ice which is required for pos's which are a cornerstone of eve industry and warfare.
Not to mention datacores and the like along with navy faction ships which have seen a recent boost to use with the recent vomiting of them onto the market caused by FW plexes. Also market forces that might have occurred in certain areas but had effects that quickly spread to others would now have more localized effects. With most null alliances using jita to buy ships to sell in their own space it would be reasonable to assume that jita would have substantially higher prices than other places that could not be as easily filled by people dropping off a freighter full of drakes.
Also different empires do have different ores that spawn that could cause subtle changes to mineral prices that would be worth exploiting far more than they currently are.
Not to mention that this change would have immediately positive effects without major changes to industry right away although it may be recommended that this eventually happen. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
50
|
Posted - 2012.11.21 02:04:00 -
[24] - Quote
Possible lore explanations of the different regions opening up.
The caldari-gallente one would be called "Black Void" and be a continuation of the recently opened "black rise" region. The gallente took the initiative in forming a stargate network in black void to counter the caldari colonization of black rise. The Gallente expansionism and new access path to caldari space has prompted the caldari to destroy all previous high security space stargates to prevent a rapid gallente incursion into the caldari home worlds.
The amarr-Minmatar one would be named "The Myridian Strip" a previously hidden network of ancient human stargates has been discovered by the angel cartel, fearing another slave revolt the amarr have closed down their stargates close to minmatar space.
just some ideas, not entirely relevant but still something that would need to be hammered out. |
Tawnia Baker
Interstellar Hollistic Agency A Point In Space
3
|
Posted - 2012.11.21 02:28:00 -
[25] - Quote
So did i understand that correct, you want that there is no possible option to move from Empire 1 to Empire 2 without crossing Lowsec?
IF yes, then it sounds not bad at first, but only at first.
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.
So the wannabe pirates sitting at the gates are doing what? Exact Gate Camping nothing else, the Wannabe Pirates at stations do what? Exactly Station Camping nothing more nothing less.
So tell me how should a new player who played weeks to get his first Iteron now move through low sec? He would be shot out of his Iteron within Seconds and after that shot out of his pod, and then? Doi you really think a new player will play again weeks to buy another iteron for exactly the same **** ?
And really i dont find many "real pirates" here in eve, most of them call themself a Pirate but are only some wannabe pirates who only wanna gank other people until they quit the game or play the game as they want. So tell me whats the reason for a so called "pirate" to destroy a empty Iteron from a new player? What does this pirate get from this kill?
As long as we have here in eve more wannabe pirates then pirates this cannot work. It could work, if those wannabe pirates become real pirates, pirates who really must work to get a good target, who must hunt it down with the risk to get caught by some police or mercs or anything else.
Currently this wannabes have a easy life, sitting at gates cloaked and waiting until something moves in that cant shoot back.
Also why its important that the pilot is podded too? why you must destroy the ship? Why not ask for ISK so the other player can pay to survive?`
REally i like your idea , but without some changes it cant work, also one of the changes must be some sort of defense options for the freighters, currently a freighter is slow has 0 defense options and 0 offensive options and thats something that must be changed too for your idea, if not, then its only more easy targets for wannabe pirates.
Cause really no one will move through low sec for a higher profit if he or she know that there is nearly 0 chance to survive this. And thats currently for freighter pilots most of the time a fact.
And removing Gate guns for what? To make it easier so anyone without knowledge of eve can become a wannabe pirate?
If piracy should become more profitable it also must be more risk. Many people complain that high sec is to secure and toooo much isk to make, so now i tell you, if piracy shoudl become more proftiable with changes from ccp so that people must fly through low sec then piracy must become more risk.
Buffing Freighters would be a option, making it impossible for 1 ship alone to scramble a freighter as example the obelisk. Or giving the freighters some offensive abilities and slots (not for big guns or such things but for some Target unlockers or boosters). Adding some sort of Buff to the freighters so they can align faster and are faster at warp.
Yes sure that would make piracy harder but if all people must fly through low sec you also get more targets. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
50
|
Posted - 2012.11.21 02:39:00 -
[26] - Quote
Tawnia Baker wrote: 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.
A 2 week old noob may not want to consider using an iteron for moving things through lowsec. Local empire trading is profitable for a noob and may be more so in the future. Their are much smaller scale ways of trading in lowsec that are easier for noobs, he could fit a cargo frigate, train for a covops frigate, join a corporation that will help him scout with his badger, or use wormholes to bypass lowsec entirely if he is clever and lucky. The whole idea is that moving through lowsec is hard, but extremely far from impossible and I feel that you greatly exaggerate its difficulty.
Their is nothing wrong with pirating or gate camping, gate camps can be avoided and pirates can be fought.
If you want to move a freighter through lowsec then you should have friends, it should definitely not be self sufficient enough to fight off an entire pirate fleet. Also not being able to move freighters through lowsec at all without dying is one important reason for doing this as it makes it harder to transfer goods between markets making small scale trading more profitable.
Also the gate guns discourage fighting in lowsec which is bad. Large groups of pirates who camp gates do not fear gate guns. Smaller groups in smaller ships do, this leads to small battles being hard to initiate since the aggressor has to have a major advantage to have any chance of fighting.
Also pirates do not have a "easy" life, they must be capable of defending themselves to from other pirates. Living in low security space requires special logistical considerations that normal players do not care about. Pirates are prevented from moving goods out of trade hubs without a second account. |
GizzyBoy
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
21
|
Posted - 2012.11.21 04:32:00 -
[27] - Quote
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.
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
50
|
Posted - 2012.11.21 04:57:00 -
[28] - Quote
GizzyBoy wrote: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.
Funny I am a main, look at my killboard and my corp history, also I hope that isn't your main your kill history is a bit... weak however KB stats are irrelevant and I only bring them up because you suggested I was an alt.
Also CCP are nerfing gate guns with the crimewatch changes, they only fire if you kill a pod. Also you appear to be ignorant to the fact that people camp (or used to at least) camp like that quite often time. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
51
|
Posted - 2012.11.21 08:59:00 -
[29] - Quote
Also the differences in certain commodities can't be to different from each other in different empires. If certain ores were more expensive in area's it may stunt industry. Although mineral costs for ships could be edited along with the quantity of the respective regions ore types so that the ships would cost less to build in the home empires. So instead of moving simple ore your moving entire ships making things more interesting and encouraging freighter travel over blockades runners.
Of course my industry knowledge is more limited so if someone who is familiar with building ships in high security space could elaborate on this idea more that would be nice. |
Crimeo Khamsi
AirHogs Zulu People
15
|
Posted - 2012.11.21 19:01:00 -
[30] - Quote
Quote:So tell me how should a new player who played weeks to get his first Iteron now move through low sec? He would be shot out of his Iteron within Seconds and after that shot out of his pod, and then? Doi you really think a new player will play again weeks to buy another iteron for exactly the same **** ?
Uhh... 1) A new player can easily be flying an iteron in under a day from making their account (one or two dozen level 1 missions even are enough to pay for one, and the only skills are frigate lvl 3 and indy level 1 which take hours, not weeks)
2) A new player has absolutely no business flying high value high risk goods between empires through the proposed new low-sec boundary areas. Newer haulers would stick to hauling antibiotics and basic modules and ores and things, mostly, not inter-empire ice products, etc. The proposed change is only for BETWEEN empires, not within them, which would still be safe, high-sec-only routes.
Quote:Currently this wannabes have a easy life, sitting at gates cloaked and waiting until something moves in that cant shoot back. Again, as above, the people who would be flying through these low sec border belts would mostly probably be advanced players, not newbies. Players with blockade runners and escorts and scouts and things, making it more of an active and difficult (but rewarding) career to be a border pirate. You'd have to use real strategy to catch those more advanced ships, which seems to be exactly what you want, yes?
Quote:Although mineral costs for ships could be edited along with the quantity of the respective regions ore types so that the ships would cost less to build in the home empires. 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. |
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
51
|
Posted - 2012.11.21 20:30:00 -
[31] - Quote
Crimeo Khamsi wrote:Quote:Although mineral costs for ships could be edited along with the quantity of the respective regions ore types so that the ships would cost less to build in the home empires. 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.
Perhaps this would also have the effect of fostering null industry without making any changes because now you can't get everything from jita at a premium making imports slightly harder but not impossible, adding incentives.
|
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
805
|
Posted - 2012.11.21 20:48:00 -
[32] - Quote
Crimeo Khamsi wrote:Quote:So tell me how should a new player who played weeks to get his first Iteron now move through low sec? He would be shot out of his Iteron within Seconds and after that shot out of his pod, and then? Doi you really think a new player will play again weeks to buy another iteron for exactly the same **** ? Uhh... 1) A new player can easily be flying an iteron in under a day from making their account (one or two dozen level 1 missions even are enough to pay for one, and the only skills are frigate lvl 3 and indy level 1 which take hours, not weeks) 2) A new player has absolutely no business flying high value high risk goods between empires through the proposed new low-sec boundary areas. Newer haulers would stick to hauling antibiotics and basic modules and ores and things, mostly, not inter-empire ice products, etc. The proposed change is only for BETWEEN empires, not within them, which would still be safe, high-sec-only routes. Quote:Currently this wannabes have a easy life, sitting at gates cloaked and waiting until something moves in that cant shoot back. Again, as above, the people who would be flying through these low sec border belts would mostly probably be advanced players, not newbies. Players with blockade runners and escorts and scouts and things, making it more of an active and difficult (but rewarding) career to be a border pirate. You'd have to use real strategy to catch those more advanced ships, which seems to be exactly what you want, yes? Quote:Although mineral costs for ships could be edited along with the quantity of the respective regions ore types so that the ships would cost less to build in the home empires. 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?
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
51
|
Posted - 2012.11.21 20:50:00 -
[33] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:
Wait, so newbies should only ever do anything in the space of the race they started as?
What?
No just don't pack your iteron full of loot and go into lowsec. Lowsec is easily capable of being traveled in a frigate/shuttle. |
Crimeo Khamsi
AirHogs Zulu People
17
|
Posted - 2012.11.21 21:13:00 -
[34] - Quote
Exactly. A cheap frigate with a MWD, some agility modules, and a warp stab or two could get through almost always even with newbie game skills, with minimal financial losses for a failure.
Not TRIVIAL, but still perfectly easy for new players to move around. Just not easy for new players to HAUL VALUABLE RACE-SPECIFIC CARGO between empires. |
Hakan MacTrew
Caledonian Heavy Industries Sick N' Twisted
28
|
Posted - 2012.11.21 21:24:00 -
[35] - Quote
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. MODULAR DRONES
MORE ORE SHIPS |
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.21 21:45:00 -
[36] - Quote
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. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
52
|
Posted - 2012.11.21 22:25:00 -
[37] - Quote
Hakan MacTrew wrote: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.
Well with the high storage amounts of freighters sending one afk in one direction would most likely be the best option for trade so very little would change.
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
52
|
Posted - 2012.11.21 22:33:00 -
[38] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote: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.
I wouldn't be forcing anyone to do anything they wouldn't want. Also decrease in inter region trade is a GOOD thing. Opportunities would increase because now any difference in prices won't be instantly filled by a guy with a freighter in 20 minutes. Also I highly doubt people will unsub because of this. BAAAAAAW MY BILLION ISK FREIGHTER CAN'T MAKE 4 MIL IN 30 MINUTES WHILE I WATCH TV! Oh wait my crane can make even more now in less time with my actually being at the keyboard! I'd say more accounts would sub to run multiple hauler accounts. Maybe more people would wan't to be pirates with more ships running through that have economic merit. Maybe in order to move battleships inter region people will be forced to escourt freighters or setup strategic jump freighter harbors like I suggested. New players would feel like they are a part of a much bigger world with them being "separated" from other places. Industry would be a lot more dynamic. If a few whiny people unsub they will be a tiny minority.
Also cloaky haulers can be caught if you have enough light tackle to uncloak it or the pilot is not careful, not to mention the much lower volumes of trade = more opportunities for the average player to exploit. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
54
|
Posted - 2012.11.22 03:28:00 -
[39] - Quote
IMO this change should be done if CCP revamps industry, and with the pos revamp industry will probably be overhauled.
If this change does happen the chaos that would ensue would be fun and hopefully what would emerge if a vibrant meaningful pvp rich lowsec, with a more dynamic high security space economy, a increased level of immerision, more people to lowsec and faction warfare, would help nullsec industry get off the ground if a industry rebalance does happen by reducing the competitiveness of jita as a market, help break apart jita from the server strainning unnessecery super hub that it is,bring meaning to being -10, possibly have more financial incentive to pvp, possibly bring back cargo hauler caravans, and weaken the power of individuals to cause market ripples eve wide due to less homogenous and interdependent trade hubs. |
Jackal Datapaw
Capital Dynamics SQUEE.
24
|
Posted - 2012.11.22 04:34:00 -
[40] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:
Also cloaky haulers can be caught if you have enough light tackle to uncloak it or the pilot is not careful, not to mention the much lower volumes of trade = more opportunities for the average player to exploit.
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. |
|
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
54
|
Posted - 2012.11.22 04:37:00 -
[41] - Quote
Jackal Datapaw wrote:Commander Ted wrote:
Also cloaky haulers can be caught if you have enough light tackle to uncloak it or the pilot is not careful, not to mention the much lower volumes of trade = more opportunities for the average player to exploit.
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.
Fine ill setup a large smartbomb camp. Either way the volumes are far smaller than freighters and their are enough stupid people that they will be lost. |
GizzyBoy
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
21
|
Posted - 2012.11.22 04:53:00 -
[42] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Nahkep Narmelion wrote: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. I wouldn't be forcing anyone to do anything they wouldn't want. Also decrease in inter region trade is a GOOD thing. Opportunities would increase because now any difference in prices won't be instantly filled by a guy with a freighter in 20 minutes. Also I highly doubt people will unsub because of this. BAAAAAAW MY BILLION ISK FREIGHTER CAN'T MAKE 4 MIL IN 30 MINUTES WHILE I WATCH TV! Oh wait my crane can make even more now in less time with me actually being at the keyboard! I'd say more accounts would sub to run multiple hauler accounts. Maybe more people would wan't to be pirates with more ships running through that have economic merit. Maybe in order to move battleships inter region people will be forced to escourt freighters or setup strategic jump freighter harbors like I suggested. New players would feel like they are a part of a much bigger world with them being "separated" from other places. Industry would be a lot more dynamic. If a few whiny people unsub they will be a tiny minority and be replaced by more people wanting to get in on this new warzone. Also cloaky haulers can be caught if you have enough light tackle to uncloak it or the pilot is not careful, not to mention the much lower volumes of trade = more opportunities for the average player to exploit.
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. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
54
|
Posted - 2012.11.22 05:28:00 -
[43] - Quote
GizzyBoy wrote: 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.
T2 materials don't come from hisec i believe, they are simply built their because 0.0 sucks and CCP needs to fix it.
Moving materials with freighters is still boring as **** and it isnt good gameplay. With this change it will still be possible safely and be important for many things without having to go into lowsec. An important point of this change is that inter-region trade would go down, which is a good thing.
Also im very familiar with test and goon freighter ganks, its not that hard, in my previous post I called it "Boring emergent gameplay" but you didn't read that I guess.
I said probably about 10 times in this thread prices will go up. Did you not read the thread? You obviously don't look at details since you assumed I was an alt. However these are only for prices that can't be produced locally, in fact if the mineral proposals i proposed are used then in fact ships that are native to the empire you are in will be cheaper. If I want a maelstrom in jita I can simply scout a rohk I buy through lowsec, sell it in hek then move back to jita, and run my caldari missions.
I also talked about how prices would be effected in null sec, yes it would be more logistically challenging to buy ships from different trade hubs and jump them into null. I would hope that this would come at the same time as a pos revamp that would make 0.0 industry not **** and that tech 2 items would in fact start to be built in null and moved to hisec. So really if done as I suggest it would boost 0.0.
Also as a pirate I would not be scared of moving things through lowsec. If I die I would face similar logistical challenges as I do now in buying ships and moving them in. These price changes could be circumvented by simply going to wherever the price is cheaper. Read the thread before you post, your obviously not a man for details. |
Luc Chastot
Moira. Villore Accords
89
|
Posted - 2012.11.22 08:36:00 -
[44] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Luc Chastot wrote:Because that's not something that happens. Borders between most countries are closely guarded, especially between sworn enemies. Closely guarded by concord? You would figure that military presence and a 3rd party police enforcement would be completely unrelated as seen by the current militia situation. Also the gameplay improvement would greatly outweigh any damage to the lore.
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. Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
54
|
Posted - 2012.11.22 08:51:00 -
[45] - Quote
Luc Chastot wrote:Commander Ted wrote:Luc Chastot wrote:Because that's not something that happens. Borders between most countries are closely guarded, especially between sworn enemies. Closely guarded by concord? You would figure that military presence and a 3rd party police enforcement would be completely unrelated as seen by the current militia situation. Also the gameplay improvement would greatly outweigh any damage to the lore. 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. Sec status is not determined by the empires its determined by concord, the most hotly contended systems by the empires are low security space in the case of faction warfare. Also how much is in your hold is irrelevant to pirates ,but not much commercial traffic even crosses lowsec in the first place for them to gank. Almost all of the "Piracy" is just pirates ganking other pirates. Also a market schism is exactly what is intended. Price differences will be a good thing and be able to be profited on by many. Increased costs are expected but also price decreases will occur to balance them out. Production will not be changed at all, the only thing that will change is how production is distributed in specific areas. Their will still be just as many retrievers in the belts mining ore and just as many factory slots/POS towers running. |
GizzyBoy
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
21
|
Posted - 2012.11.22 10:53:00 -
[46] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: I said probably about 10 times in this thread prices will go up. Did you not read the thread? You obviously don't look at details since you assumed I was an alt. However these are only for prices that can't be produced locally, in fact if the mineral proposals i proposed are used then in fact ships that are native to the empire you are in will be cheaper. If I want a maelstrom in jita I can simply scout a rohk I buy through lowsec, sell it in hek then move back to jita, and run my caldari missions.
I also talked about how prices would be effected in null sec, yes it would be more logistically challenging to buy ships from different trade hubs and jump them into null. I would hope that this would come at the same time as a pos revamp that would make 0.0 industry not **** and that tech 2 items would in fact start to be built in null and moved to hisec. So really if done as I suggest it would boost 0.0.
Also as a pirate I would not be scared of moving things through lowsec. If I die I would face similar logistical challenges as I do now in buying ships and moving them in. These price changes could be circumvented by simply going to wherever the price is cheaper. Read the thread before you post, your obviously not a man for details.
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. |
Crimeo Khamsi
AirHogs Zulu People
17
|
Posted - 2012.11.22 17:20:00 -
[47] - Quote
Quote: 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".
Fact 1) Earth does not have one location where 95% of people go to trade everything in one building. In fact, for most of human history, you couldn't trade more than a few miles from your home without massive conglomerate enterprises which were the exception, not the rule.
Fact 2) Earth's trade has not died off, nor has humanity crumbled into dust somehow due to Fact #1.
Conclusion) You aren't very good at economics.
edit: bonus fact) There was also very little rule of law on international roadways through most of human history, and lots of "ganking" of unescorted, unprotected tradesmen. Hence people traveled in protected caravans. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
55
|
Posted - 2012.11.22 18:08:00 -
[48] - Quote
GizzyBoy wrote:
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.
Yes because everyone is to scared to fly a hauler through lowsec.
Also i'm sure CCP intended 0.0 to be horrible at producing its own goods and ships and have a one stop shop where it's just imported in with a jump freighter.
Wormholes would still be their and still great methods to trade by for the clever people.
Not to mention dodixie and amarr have very robust markets that if their was more demand more industrialists would be invited to setup shop their instead of jita. It is silly to assume that nobody would change their behavior and keep shopping at jita forever.
0.0 needs to have its own industry whether or not highsec is divided. Also if my idea was implemented the importation of raw materials from null would still go to the areas where their is demand. Gallente tech 2 builders would get their tech brought to them and if their are more caldari builders then they should get their own proportionate share of the tech. Production would not change in high sec, let me say this again, PRODUCTION WOULD NOT CHANGE, the ability to move goods to other area's being diminished would make trade highly profitable. Not to mention the homogenous ores coming from 0.0 would help keep prices from going to wild. Industry populations would be distributed hopefully by what the most popular ships are if common sense holds sway. However if the ability to build ships in null was improved then the demand for raw materials and modules in high sec would be lowered and this problem would not exist. |
Endymion Varg
Interstellar Vermin Inc.
8
|
Posted - 2012.11.22 18:19:00 -
[49] - Quote
Confirming that I would give up my second (and last) testicle for this to be implemented. |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
10721
|
Posted - 2012.11.22 18:34:00 -
[50] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Gate camping =! True piracy If you ransom, pillage and kill things to make ISK for a living, then it's piracy.
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
|
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
55
|
Posted - 2012.11.22 20:58:00 -
[51] - Quote
Would be nice to know where in highsec the most industry POSes are concentrated. Also if ice must be imported for non native towers and we assume that the price difference would be quite high and it would be to expensive to run a non native pos, are their any races that would suffer greatly from this? |
Omnathious Deninard
Extrinsic Operations
269
|
Posted - 2012.11.22 23:41:00 -
[52] - Quote
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. Ideas for Drone Improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1658683#post1658683 Updated 10/10/12 |
Valea Silpha
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
70
|
Posted - 2012.11.23 01:02:00 -
[53] - Quote
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.
Under no circumstance would the risk be worth the reward. For new people, it back-stabs them for shopping for a good price.
To put it concisely, your idea doesn't encourage emergent gameplay, it encourages people to not play the game. It doesn't even make sense in its own terms.
'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.
There is no aspect of this that would improve the game, except that you get to kill more haulers. Go you. |
Daichi Yamato
Swamp Bucket Swamp Bucket Empire
59
|
Posted - 2012.11.23 01:32:00 -
[54] - Quote
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. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
56
|
Posted - 2012.11.23 03:02:00 -
[55] - Quote
Quote: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. Cloaked haulers.
Quote: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.
If their are enough entrances it will be difficult to camp every gate and every possible path through lowsec, their should always be a way around. It would be impossible for jita to reign supreme as all non caldari goods would have to be imported or would be more expensive to build their. Also dodixie, hek, and amarr are fine hubs and I can currently find almost and non faction module I want their. CCP has already made it clear they wan't people to stick with the race they initially chose in the beginning, however a new player can still always train X race frigate to one and start from the beginning.
Quote: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.
Cloaked haulers, transport contracts, have more than 5 possible paths, wormhole, etc. Also lowsec isn't that scary I go their all the time. Even the scariest places like rancer and ammakake can be traversed.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
56
|
Posted - 2012.11.23 03:02:00 -
[56] - Quote
Quote: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.
Well if you drive said targets from your territory you may have won. Also I thought you said lowsec is a scary impassable gauntlet and that nobody wants to sell their things for 20% off. Not to mention as having experience with wardecs myself its not that hard to move through in a shuttle yourself and buy another hurricane in amarr. Baaaaaaaaaw I can't drop my vindi on them! I guess your not a very big fan of wormholes either huh?
Quote: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.
Once again, crossing lowsec isn't that hard. Get a crane, a helios, or scout. Find a wormhole that makes a shortcut.
Quote:'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).
Sounds fun. I would love to do that! So if I get a frigate and hunt around lowsec where resupply points are few and far between, other players can fire on my for being a criminal without punishment, and their are merchants going around? Also I don't think the guys in somalia or the barbary coast pirates would call themselves "privateers"
Quote: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.
Add more paths and make your own friends. Carebears are allowed to dock also, also maybe this would provide actual incentive for real anti pirates. Not the RP noob corps they are now. Also, CLOAKY HAULER CLOAKY HAULER CLOAKY HAULER. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
56
|
Posted - 2012.11.23 03:06:00 -
[57] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote: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 LP items start to saturate the market heavily then a industrious trader would quickly start to move them out of the region. Maybe a smart missionbear would learn to every once in ahwhile move his own items because he isn't a lazy bum. So missioners have two options, 1. they don't move their items and make less money than they did before. 2. they move their own items and suddenly missioner income gets a buff. Sounds like a good idea to me.
Same thing with ores, you can either export your own ore and make more money than before or don't and make less, it's your choice. Doesn't sound like that big a deal to me. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
56
|
Posted - 2012.11.23 03:14:00 -
[58] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote: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. Wouldn't make that big of a difference, make an alt corp and set one up. Pirates and rival traders would often have to watch out for them being setup. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Jackal Datapaw
Capital Dynamics SQUEE.
24
|
Posted - 2012.11.23 04:13:00 -
[59] - Quote
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. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
56
|
Posted - 2012.11.23 04:27:00 -
[60] - Quote
Jackal Datapaw wrote: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.
No it won't your being silly. You can still mine as much as you want, you can still mission as much as you want, you can still wardec as much as you want, you can still single station trade as much as you want,you can still incursion as much as you want, you can still do exploration as much as you want, and you can still build as much as you want. Carebears don't have to participate and can still be afk casual zombies with the same mission rewards intact. All it ads are options for less risk averse people to make more isk than they already do. Carebears can team up with these risk takers, carebears do the farming while the haulers do the dangerous activities. It's not even like the risky activity is even hard or that dangerous!
Lowsec has very little real meaning outside of faction warfare. The only role it plays on the sov level is a safe cyno haven, the only role it plays in industry is that it is where capitals are safely baked in stations. If my change were added lowsec would be a important part of the high sec dynamic. Null needs changes to it's industry that need to be addressed in an entirely separate thread, in such dire need it could be game breaking. Making alliances have to move their jump freighters slightly farther is hardly a nerf to null. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Crimeo Khamsi
AirHogs Zulu People
22
|
Posted - 2012.11.23 17:27:00 -
[61] - Quote
Valea Silpha wrote: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. These are "bad" things why? Manipulation = strategy and intelligent, merit-based reward, which EVE traditionally encourages. Prices = ONLY higher if you insist on buying everything at Jita even though it makes no sense anymore. Most intelligent people would pick up on this and begin to trade at the 4 separate trade hubs, not just Jita.
Quote: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. And here you completely contradict yourself. Up above, you complained about high prices for imported goods being such a terrible thing, but now you completely ignore that and for some reason believe that Jita would be the ONE trading place, despite those prices.
This makes no sense. Just like you, EVERYONE ELSE hates high prices, too. Which means that most people would NOT continue to import expensive goods to Jita and just pay double prices anyway. Instead, they would shop elsewhere for those goods...
Make up your mind. You can't complain about how the prices would be horrible and ALSO complain about how people don't care about high prices and only care about trading at Jita instead, all at the same time.
Quote: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. No. "Hauling for personal stuff" is THE SAME THING AS "hauling for trade"
Day 1 of Econ 101 teaches your opportunity costs. Every time you haul your own stuff from A to B, you are paying the cost of whatever the highest value activity is that you could have been doing at that time. Which for most people (who aren't haulers), will be a higher number than what it would have cost them to just hire a contractor, or putting up good buy and sell prices on the market.
Thus, you are basically hiring yourself as a hauler every time you haul your own stuff. And since most people aren't professional haulers, usually this is the wrong choice, because you aren't specialized for that, and will do it inefficiently. Just like hiring a specialized hauler to defend you in a cruiser would be the wrong choice. Thus, I fail to see why we should treat these situations differently, or why it would be a bad thing for you to begin contracting your hauls to professionals who know how to get through the lowsec belt.
Because guess what? Hauling a dozen ships is NOT "horrific" for somebody with a freighter and a team of scouts to find a safe path for them. they can haul 35+ cruisers in one trip, and probably do it faster than you could move a single ship, and for less money. And they can clear out your entire hangar's worth of junk too at the same time, at the same advantages.
Just because your poor business choices would become even worse business choices is not a reason to avoid implementing a good game design feature. There are plenty of choices you could make that would save you all of that hassle AND save you money AND would work just fine in this modified world... |
Crimeo Khamsi
AirHogs Zulu People
22
|
Posted - 2012.11.23 17:52:00 -
[62] - Quote
Valea Silpha wrote: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. Fun fact: people don't fight wars in real life as a series of 1 on 1 duels.
One of the main goals of introducing faction warface, IIRC, was to get people to work more in TEAMS. And if you are in a team, like in a real war, then you can punch through a silly pirate gate camp easily, and proceed on to destroy your enemy targets or take over control points.
This seems more like an advantage to me than a disadvantage...
Quote:Under no circumstance would the risk be worth the reward. For new people, it back-stabs them for shopping for a good price. No, it punishes them for completely ignoring multiple warning signs all at once: 1) The tutorials which repeatedly say to be careful about low sec space, and which in the future would specifically mention the divided empires 2) The warning the game gives you when you attempt to activate a star gate to a low sec system 3) The orange boxes on your planned route in the upper left 4) The fact that prices are only listed region-wide in the market screen (meaning that for them to even KNOW there are lower prices in another empire, they'd have to have an alt or be using a third party program, which implies they know how the system works already)
People who ignore multiple warning signs without knowing what they are doing are idiots, and I don't feel sorry for them at all, sorry.
Quote:'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). Your history lesson is meaningless, because the suggested change in this thread is NOT "add more pirates." The suggested change is "add low-sec belts in between empires.
Any pirates who choose to enter those belts would be there precisely because it was advantageous or profitable for them to be there. There's nothing artificial or unrealistic about it at all. Because ANY pirates in that location AT ALL would be there as a result of emergent gameplay, of their own choice, because it gave them some advantage.
So why weren't there so many pirates in real life? Oh I don't know, maybe because it was a COMPLETELY different situation? Let's see:
1) In the far future, offense would become cheaper and stronger much more quickly than defense would. This is a trend we see in real life. People don't build castles anymore, because walls couldn't keep up with bombs. Instead, we fight by gaining intelligence about target locations, and once you know where a target is, theyre usually as good as dead in modern warfare. In EVE, this means that a frigate which can take down a merchant ship is comparatively cheap and risk free, compared to the days of sail on Earth. This is a realistic change that would realistically and emergently result in a higher proportion of pirates in real life, too.
2) On Earth, there were very few chokepoints where ships HAD to travel through, and they were few enough that navies could heavily defend them. Stargates, by comparison, are MANY in number, and cannot all be policed (by CONCORD) as cost effectively. This also realistically implies more pirates. In fact, you can see a miniature example of this in places like Singapore, where there ARE a lot of real life pirates, precisely because there are a series of narrow straits which are campable, but also too numerous for the authorities to defend. Result? Lots o' pirates, just like in EVE.
3) Pirates in the golden age of sail were numerous in part because everybody was always at war with everyone else. In modern day Earth, this is not true, meaning fewer opportunities. But in EVE, there are hundreds of corp and empire wars everywhere, which naturally leads to more pirates.
3) Like you say, merchant ships didn't travel alone. In Eve, they do, which is another reason why it makes sense there are more pirates... But this is not a hard-coded game mechanic. People CHOOSE to travel alone. With divided empires, this would be a poor choice (unless you have a cloaked ship), and people would quickly learn to not do that anymore.
Most of these reasons for more pirates have everything to do with the intended, basic mechanics of EVE, and nothing to do with the change proposed in this thread. |
Lavitakus Bromier
The Scope Gallente Federation
15
|
Posted - 2012.11.23 18:36:00 -
[63] - Quote
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. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
57
|
Posted - 2012.11.23 19:05:00 -
[64] - Quote
Lavitakus Bromier wrote: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.
Freighters are useful and necessary for things other than trading, not to mention a trader can still use a cloaky hauler and cross lowsec and probably make more per trip than he does now. Also the gameplay your trying to protect is boring, really really really boring. People who do it know its boring by virtue of they aren't their at their keyboards most of the time they do it! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
57
|
Posted - 2012.11.23 19:16:00 -
[65] - Quote
Ive seen alot of people post that they agree with this idea, however they say "CCP will never do it", I would love to at least get enough discussion going in this thread that a dev responds saying he read it, that would be ballin. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Endymion Varg
Interstellar Vermin Inc.
9
|
Posted - 2012.11.23 19:30:00 -
[66] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Ive seen alot of people post that they agree with this idea, however they say "CCP will never do it", I would love to at least get enough discussion going in this thread that a dev responds saying he read it, that would be ballin.
It almost seems like this is a feature that should have been with Eve from the beginning. |
Crimeo Khamsi
AirHogs Zulu People
25
|
Posted - 2012.11.23 20:38:00 -
[67] - Quote
Lavitakus Bromier wrote: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). |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
57
|
Posted - 2012.11.23 23:41:00 -
[68] - Quote
Crimeo Khamsi wrote: 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).
Well reason null has no trade coming is also because you can't even dock.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
57
|
Posted - 2012.11.24 05:45:00 -
[69] - Quote
Also their are some minor details that must be executed correctly for this to work. Many against my proposal cry foul because they fear that every choke point would be a rancer style hell camp. I believe that this problem exists currently in lowsec becasue if you look at the map, you will see that the side lowsec branches have usually 2-3 ways in and one straight path through the middle with some gangly systems off the side nobody cares about. Their are alot of side routes and ways to double back but these quickly remove the incentive of going to lowsec because they don't save any jumps.
Doing a quick survey with the in game map I found something interesting, their are only five high sec gates out of caldari space, three of which are right next to each other. I honestly found this surprising although I have never spent that much time studying the high sec map in detail before. Then another 23 entrances to high sec total, most being part of the same constellations. I would suggest adding 10 more along with a new route that leads to one of the new regions for every low sec constellation to adequately buffer against hell camps. Also CCP's standard randomization system for making new regions should be tweaked somewhat. Make it more interconnected so if mid route a trader finds his route blocked he can quickly reroute mid trip with only 1-3 jumps added. Possibly make it more like a spider web in design with spokes and then supports going in-between those spokes with 4-6 systems being the length of each spoke. Then tangle it all up to make it look pretty. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Tribal Band
231
|
Posted - 2012.11.24 23:04:00 -
[70] - Quote
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. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens |
|
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
61
|
Posted - 2012.11.24 23:27:00 -
[71] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote: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. Just bring moar logi, then the only people who can camp it are those who are capable of building unbreakable hell camps or big groups of sniper nados that rapidly vanish. Setting up areas where combat is intended to occur but punishes the attacker tactically is a bad idea, just encourages being lame. All or nothing, either let me orbit the gate solo in my rifter or just prevent all pvp period. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
GizzyBoy
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
21
|
Posted - 2012.11.24 23:36:00 -
[72] - Quote
Crimeo Khamsi wrote:Quote: 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".
Fact 1) Earth does not have one location where 95% of people go to trade everything in one building. In fact, for most of human history, you couldn't trade more than a few miles from your home without massive conglomerate enterprises which were the exception, not the rule. Fact 2) Earth's trade has not died off, nor has humanity crumbled into dust somehow due to Fact #1. Conclusion) You aren't very good at economics. edit: bonus fact) There was also very little rule of law on international roadways through most of human history, and lots of "ganking" of unescorted, unprotected tradesmen. Hence people traveled in protected caravans.
|
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
61
|
Posted - 2012.11.24 23:37:00 -
[73] - Quote
GizzyBoy wrote:forums ate my text :/ happened to me twice in this thread. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Tribal Band
231
|
Posted - 2012.11.24 23:45:00 -
[74] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:All or nothing, either let me orbit the gate solo in my rifter or just prevent all pvp period. 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. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
61
|
Posted - 2012.11.24 23:46:00 -
[75] - Quote
Another thing that occured to me is that moving caravans through lowsec will be difficult because it is already easy to alpha badgers and freighters in high sec, especially when you don't move very fast.
I was reading trinkets hauler rebalance thread and I think that this idea could have applications to my idea. A new class of indsutrial should be introduced with high resists but medium ehp on the whole to compliment logistics support more. In order to kill a badger you have to destroy the entire support fleet first.
Also a new addition to the freighter lineup is needed, a 200k m3 cargohold and slightly lower than battleship agility and more HP concentrated in armor and shields depending on the race to allow logistics support, it could have high slots and medium slots to support ewar and logistics and be a true battle hauler. It would have a 2au/s warp speed so that it is slow, but not so slow you can't dream of avoiding a pirate gang. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Tribal Band
231
|
Posted - 2012.11.24 23:46:00 -
[76] - Quote
GizzyBoy wrote:forums ate my text :/ All you have to do is hit the back button on your browser and it'll return you to the screen where you were typing it, with all the text still in place.
It might not do this with all browsers, and you might have to go into your internet options and find the setting that makes it store old page information. Google Chrome seems to do this by default. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
61
|
Posted - 2012.11.24 23:49:00 -
[77] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Commander Ted wrote:All or nothing, either let me orbit the gate solo in my rifter or just prevent all pvp period. 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.
The dangers will be just as great, instead of a lone solo pvper you will find a battleship gang with Sebo'ed hics grabbing you capable of popping the faction navy without a sweat. In faction warfare I have seen a solo asb slepnir camp a gallente high sec station while instapopping the faction police and still handling the players coming from the station. Middle sec will provide false safety and very poor quality pvp. Like high sec but no war dec cost.
Also gate guns are already being nerfed, they will only fire if you pod someone after retribution hits. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Tribal Band
231
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 00:02:00 -
[78] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:The dangers will be just as great 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. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
61
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 00:04:00 -
[79] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Commander Ted wrote:The dangers will be just as great 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.
They already do with my faction warfare case, even then it was one dude camping an entire station. The answer is bring more logi still and you can tank them. If every logi has stuff shooting it them the logi will be repped by the logi. Not to mention you can pop faction ships like their nothing. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
BinaryData
Kleinrock Heavy Industries Kleinrock Group
8
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 00:17:00 -
[80] - Quote
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. |
|
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
62
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 00:19:00 -
[81] - Quote
BinaryData wrote: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. You are unwilling to accept arguments from others and should not post in a forum. I have had a great deal of positive feedback already and I assure you I am not a troll. Perhaps instead of making unproductive posts you should post your ideas and concerns in a organized concise fashion and they will be responded to as such much like how I have responded to all other posters in this forum. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Red Teufel
Blackened Skies Nulli Secunda
109
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 00:23:00 -
[82] - Quote
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 |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
64
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 00:30:00 -
[83] - Quote
Red Teufel wrote: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
I am not sure low security space trade hubs would come of this. Being as a single system would be fairly easy to camp and if it were a hub then it would surely be profitable to camp it often. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Red Teufel
Blackened Skies Nulli Secunda
109
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 00:37:00 -
[84] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Red Teufel wrote: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 I am not sure low security space trade hubs would come of this. Being as a single system would be fairly easy to camp and if it were a hub then it would surely be profitable to camp it often.
so anti pirate corps would become relevant as well? O_o omfg!!! |
Red Teufel
Blackened Skies Nulli Secunda
109
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 00:39:00 -
[85] - Quote
i believe if you fix the basics it snowballs and fixes everything else. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
64
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 00:39:00 -
[86] - Quote
Red Teufel wrote:Commander Ted wrote:Red Teufel wrote: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 I am not sure low security space trade hubs would come of this. Being as a single system would be fairly easy to camp and if it were a hub then it would surely be profitable to camp it often. so anti pirate corps would become relevant as well? Yes but not for low sec trade hubs, the incentives would be far to low for non pirates. It would be pirates ganking other pirates. Imagine if all the drug dealers in one town tried to sell their drugs in one warehouse, they would shoot each other non stop. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
BinaryData
Kleinrock Heavy Industries Kleinrock Group
8
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 00:41:00 -
[87] - Quote
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. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
64
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 00:56:00 -
[88] - Quote
BinaryData wrote: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.
Nobody will be forced into lowsec at all. Everything you could ever need is in high sec and you will still have access to all the ores and missions you could dream. Industry production would be hardly affected since people will still be building just as much as they do now, perhaps more so because of the added production slots in lowsec. The lack of imports to your area would be compensated by the lack of exports.
The tranportation of assets was addressed beautifully by another poster in this thread. You can pay someone else to move your assets for you, in fact it would bring more buisness to the trade industry than you could dream. In economics their is something called opportunity cost, in its simplest terms this means time= money, the cost of an action is not just determined by how much you pay but what else you could be doing at that time also. Not to mention moving from area to area should be a big deal, finding a direct connecion between two high sec systems via wormhole ,moving your items through with a cloaky hauler, paying someone who does nothing but move things and is expert at it, having a good corporation with carrier or jump freighter access, or straight up liquidation would still be perfectly viable options. Also how often do you move anyway? jeez.
Low-sec is more profitable than high sec, it has better ores, exploration sites, Planetary interaction, and the ability to build capital ships. It is obvious CCP can do nothing to herd casual zombies into lowsec and I already knew when proposing this idea that such an effect would not occur. My idea would add a reason to fight for it. Trade ways must be secured and their would be people who take it upon themselves to protect commerce and have their own self interests at heart for doing so. Give the pvp'ers a reason to fight for you carebears. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Red Teufel
Blackened Skies Nulli Secunda
109
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 01:10:00 -
[89] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Red Teufel wrote:Commander Ted wrote:Red Teufel wrote: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 I am not sure low security space trade hubs would come of this. Being as a single system would be fairly easy to camp and if it were a hub then it would surely be profitable to camp it often. so anti pirate corps would become relevant as well? Yes but not for low sec trade hubs, the incentives would be far to low for non pirates. It would be pirates ganking other pirates. Imagine if all the drug dealers in one town tried to sell their drugs in one warehouse, they would shoot each other non stop.
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.
|
Red Teufel
Blackened Skies Nulli Secunda
109
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 01:15:00 -
[90] - Quote
BinaryData wrote: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. |
|
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
64
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 01:17:00 -
[91] - Quote
Red Teufel wrote:BinaryData wrote: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.
They intended people to do it because of time saved, however they forgot that their are only 1-2 lowsec routes that actually save time and those have been fairly effectively raped.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
64
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 01:20:00 -
[92] - Quote
Red Teufel wrote:
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.
Nullsec alliance can prevent people from docking in their stations with 100% certainty. Pirates being smaller groups that do not have the luxury of owning their own stations only import goods on demand for members' wishlists. I doubt their would be any reason for this to change with pirates having more to shoot at. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Red Teufel
Blackened Skies Nulli Secunda
109
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 01:33:00 -
[93] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Red Teufel wrote:
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.
Nullsec alliance can prevent people from docking in their stations with 100% certainty. Pirates being smaller groups that do not have the luxury of owning their own stations only import goods on demand for members' wishlists. I doubt their would be any reason for this to change with pirates having more to shoot at.
well you are probably right...but i can dream. |
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
608
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 02:27:00 -
[94] - Quote
When I started EVE, I began trading in Aridia. Yeah, lol, right? But sell 100 Hobgoblin Is at 650,000 ISK each to deranged desperate pirates, and you can see why. Gonditsa, back when MINER MINER and LS Sledgehammer camped it 23/7, was a deathtrap - and this was before instalock Lokis. But, you add the pirates to watchlist, wait till they are offline, gird your loins, install your stabs, and make a go of it.
I used to fear and loathe lowsec for years once I got into Null and could blat rats for 1.5M a pop in a Hound. The risks, back when everything was gatecamped, were too great.
Now I'm living in Frerstorn, have a stash of 80 hulls imported from Rens / Hek, mostly T2, and I lose very little to pirates. Alts help, but mostly good intel channels and judicious cloak-MWD make everything fine and dandy.
So, I fully support this idea. It will create emergent gameplay, and discourage AFKsters who get ISK simply and easily including via using hauling bots with freighters.
There's a lot of Q.Q at the idea. Lot of talk of it "forcing" people. Hardly.
As Ted says, no one will be forced to do anything. The only time I'm forced into lowsec against my will is when doing missions and the agent gives me some stupid mission 3 jumps into lowsec and I am too tired or drunk to not accept it, and I've already dumped one in the last 3 hours.
As for the idea noobs will be ganked in lowsec after a week with all their worldlies in a Badger and quit? Well, they do that already by derping into lowsec. I know plenty of people whose first losses were derping into lowsec. There's a splash screen you have to tick a button to stop spamming at you. If that isn't stopping derping now, it doesn't matter is every system aside from Jita is lowsec - people will still take that plunge and get ganked.
But in all this, there's also an assumption that people roam about in their hisec carebearing lives like giant nomadic bears. No they do not. 90% of bears will hump the same level 4 agent for months, and some, a bunch of agents in the same region. Firstly, unless you learn fast enough, you trash your faction standing with the opposed Empire faction, making moving from Penirgman to Gulfonodi an unreasonable chore. Most people make their bed and lie in it, and run the epic arcs only if they worry about visiting the other space (or Jita).
Industry guys attempt to make most of their stuff as close to Jita as possible. Even in my alliance, shopping is done via alts in Jita for all manner of things. Yes ships are made in Rensbut the volume is low even if the prices are equitable, and even if you can get the same suite of items in Rens for roughly the same prices. Jita is just Jita.
Put lowsec between, and this behaviour will stop. Which means less people with freighter/orca hauling alts, but also less distance to cover to get the same results. Industry toons will no longer flock to a limited supply of moons only a few jumps from Jita; this will stop wars over the moons, but so what? Industry will decentralise from around Jita and Caldari space.
The key with this proposal will be to ensure that there are several (4-5) roughly equally useful routes (in terms of # jumps) between the major Empire blocs, to prevent, eg, the Rancer bottleneck. Amamake isn't a bottleneck as you can actually go via Bosboger and the Gulm/Ama gate is never camped. Hell, these days, Ama/Oso isn't camped at least 1/3rd of the day.
Other effects, for instance, will be a greater use of wormholes. Not only A641 hisec-hisec transients, but C1, C2 and C3 holes with hisec statics. I have in the past used these to move ships and fleets in bulk, eg, from Solitude hisec to Empire. Shut yourself inside with the fleet, collapse the hole professionally, scan the new exit, viola you are somewhere else. Repeat until in the correct hisec. You can even take orca loads of freight through with this method.
It will also benefit the guys who live in wormholes; it is possible to then manufacture or even just out and out trade from your wormhole POS. You can even haul in 20 BS hulls, stuff them in a CHA and then haul them out to the intended destination. I've done it before, it is quite feasible.
In short, this idea has merit. Taking submissions for "Trinkets friendly Advice Column" via evemail or private convo in-game. Anonymity sorta guaranteed.
|
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
69
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 02:33:00 -
[95] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:Words created by a master online wordsmith
Trinkets thank you for summing up everything good about this idea and defeating every argument in one great post. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Katrina Oniseki
Revenent Defence Corperation Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
862
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 02:37:00 -
[96] - Quote
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. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
69
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 03:05:00 -
[97] - Quote
Katrina Oniseki wrote: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.
Wonder if a developer has even read this thread. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
70
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 08:10:00 -
[98] - Quote
So out of curiosity I was looking at courier contracts and realized that they all blow. Surprising? no.
Maybe if this change was added being a self employed courier would be an actual career possibility instead of spending 1.5bil on a freighter, 80mil on collateral, and an hour of your time to some ,often times off the beaten path, system for only 8mil. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Red Teufel
Blackened Skies Nulli Secunda
109
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 20:06:00 -
[99] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Katrina Oniseki wrote: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. Wonder if a developer has even read this thread. Because CCP always listens and has had a record of prioritizing their resources into things that expand gameplay every expansion cycle. Right?
Probably not since they will be busy for some time to come just fixing things that have been broke for years. |
Nylith Empyreal
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
163
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 21:21:00 -
[100] - Quote
Throwing my support, and honestly giving how long it took them to simply give us a prison we can walk in, I would scream laziness or asshatery before 'reasons it's not implemented'. "Oh, you can't help that," said the troll: "we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad." "How do you know I'm mad?" -ásaid the forumwarrior. "You must be," said the troll, "or you wouldn't have come here." |
|
Red Teufel
Blackened Skies Nulli Secunda
109
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 21:55:00 -
[101] - Quote
vote OP to be on the csm |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
70
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 22:07:00 -
[102] - Quote
Also the resources required for adding new things to the map would be minimal. CCP has added regions in the past and adding new ones now would hardly be a chore. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
615
|
Posted - 2012.11.26 11:28:00 -
[103] - Quote
The year is 1943. The location: St Petersburg. The great armies of the Third Reich and the Red Army face off across no-mans land. On the German side, barely 100 yards back, you can buy a wiener schnitzel or schwiene haxen and dine in great Bavarian bier halle, while dreaming of buying the new Volkswagen. On the Russian side you can eat pirogi, drink horseradish vodka, and dream of not being sent to Siberia. All is at peace.
You drive to the checkpoint on the front lines. It is manned by League of nations police. As long as you don't randomly headshot or stab a random passerby, neither the Germans nor the Russians nor the League of Nations police will attack you. If you do headshot a random passey, you will be killed by ninjas or maybe drop bears.
Yeah. Makes sense! Taking submissions for "Trinkets friendly Advice Column" via evemail or private convo in-game. Anonymity sorta guaranteed.
|
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
78
|
Posted - 2012.11.26 18:02:00 -
[104] - Quote
I have now suggested this idea in the CSM assembly hall forums https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=175823&find=unread https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
14
|
Posted - 2012.11.26 19:57:00 -
[105] - Quote
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. |
Crimeo Khamsi
AirHogs Zulu People
31
|
Posted - 2012.11.26 20:27:00 -
[106] - Quote
Quote:This change would simply restrict INTER-EMPIRE trade to machocists who don't mind dying defenselessly, or to those who can keep the pirates off. Fixed that for you.
INTRA-empire trade would be unaffected (trade of common goods like regional ores and antibiotics and basic T1 modules that match that empire's ship types, etc.)
Only the highly lucrative trade of goods that are specially available only in certain areas would be restricted in the way you suggest. In other words, the highest profit trades would be restricted to the highest skilled, most risk-seeking haulers, while lower profit trades would still be available to any haulers.
This is classic correct game design. High risk + high skill = high reward, and low risk + low skill = low reward. That's not a "flaw." That's exactly what was intended by the OP.
The rest of your post seems to center around incorrect assumptions. You seem to be confused about the goal of this change. The goal is NOT to get more people to spend time in low sec, NOR to necessarily increase pirate targets. The goal is to change trade so that its profits go to engaged, creative, skilled, risk-seeking players, instead of going to low-risk, AFK freighter players who turn on auto pilot and then go watch TV while the isk rolls in. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
79
|
Posted - 2012.11.26 20:29:00 -
[107] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote: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.
Your assumption runs on the assumption that gate camps are totally unavoidable and that it isn't interesting to outwith and evade someone for profit. Also you assume that people who like to pvp and are not risk averse would not make use of this to make profit. Adequate numbers of routes in lowsec would make gate camping inefficient and it more worthwhile to chase somene anyway. The only people who would be caught are mouth breathers without a d-scan to evade smartbombs or friends. Also carebears are not being forced to go into lowsec with this change, its not like they move around much anyway unless they are playing afk in a freighter..
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.26 22:26:00 -
[108] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: I wouldn't be forcing anyone to do anything they wouldn't want. Also decrease in inter region trade is a GOOD thing. Opportunities would increase because now any difference in prices won't be instantly filled by a guy with a freighter in 20 minutes. Also I highly doubt people will unsub because of this. BAAAAAAW MY BILLION ISK FREIGHTER CAN'T MAKE 4 MIL IN 30 MINUTES WHILE I WATCH TV! Oh wait my crane can make even more now in less time with me actually being at the keyboard! I'd say more accounts would sub to run multiple hauler accounts. Maybe more people would wan't to be pirates with more ships running through that have economic merit. Maybe in order to move battleships inter region people will be forced to escourt freighters or setup strategic jump freighter harbors like I suggested. New players would feel like they are a part of a much bigger world with them being "separated" from other places. Industry would be a lot more dynamic. If a few whiny people unsub they will be a tiny minority and be replaced by more people wanting to get in on this new warzone.
Also cloaky haulers can be caught if you have enough light tackle to uncloak it or the pilot is not careful, not to mention the much lower volumes of trade = more opportunities for the average player to exploit.
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. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
81
|
Posted - 2012.11.26 22:44:00 -
[109] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:
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.
Moving something from one place to another is only important if the area in question can't build its own resources. Basically most industrialists try their hardest to cluster close to jita which reduces the ability for other hubs to compete. So the current system sucks for people who don't live in caldari space. The only things that will increase in price are things that are not build locally. A minmatar shipyard will probably be in minmatar space due to the abundance of the appropriate minerals so minmatar ships will be cheaper for noobs in their starting area. So all price increases will be met with appropriate price decreases.
The need for a noob to go to the other side of empire space is small. If their RL friends want a player to move from his starting location to another empire, crossing in a noob ship or pod is very viable, especially if enough routes are added so that not everywhere is camped.
Cloaky haulers can easily evade all gatecamps. However many will die because people are stupid and won't bother to know where the hellcamp of all hellcamps is or use their dscan to see a smartbomb camp ahead of time. Multiple options will exist for traders. Their are fairly common high sec- high sec connections that can fit two freighters. This will allow industrious traders who aren't afk at the keyboard to move goods between empires safely.
If I cyno at a POS and me and collaborators are the only people who know about the incoming cyno I can have a bumping mach on standby to get my ship in the shields with one good whack. Also if large organizations fought over pos towers in low sec that would achieve the intended goal of making lowsec worth something. Goons would not be the only power block willing to fight over these towers. Not to mention titan doomsdays and bubbles do not work in empire space so that means that smaller capitals will be more viable. If appropriate changes or additions were made to the hauler and freighter classes a large fleet could conceivably escourt groups of ships between empires and be nimble or have enough hitpoints in armor/shields to not die instantly and have logistics support. Such gangs could conceivably consist of 10 pilots if the new haulers were nimble enough. Also the costs and logistics of using cynos to constantly move back and forth supercaps from the heart of empire to your own territory would put a strain on even the most dedicated nerds. Low security space also takes away the use of jump bridges to easily get to your titan jump bridge. The goons would have a harder time using their massive weight of numbers unless they setup a permanent contingent in empire space which would be cool if their was actual fighting in null.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.26 22:48:00 -
[110] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:
T2 materials don't come from hisec i believe, they are simply built their because 0.0 sucks and CCP needs to fix it.
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
Quote: An important point of this change is that inter-region trade would go down, which is a good 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.
I know, you are likely to say, "Really a real world example when we are talking about a game?" Well...yes. There are reasons economists are studying the economies in MMOs. The laws of supply and demand still apply. They are learning things that can then be extrapolated to the real world. So working in the other direction isn't necessarily incorrect.
So explain why having higher prices and less trade is a "good thing". Failure to do so indicates you are just trolling.
Quote:Also im very familiar with test and goon freighter ganks, its not that hard, in my previous post I called it "Boring emergent gameplay" but you didn't read that I guess.
And this will, if anything, make it even easier to do.
Crimeo Khamsi wrote: Fact 1) Earth does not have one location where 95% of people go to trade everything in one building. In fact, for most of human history, you couldn't trade more than a few miles from your home without massive conglomerate enterprises which were the exception, not the rule.
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.
|
|
Aurelius Valentius
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
204
|
Posted - 2012.11.26 22:48:00 -
[111] - Quote
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? Look at all the Macks in local...impressive... very impressive... I see you have fashioned a new exhumer... much like you father's... your skills as a miner are now complete...indeed you are powerful as CCP Devs have foreseen... |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
81
|
Posted - 2012.11.26 22:50:00 -
[112] - Quote
Aurelius Valentius wrote: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?
Or they just leave corp avoid my war, join dec shield and then rope me in a permament war with a 3rd party entity while they continue on the merry way being afk. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Rocker Will
Roid Rage Academy Friends United Seeking Influence and Notoriety
4
|
Posted - 2012.11.26 22:53:00 -
[113] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:
Imagine all the fun that can be had when you actually have to be at risk to move things? Sure their is suicide ganking but that only happens if your hauling a stupid amount of things or are just unlucky.
If this change was added i would consider a cloaking hauler to move items myself since I am not as inclined to do research to exploit the market under the current landscape.
agreed whats the point in having cloaking abilities on haulers if u never need to use them, |
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.26 22:57:00 -
[114] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: Moving something from one place to another is only important if the area in question can't build its own resources. Basically most industrialists try their hardest to cluster close to jita which reduces the ability for other hubs to compete.
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.
Quote:If I cyno at a POS and me and collaborators are the only people who know about the incoming cyno I can have a bumping mach on standby to get my ship in the shields with one good whack before a interceptor even shows up.
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.
Quote:Also if large organizations fought over pos towers in low sec that would achieve the intended goal of making lowsec worth something.
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.
Quote:If appropriate changes or additions were made to the hauler and freighter classes a large fleet could conceivably escourt groups of ships between empires and be nimble or have enough hitpoints in armor/shields to not die instantly and have logistics support.
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. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
81
|
Posted - 2012.11.26 23:03:00 -
[115] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote: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 Most 0.0 fleets use a variety of the ships belonging to the different races. Their costs would each be different in each empire depending on the home race. Now considering that those things would no longer be the best price in jita in all cases it would expected that markets in places like rens would expand. These expanded markets would also bring in goods from t2 equipment builders to help service people who just bought their ships. The end result is all 5 hubs are mostly equal and any nullsec alliance would no longer have to go just to jita, they would go to the hub that is closest to them. As for buying ships, i don't think having to go a couple extra jumps in your jump freighter would be that much of a deal breaker.
Quote: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. Difference between eve and the real world is that most place in eve are fairly equal. The veldspar quality in the forge is no different than in domain. Any price spike means a massive opportunity for people to start taking bigger risks to get their stuff over to another hub. Suddenly trade is a massively profitable business, red frog industries and the like become fabulously rich for all their hard work and everyone is happy.
Quote:And this will, if anything, make it even easier to do. No easier than it already is in high security space. Freighters can still use high sec to high sec connections or introduce a new freighter class with more hp, less cargo, and that is more nimble and can easily be supported by logistics vessels.
Quote: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.
Jita has the best prices.The problem of one hub is already in effect. I think around 90% of all transactions happen in jita. The reason? Because jita is jita. Traders wouldn't mind having to go to different regions because they would make more isk. I would love to have the traffic of jita be divided evenly among the 5 hubs. It would be silly to think if importing were harder that jita could maintain its massive monopoly over trade. It would rapidly run out of adequate supplies for 2k people, the single station traders would start to spread out, and null alliances would simply use the hub that is the closest one.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
81
|
Posted - 2012.11.26 23:19:00 -
[116] - Quote
Quote: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. If you could be closer to jita im sure you would. If the hubs were homogenous in population then you as a industrialist could get good prices and demand for what you are building away from jita.
Quote: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. Its not nullsec, if im orbiting a friendly pos and a small gang shows up their isn't much they can do. I'm fast as all hell and can quickly dive back in the shields myself, all I have to do is watch d-scan and only come out when the time is right. Is some **** gonna sit their for 12 hours staring at my afk mach waiting for me to come out then calling a gang in the matter of a minute to blap the fastest of all battleships? Also a 100mn stabber fleet issue and a typhoon make great alternatives for poor people.
Quote: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.
What are you talking about? I always want lowsec to be worth fighting over. It's not atm ignoring faction warfare. I never said anything to contradict that. Big corps will fight over pos towers, thats obvious to everyone if this were a viable thing. These big corps will want to be the only ones with such a tower. They will blow up each others towers. When one corp isn't around jump freighters will cyno in here and be bumped in, it won't be risk free but if one is careful you probably won't die. If the corps aren't trying to blow up each others towers then the will probably fight to keep the other one off their pos at least. Depending on how valuable such a position is determines how much fighting their is. If my buisness is trade then I will fight to defend myself from attackers. pvp is fun, more pvp that pays for itself is a good thing.
Quote: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.
If armed fleets are carrying cargo then its obvious the volumes will be a fraction of what the afk freighter fleet is currently capable of so my original intention is secure. Pvp with economic incentives is always a good thing and its fun. Separating the empires making trade more profitable is a good thing to. Both would be achieved. The idea behind these fleets is obvious, they carry more in a shorter amount of time than a single freighter that found a high sec wormhole will be capable of. The volumes would be greater than a single cloaky hauler. Meanwhile the risk is much greater being the balance to the two.
However the idea is perfectly optional, I wouldn't mind if they didn't do it but I think it would be a great compliment to my plan. Especially since their are about 3 other active threads in this forum asking for a new freighter class. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 00:09:00 -
[117] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: Difference between eve and the real world is that most place in eve are fairly equal. The veldspar quality in the forge is no different than in domain.
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".
Quote:Jita has the best prices.The problem of one hub is already in effect.
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. |
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 00:11:00 -
[118] - Quote
Quote:If you could be closer to jita im sure you would. If the hubs were homogenous in population then you as a industrialist could get good prices and demand for what you are building away from jita.
I had bulk buyers in both Jita and Amarr and a sometime buyer in Dodixie. I moved a fair amount of product through the first two. Really, this "Jita is a problem" strikes me as one that is constructed entirely out of cloth. |
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 00:21:00 -
[119] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Quote: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. What are you talking about? I always want lowsec to be worth fighting over. It's not atm ignoring faction warfare. I never said anything to contradict that. Big corps will fight over pos towers, thats obvious to everyone if this were a viable thing. These big corps will want to be the only ones with such a tower. They will blow up each others towers. When one corp isn't around jump freighters will cyno in here and be bumped in, it won't be risk free but if one is careful you probably won't die. If the corps aren't trying to blow up each others towers then the will probably fight to keep the other one off their pos at least. Depending on how valuable such a position is determines how much fighting their is. If my buisness is trade then I will fight to defend myself from attackers. pvp is fun, more pvp that pays for itself is a good thing.
It still wont be worth fighting over. There might be instances that are worthy of ganks using supers, but they wont be trying to control the low sec system(s). Let me paint the scenario with more detail.
You are going to cyno in to a "safe harbor". You have your mach for bumping. But Alliance XYZ has noticed your activities. They've been watching and waiting. Now they are ready to pounce. They have a recon ship logged near where you cyno in at. You log in your characters and light the cyno, the recon logs in and lands as shortly after your JF jumps in. He tries to lock up the JF, but fails due to your awesome bumping. But he gets the mach and says, good enough and pops a cyno and in come the supers and a few other caps and pop your cyno.
Unbeknownst to the first alliance a second alliance has noticed the activity gets a cyno pilot in there and cynos in their supers and caps and the fun starts.
Now, are they fighting in low sec? Sure. Are they fighting over low sec? No. When the fun is done they'll both bunk off to whatever part of Null they call home. The victor might RF your tower for ***** and giggles and if you try to rep it come back and try to kill your repping fleet and failing that the tower itself.
But in the end they still wont give a sh*t about low sec. Why? Because low sec sucks. Making more of something that sucks isn't going to make it better, it will just make more of New Eden suck.
|
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
83
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 00:21:00 -
[120] - Quote
Quote: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". The severeness of the volatility can not be determined unless we actually come up with ratio's for how much ore is found where. I do not see this as likely being a problem in the long term. If it is done suddenly their could be temporary chaos as the market readjusts but if changes to ore distribution are done slowly it would adapt just fine in my opinion. I'm not sure about ice because I have no idea the advantages and uses for different pos types. I think gallente might be better for building stuff but this is something I am not educated on and im sure you could enlighten me about.
Quote: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.
It can be a problem for people who don't live near caldari space want the best price, it puts increased load on the server, and it just hurts immersion imo. It is still only a secondary reason to do this change anyway. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 00:35:00 -
[121] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Quote: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". The severeness of the volatility can not be determined unless we actually come up with ratio's for how much ore is found where. I do not see this as likely being a problem in the long term. If it is done suddenly their could be temporary chaos as the market readjusts but if changes to ore distribution are done slowly it would adapt just fine in my opinion. I'm not sure about ice because I have no idea the advantages and uses for different pos types. I think gallente might be better for building stuff but this is something I am not educated on and im sure you could enlighten me about. Quote: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. It can be a problem for people who don't live near caldari space want the best price, it puts increased load on the server, and it just hurts immersion imo. It is still only a secondary reason to do this change anyway.
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.
Quote:It can be a problem for people who don't live near caldari space want the best price,
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. |
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 00:39:00 -
[122] - Quote
Quote:They are gonna move all those supers to lowsec just for killing 1 JF?
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. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
83
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 00:47:00 -
[123] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:Quote:They are gonna move all those supers to lowsec just for killing 1 JF? 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.
Why supers though? Its a jump freighter you can alpha the thing with 10 tier 3 battlecruisers. You would have to keep up a 24/7 watch to see when it would come in and have the titan in jump bridge range the whole time, or always be camping it in which case the guy wont come. Also who is to say you couldn't have more than one pos? Destruction of the pos is the only viable option which would encourage battles that matter in low sec.
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:
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.
Are their enough belts in Caldari for everyone? Is their enough ice in Caldari for everyone? What about station factory slots or moons? planets? I don't think so. If jita got more populated like you say then you would find that the other four regions have much less competition for harvetsing. So as an industrialist I could create far greater volumes elsewhere. That means everywhere else in eve other than jita would have far lower prices. So your idea of Jita becoming bigger is obviously false. In fact "f**ck it, Jita" is already the dominate sentiment judging by the big red blob you see when you look at the average pilots in space on the map.
Quote: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.
1. I feel that it is a problem because trading is a boring profession that is easily botable. Not to mention nobody buys things in a backwater like rens, if my change were added it would be the go to place for minmatar ice and ships in bulk bringing other types of markets with it benefiting the locals. 2. Rens and hek are always in shortage. They suck hard, you occasionally get bulk sales in one of those areas but it is infrequent. Things are often times more expensive their to as is. My change would help them compete and not suck. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Meolyne
los tabarnakos Ouate de Phoque
21
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 01:07:00 -
[124] - Quote
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 == $$$ == dev get paid == patchs every 6 months.
Basically, when we, Europeans, take our cars to visit others countries, we aren't ganked by pirates. But pirates are ganked by customs/faction police. If we push further (let's say, East), we have a chance to be ganked by the Ex-DRF, or TEST. (Amarrians religious )
Eve reflects the world, let's keep our WTO (SCC) as it's now. If you want to be a high sec pirate, Learn the rules, then find some way to avoid them.
|
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
85
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 01:11:00 -
[125] - Quote
Meolyne wrote:When i saw this thread, i immediately thought about this Eve comic : ConcordCredits goes to Wight Ithira. His threadFactions War or not, Concord keeps securing the peace in galaxy for every capsuleer. Their new doctrine will be released Dec 4th 2012. Capsuleers == $$$ == 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.
Eve is not a peaceful place like europe. The four empires all have their differences. The caldari hate the gallente for taking their homeworld, the gallente hate the caldari for killing millions on their homeworld. The only thing keeping the peace is a 3rd party navy equipped with advanced technology eons ahead of the other races.
Now I can understand why you would want the gallente and minmatar to be connected and the amarr and caldari to be connected but I think it would be better gameplay wise if they were all separate. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mirima Thurander
Estrada Dynamics - Exploration and Acquisition
419
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 01:33:00 -
[126] - Quote
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. A Dark time comes. A time of terror comes. My time. If it offends you. Stop me. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
85
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 01:35:00 -
[127] - Quote
Mirima Thurander wrote: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.
definitely a no brainer https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Brent Newton
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 05:28:00 -
[128] - Quote
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. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
86
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 05:30:00 -
[129] - Quote
Brent Newton wrote: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.
Heh it wouldn't really make it much more dangerous for most high sec dwellers or greatly effect their income https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
14
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 13:09:00 -
[130] - Quote
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. |
|
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 17:38:00 -
[131] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:
1. I feel that it is a problem because trading is a boring profession that is easily botable. Not to mention nobody buys things in a backwater like rens, if my change were added it would be the go to place for minmatar ice and ships in bulk bringing other types of markets with it benefiting the locals. 2. Rens and hek are always in shortage. They suck hard, you occasionally get bulk sales in one of those areas but it is infrequent. Things are often times more expensive their as is. My change would help them compete and not suck.
Overall I think this change would definitely create more opportunities for something called "fun"
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.
Quote:If jita got more populated like you say then you would find that the other four regions have much less competition for harvetsing. So as an industrialist I could create far greater volumes elsewhere.
Try again, this time ease up on the ceteris paribus assumption.
Quote:So your idea of Jita becoming bigger is obviously false.
It is possible, but unlikley, because your reasoning above is lacking--i.e. it is relying too much on ceteris paribus.
Quote:In fact "f**ck it, Jita" is already the dominate sentiment judging by the big red blob you see when you look at the average pilots in space on the map.
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. |
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 17:44:00 -
[132] - Quote
Quote: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.
An excellent point. The escort for the carebear will likely have to be made up of PvPers. PvPers want to PvP. But a successful escort of a freighter is going to have...wait for it....wait...no PvP. PvP will entail risk to the carebear of substantial loss. Further, there is absolutely nothing to ensure that the PvPers wont get the poor bear out into these low sec regions and then say, "Oh, by the way, we want that cargo...." and shoot the poor sod. Training alts to do this is easy...just a few days to get into the right ships and then blammo. After you get a reputation for doing that, biomass the alt, train a new one, rinse repeat.
Beats the Hell out of the underpants gnome's plan. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
86
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 18:50:00 -
[133] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote: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.
Then don't go to lowsec. What would this change for you? Not being able to send your freighter afk to jita? Is that how you have fun? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 19:02:00 -
[134] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: Then don't go to lowsec. What would this change for you? Not being able to send your freighter afk to jita? Is that how you have fun?
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. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
86
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 19:03:00 -
[135] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:
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.
If you have a better alternative to minmatar space you are likely to trade their. If everyone's space has obstacles in getting their the risk will be evenly spread and that problem would not exist. 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.
Quote:Try again, this time ease up on the ceteris paribus assumption. So their are enough factory slots, ice belts full of new order slaves,moons, asteroid belts, exploration sites, and wormholes for everyone? Or will everything be moved to jita as it is now? Also next time try making an argument instead of a latin phrase I had to google that didn't really explain what was wrong with my point.
Quote:It is possible, but unlikley, because your reasoning above is lacking--i.e. it is relying too much on ceteris paribus. Why?
Quote: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. My main beef is not with jita. Also you neglect I already mentioned nullsec production in the first post.
commander ted wrote: Also fix nullsec industry while your at it.
Their are plenty of other reasons to do this.
Namely to make trading fun in the face of it being only buying a ship loading it with loot then autopiloting while you aren't even their. Also the hopeful possibility of making low sec a place where pvp other than FW and pirates shooting other pirates for no real gain. The end result being the only people who will loose their current style of play are afk traders who when at their keyboards its boring as hell, not to mention easily done by a bot. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
86
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 19:05:00 -
[136] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:Commander Ted wrote: Then don't go to lowsec. What would this change for you? Not being able to send your freighter afk to jita? Is that how you have fun?
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. Like trade?
Must I mention all the current incentives they have? FW plexes, capital ship building, better ores, better exploration sites, factory slots that are less likely to be used, pos's without standings requirements, the list goes on. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
15
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 19:08:00 -
[137] - Quote
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. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
86
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 19:17:00 -
[138] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote: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.
Rising prices? Well the only thing you might have to replace over and over is the occasional drone, and ammo is not that big a deal in any case. Unless you die a lot in missions. I don't care that you don't care for pvp, bear it up all you like. Not to mention your opportunities for profit will increase as well for your LP rewards if you get a helios and cross lowsec only once making even more than you do now.
Also I think this "Rising prices" thing is exaggerated. You will probably have to pay more for a raven outside of caldari space and the like but industry should start to localize. Also in any case moving to another region can be done by paying someone else to move your things for you, finding a safe highsec to highsec wormhole (will take some extra time yes) , or just saying **** it and use a friend or alt to scout which is very very very very easy. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
15
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 19:22:00 -
[139] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Nahkep Narmelion wrote:Commander Ted wrote: Then don't go to lowsec. What would this change for you? Not being able to send your freighter afk to jita? Is that how you have fun?
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. Like trade? Hell if I use a blockade runner it would be better than the snooze fest of flying a freighter. People who really want to do it safe can still spend a lot of time finding a wormhole, while larger and more constant quantities can moved by going directly through low sec. Must I mention all the current incentives they have? FW plexes, capital ship building, better ores, better exploration sites, factory slots that are less likely to be used, pos's without standings requirements, the list goes on.
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. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
86
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 19:25:00 -
[140] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:
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.
Sorry but I already do exploration sites in lowsec and its very safe. Occasionally I get driven out of my site but I keep my ishtar.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
15
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 19:36:00 -
[141] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:
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.
Sorry but I already do exploration sites in lowsec and its very safe. Occasionally I get driven out of my site but I keep my ishtar. I really don't care if you live in lowsec or not. I just want someone to go for reasons of economic necessity which would be better than the pirate on pirate assgrabbing fest it is.
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. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
86
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 19:39:00 -
[142] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:
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.
Fine go me, I don't care if you don't go to low sec, I know you won't. When you wanna move your ships find a wormhole or pay someone else to do it. Your play style will change little, I will have a new opportunity for fun that won't effect you. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
15
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 20:18:00 -
[143] - Quote
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. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
86
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 20:31:00 -
[144] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote: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.
No im not. Stop assuming things. Maybe I want a fight that matters? I like how you also assume most of eve run missions and doesn't pvp just like you. I don't want to hurt your carebearing and this won't, your asking for something not to change because it would put a minor and easily counterable rain on your parade. How much time do you spend moving all those ships anyway? Seems like a lot of isk/hr lost moving all of your missioning boats. Maybe you would be better off paying someone with a static highsec wormhole and a freighter to do it for you. Maybe you can bring just your tengu and pack it in a crane then be done with it. The only people who will be hurt are people who haul without even being at their keyboard. YOUR PLAY STYLE WONT CHANGE. Really I think you have all sorts of misconceptions about how us "evil" pvpers only want to make the little carebears cry. Things that make you more isk for risk are fun. Maybe not to you but to me it is great fun. Low risk low isk trading will still be their. Low risk transporting of your assets will still be their.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
15
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 21:04:00 -
[145] - Quote
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. |
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 21:50:00 -
[146] - Quote
Quote:If you have a better alternative to minmatar space you are likely to trade their.
How about mission running. About as boring (imo) and probably makes ok isk and little to no risk. Mining, same thing once you get decent skills and the appropriate barge for your play style/ore you want to mine.
Quote:If everyone's space has obstacles in getting their the risk will be evenly spread and that problem would not exist.
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.
Players have demonstrated time and again that in general they don't like low sec. Low sec is sparsely populated and alot of resources are largely untapped. They just don't want to go there. So, if you are going to come up with a strategy to get more people into low sec, make things happen there, sit down and think about how any idea you come up with can be circumvented up to and including people just going, "Welp, so much for that, and just not doing what you think they should and doing something else entirely."
Quote: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.
|
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 21:50:00 -
[147] - Quote
Quote:So their are enough factory slots, ice belts full of new order slaves,moons, asteroid belts, exploration sites, and wormholes for everyone?
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.
Quote:Like trade? Hell if I use a blockade runner it would be better than the snooze fest of flying a freighter.
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.
Quote: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.
|
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 22:07:00 -
[148] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:
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.
Sorry but I already do exploration sites in lowsec and its very safe.
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.
Quote:I just want someone to go for reasons of economic necessity which would be better than the pirate on pirate assgrabbing fest it is.
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. |
Lord Battlestar
CALIMA COLLABORATIVE Atrox Urbanis Respublique Abundatia
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 22:34:00 -
[149] - Quote
works for me, more profit for jump feighters or transports. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
86
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 00:22:00 -
[150] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote: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.
If imports from other places stop or are reduced the supply in jita will see a sharp drop. So prices increase. Prices being higher in jita than elsewhere makes people choose to move. Their aren't enough belts and moons to supply jita in caldari space alone. In the long run obviously people will be forced to leave. Their are a limited number of places you can harvest from and a limited number of places you can build from, the potential number of factory orders in the caldari state are limited and all of eve can't live in one spot.
Another thing is the null sec alliances that buy in bulk from jita would instead go to the hub that is closest.
Quote: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. I have a easy fix to make something not boring, I also am preserving the ability of the people who like boring to do boring. Their are plenty of people without a freighter alt who need a POS moved to a system, people who are moving somewhere else and need to transport things to another hub quickly with a WORMHOLE, quick opportunities to make isk by supplying a mission hub with ammo, moving ships from your industry pos to the local hub, supplying minor hubs like tash-murkon with products to sell, etc. Profits for boring traders would likely increase along with profits for risk taking traders.
If your moving a freighter through a high sec choke point crammed with expensive loot your dumb. If you go solo in lowsec with a freighter, your dumb. If you have a scout and a alt to web your freighter, your not as dumb still kinda dumb though (back to my idea of adding a new freighter class). Having your freighter survive when you make it through a obstacle is gratifying.
Quote: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.
Quote: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.
He doesn't fly a freighter and he doesnt have to go into low sec. Thus this change is irrelevant to him. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
86
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 00:25:00 -
[151] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote: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. If he is moving his badger alone then he is an idiot.
Everyone carebears to some degree because they have to. If I could make a proper living doing nothing but pvp that is exactly what I would do.
If your reasons are easily circumvented then they are not good reasons. If you have any other reasons against this please post them and I will argue with you. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
86
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 00:36:00 -
[152] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:
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.
He doesnt have to go into lowsec. K problem solved.
Quote: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.
Freighter pilots who don't like to risk will use wormholes and make more per trip and less afk.
People who like risk and think it is worth it should have the ability to make more per trip by taking a faster and constantly open route through low sec. Current freighters are to slow to do this, (nimbler less alpha friendly freighter class?). However say a corporation say a opportunistic price gap between a t2 module of some type then it may want to bring a couple iteron v's through low security space with a scout frigate, and a number of ships capable of neutralizing any smaller lighter group of pirates would make the trip. The reason nobody currently uses the jita-dodixie route is because their is one system that you must pass through for the route to be worth it, Rancer, which is currently a inescapable hell camp that those not already briefed die in often. My proposal would not have such a problem because it would have more than one route worth flying.
Then a corporation capable of setting up a safe pos will have the option to constantly move jump freighters back and forth making a safe pos like theirs a desirable target for attack by another low sec entity. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
86
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 00:47:00 -
[153] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:
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.
Relevant point next time?
Quote: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.
Quote: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.
I looked at the map, it is 100% impossible to get from amarr to jita without crossing .5 space. It is also impossible to get from jita to dodixie without crossing .5 space. Hmmmmm so maybe it doesn't matter? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
86
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 01:00:00 -
[154] - Quote
Was exiting providence in my rupture and in the 4 jumps out in domain empire low I saw a badger, iteron V, and a bestower pass me by. No camps excluding the one at the entrance to null. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Blastil
Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance
25
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 01:00:00 -
[155] - Quote
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. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
86
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 01:08:00 -
[156] - Quote
Blastil wrote: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.
Fuel costs money, everything in eve is not going to be moved by jump freighter, that is just silly. I can make a 20 jumps in my blockade runner before you can even get your jump freighter to lowsec, beating you to any lower volume item. While the jump freighter will be good at higher volume trades it will still loose to blockade runners. Sudden opportunity trades won't be for them, they will likely be preferred because they can keep moving things that are always in demand like ice and ore over and over. People with less isk and resources will then be able to use wormhole freighters. Null sec alliances who move their ships and modules into their space either sell them at a loss of impart costs onto the consumers. Also solitude blows for a number of reasons, mainly because it has no advantage to it over gallente space. Their are no special missions, no special ores, no anything. The other four empires already have people living in them while solitude never had anything. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Rendiff
Flashpoint Industries Ethereal Dawn
17
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 01:42:00 -
[157] - Quote
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. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
86
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 01:43:00 -
[158] - Quote
Rendiff wrote: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. I agree and disagree, I think it would be more fun if they all separated. Also maybe all four sides could be able to shoot each other in FW? I can not think of any lore reasons for it but I would prefer it from a game play point of view. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
86
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 03:57:00 -
[159] - Quote
Lore explanation thought up, The caldari states new jump gate technology to explore the rest of black rise has caused stargate wormholes to be unstable that are near black rise. This new region is called "Black Void" and has caused the connecting gallente and amarr stargates that are high security space to be severed due to their proximity. The gallente have also lost connection to the minmatar due to this strange event. Black void would be a narrow sparsely filled region filling the void from the serpent's coil to algintal. Many suspect this new jumpgate technology was not discovered by the caldari but purposely given to them by an unknown entity. The Gallente have discovered a new ancient jumpgate network near the myrdian strip, and would be named after the local landmark. The angel cartel and serpentis have began moving in because they feel that their is ancient jovian technology to be had making it very insecure. This region will connect to minmatar and ammatar space with another connection to black void. The ammatar have decided to break all ties with the amarr and destroyed all their stargates in high security space. They wish to ally with the minmatar republic but they are still a sovereign state, at the same time the ammatar have found new gravity wells in divinities edge and began settling their. Divinities edge will be the minmatar's new zone (kinda). Amarr are huge and don't need ****, they just will connect to Black Void and Divinities Edge.
Currently each faction connects to their ally and their historial enemy by high sec while having to cross their allies space in order to get to the enemy of their friends space.
Because I got confused myself writing that here is a simplified form
Amarr get to minmatar space by going through the new Ammatar lowsec (divinities edge), Caldari through black void. Gallente reach the caldari through black void/rise and minmatar through Myridian. Caldari can reach minmatar by hopping through black void to myrdian to minmatar. Amarr reach gallente through myrdian then black void.
For each race to reach their main enemies area they can still cross the current FW battlegrounds.
All four races can reach the enemy of their friends more quickly by way of the already existing narrow constellations. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
15
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 04:27:00 -
[160] - Quote
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. |
|
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
87
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 05:06:00 -
[161] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote: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.
People do pvp in low just for fun all the time very little monetary gain is made though as they often carebear to pay for the ships losses, In null people fight for ratting rights and to protect under construction capitals but not to many large incentives like that exist in low, (poco's just don't have the same isk appeal). However their is no good reason to bring a freighter through currently, (one time I was in a frigate and i saw a freighter autopilot 3 jumps through low tried calling for help but I couldn't do anything or else gate guns would kill me).
Now saying someone in the new lowsec will always be a badger who has no defenses is silly, a smart pilot will bring a scout or friends. Just because they are the prey doesnt mean they wont bite back, it could be a trap badger that lights a cyno, the pack of haulers may have logistics support and a group of cloaked recon vessels with a regular pvp gang lying in wait, it could be a whole armada moving through multiple freighters.
True bears who absolutely don't want to pvp will use cloaky haulers or high sec wormholes. Saying that people who don't want to pvp should have access to the most lucrative form of trade is silly, it's like saying 0.0 ores should spawn in highsec because CCP is trying to force us casuals into going into null. Just like with every other form of isk making their will be a version that doesn't make as much isk (the safe way) and the one that makes more. The safe play style will remain and plenty of jobs will still be around for the risk averse trade bear. So in short NOBODY IS GOING TO BE FORCED TO GO ANYWHERE.
Also people do setup traps like you said all the time, waiting that long is boring though and I have better things to do. Most people use courier contracts to do that sort of thing anyway btw. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
87
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 05:13:00 -
[162] - Quote
Btw I made a quick map in paint to give an example of what the new map could look like Proposed Map https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
15
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 05:48:00 -
[163] - Quote
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. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
87
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 05:53:00 -
[164] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote: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. /facepalm
Im not waiting 12 hours - a few days for some idiot to bring a marauder into lowsec. Seriously their are options for traders other than crossing lowsec, I told you multiple times their are ways around lowsec for the risk averse. People who want to make more isk can bring escorts for their haulers. I said multiple times NOBODY IS FORCED TO DO ANYTHING. If I wanted to force someone into pvp I would wardec them. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Ludi Burek
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
199
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 13:03:00 -
[165] - Quote
How does this boil down to "they just wanna gank meh :(" for some people.
This change would improve the value of activity for industrialist and inter region traders, pro couriers...
Why does it have to automatically be gankers vs the poor haulers? Are people that one dimensional? Don't be the dumb hauler geez, or is that just inevitable for some people? To be that guy |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
15
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 14:48:00 -
[166] - Quote
Ludi Burek wrote:How does this boil down to "they just wanna gank meh :(" for some people. This change would improve the value of activity for industrialist and inter region traders, pro couriers... Why does it have to automatically be gankers vs the poor haulers? Are people that one dimensional? Don't be the dumb hauler geez, or is that just inevitable for some people? To be that guy
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. |
Crimeo Khamsi
AirHogs Zulu People
38
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 16:22:00 -
[167] - Quote
Quote: 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?
Good riddance, we don't need people playing eve who are so dumb that they aren't even capable of considering the usage of entire classes of ships that already exist in the game to allow them to do exactly what they want to do.
There are these things... called blockade runners. They have, like, cloaks and ****. In the proposed plan, anybody who didn't want to be social, but still wanted to haul high value goods, could use one of these mythical ships, along with the star map "ships killed" stats, d-scan, and bookmarks, and get through 99%+ of their trips past the lowsec belt just fine.
If they refuse to upgrade to anything except a t1 undefended, unescorted badger, even after getting ganked the first 1 or 2 times, then they are true idiots, and they have no business hauling anything in the first place. These would be the only people who would be getting "forced" into ganky, pvp situations when they didn't want to be: people who are illiterate. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
87
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 17:25:00 -
[168] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote: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.
Everything your saying doesn't make sense because I just told you how not to get ganked with near certainty WORMHOLES AND BLOCKADE RUNNERS. If you want to make more isk trading then go to low sec with protection and we can have a fleet battle with pvp ships escourting haulers. So please stop being a broken record. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
90
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 22:39:00 -
[169] - Quote
Proposed regions overlayed current eve map. map https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
L'Acuto
Old Timers Guild Inc.
7
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 01:49:00 -
[170] - Quote
Trade between the empires would be ruled by jump freighters. |
|
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
91
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 01:51:00 -
[171] - Quote
L'Acuto wrote:Trade between the empires would be ruled by jump freighters.
Fuel isn't free son. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Omnathious Deninard
Extrinsic Operations
275
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 01:58:00 -
[172] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:L'Acuto wrote:Trade between the empires would be ruled by jump freighters. Fuel isn't free son. A person could make good money by transporting off race fules to major hubs with these changes. Ideas for Drone Improvement Updated 11/16/12Catastrophic Uprising is Recruiting |
Blastil
Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance
25
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 03:45:00 -
[173] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Fuel costs money, everything in eve is not going to be moved by jump freighter, that is just silly.
AHAHHAHAAHHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAAHHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAH.
Maybe you should try playing eve before commenting on how to fix it....
|
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
91
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 04:23:00 -
[174] - Quote
Blastil wrote:Commander Ted wrote:Fuel costs money, everything in eve is not going to be moved by jump freighter, that is just silly. AHAHHAHAAHHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAAHHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAH. Maybe you should try playing eve before commenting on how to fix it.... I was incorrect on the costs of jump freighter fuel and have been running under a major misconception. However I do not believe that this oversight will completely ruin my plan.
My earlier suggestion in the opening post of removing all stations from high sec entry points still could be applied adding risk to the use of jump freighters, jump freighters are still slow and a cloaked hauler will beat it to wherever it is going. Normal freighters still carry far larger volumes and can use wormholes to carry greater volumes assuming a wormhole can be found quickly, normal freighters do not cost seven billion isk either. A regular Itty V can carry nearly 40k m3 of items and can cross lowsec with a scout beating it to a trade of lower volumes.
I was under the impression that fuel was much more expensive than it was. I dun goof'ed. Other posts in this forum also reinforced this misconception. Yet I do not think this robs my idea of all of its merit. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Blastil
Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance
25
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 15:35:00 -
[175] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: I was incorrect on the costs of jump freighter fuel and have been running under a major misconception. However I do not believe that this oversight will completely ruin my plan.
...
I was under the impression that fuel was much more expensive than it was. I dun goof'ed. Other posts in this thread also reinforced this misconception. Yet I do not think this robs my idea of its merit.
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. |
Omnathious Deninard
Extrinsic Operations
281
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 16:40:00 -
[176] - Quote
Fuel prices are due to ice not being an depleatable resource, imagine how cheap ships would be if asteroids were infinite. Ice needs to have a limited supply. That though does affect this idea it by no means strips it of credibility. Ideas for Drone Improvement Updated 11/16/12Catastrophic Uprising is Recruiting |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
95
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 17:34:00 -
[177] - Quote
Blastil wrote:Commander Ted wrote: I was incorrect on the costs of jump freighter fuel and have been running under a major misconception. However I do not believe that this oversight will completely ruin my plan.
...
I was under the impression that fuel was much more expensive than it was. I dun goof'ed. Other posts in this thread also reinforced this misconception. Yet I do not think this robs my idea of its merit.
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 feel silly after I initially thought fuel cost a big deal. I never had any reason to move capital ships myself. However if it was possible to force jump freighters to be vulnerable at a low sec exit at a point like a pos then surely it would encourage conflict over the control of trade routes. Not to mention many people are nowhere near being capable of affording a jump freighter and I wonder just how many jump freighters their are? Also who the hell complains about moving stuff around hisec? Just send a freighter to autopilot their. I also never said anything about making JF jump ranges shorter.
Also a huge percentage of current trade is done by poor people who can't afford a 7 billion isk jump freighter. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 17:58:00 -
[178] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: If imports from other places stop or are reduced the supply in jita will see a sharp drop.
Maybe.
Don't you get it. People often don't do what you think they should. This has been Greyscales problem in trying to change null sec and break up the big power blocks. He thinks, "Tweak this, and that will cause the change I want." But the players show time and again that they are quite able to adapt to his changes AND maintain their large power blocks.
Same thing could happen here. For example Rens and Hek could simply stop being trade hubs altogether. Now you have to cross a vast swath of low sec that curiously devoid of stations, only to get across that to find you have to travel across a number of 0.5 systems where you are still easily gankable by a surprisingly small handful of players. Yeah....fun fun that.
Quote:So prices increase.
Yes, in the short run prices will increase. Will prices stay elevated? Some will and some wont.
Quote:Prices being higher in jita than elsewhere makes people choose to move.
Pure speculation here. Jita prices will be higher that Jita prices prior to this change, they wont necessarily be higher than everywhere else.
Quote:Their aren't enough belts and moons to supply jita in caldari space alone. In the long run obviously people will be forced to leave.
First off getting moon goo to market wont be that big a deal for null sec alliances. As for moons for POS for things like invention, I think you need to count again. This citadel has 1,599 moons in systems with sec status of 0.5-0.7 The Forge has 2,359. 2,183 in Lonetrek for a total of 6,472 moons. That is alot of moons for doing research. Is it enough for everyone? I don't know but I'm gonna guess that that is enough to keep Jita from shrinking much. In fact, yeah people might move...to Caldari space.
You are just guessing here...Hell you can't even be arsed to go look at how many moons are in Caldari 0.5-0.7 space. You just assume it is not enough, or not enough to allow for trade in Jita after this change to remain the same or even grow.
And as I noted Amarr might also become a bigger trade hub (at the expense of say Gallente space). And you don't want to know about the available moons in just Domain alone (4,237 with another 1,911 in Genesis, tack on Kador and in Amarr space there are at least 8,136 moons).
So best case scenario for you might be shifting all trade to Amarr and Jita.
Quote:Their are a limited number of places you can harvest from and a limited number of places you can build from, the potential number of factory orders in the caldari state are limited and all of eve can't live in one spot.
Yes, but there are lots and lots of moons. And when prices go up, it might make sense to even start building at POS in Caldari and Amarr space vs. going to Gallente or Minmatar space and hoping people buy from you there. They might, but maybe not.
|
Ocih
Space Mermaids Somethin Awfull Forums
316
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 18:21:00 -
[179] - Quote
I support a divided EVE. Decisions should matter. Being Amarr means nothing in EVE right now. |
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 19:07:00 -
[180] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Nahkep Narmelion wrote:
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.
commander ted wrote:If you have a better alternative to minmatar space you are likely to trade their. Relevant point next time?
The relevant point is you can't even take 5 minutes to do basic research such as how many moons are available for POS in caldari space or even the number of belts (there are 1,154 fixed belts in Caldari space by the way and the actual number is unknown...I'll let you ponder that one for a bit). Then based on ignorance you make statements with certainty.
Commander Ted wrote:Fuel isn't free son.
That is just pathetic. It doesn't refute the claim in the least. Yeah, jump freighter use fuel and that has a cost. But they will likely beat using a standard freighter for inter-empire trade. The dominant form of travel for large cargo will likely be the jump freighter. For smaller cargo, the blockade runner.
And since you are demonstrating that you once again don't know **** from shinola, people will use a jump freighter to move items in bulk when the profit margin is sufficient to offset the costs of the POS(es) necessary to cross this low sec belt and jump freighter fuel costs. For smaller items that are profitable to move, a blockade runner will be used.
In those cases when the profits do not justify moving cargo, the cargo will not be moved.
Quote: I feel silly after I initially thought fuel cost a big deal. I never had any reason to move capital ships myself. However if it was possible to force jump freighters to be vulnerable at a low sec exit at a point like a pos then surely it would encourage conflict over the control of trade routes.
Tell us again how you weren't going to force anyone to do things.
And your "simple fix" is getting more and more complicated. Now it is add low sec systems to separate empires. Oh, maybe a new freighter class ship. And...uhhh...some sort of way to make jump freighters even more vulnerable at a POS. |
|
Ersahi Kir
Freelance Mining Company
5
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 20:53:00 -
[181] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Nahkep Narmelion wrote: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. I wouldn't be forcing anyone to do anything they wouldn't want. Also decrease in inter region trade is a GOOD thing. Opportunities would increase because now any difference in prices won't be instantly filled by a guy with a freighter in 20 minutes. Also I highly doubt people will unsub because of this. BAAAAAAW MY BILLION ISK FREIGHTER CAN'T MAKE 4 MIL IN 30 MINUTES WHILE I WATCH TV! Oh wait my crane can make even more now in less time with me actually being at the keyboard! I'd say more accounts would sub to run multiple hauler accounts. Maybe more people would wan't to be pirates with more ships running through that have economic merit. Maybe in order to move battleships inter region people will be forced to escourt freighters or setup strategic jump freighter harbors like I suggested. New players would feel like they are a part of a much bigger world with them being "separated" from other places. Industry would be a lot more dynamic. If a few whiny people unsub they will be a tiny minority and be replaced by more people wanting to get in on this new warzone. Also cloaky haulers can be caught if you have enough light tackle to uncloak it or the pilot is not careful, not to mention the much lower volumes of trade = more opportunities for the average player to exploit.
|
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 21:33:00 -
[182] - Quote
Ersahi Kir wrote:Commander Ted wrote:Nahkep Narmelion wrote:This probably wont .... I wouldn't be forcing anyone to do anything they wouldn't want. ....
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. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
95
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 21:52:00 -
[183] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:Ersahi Kir wrote:Commander Ted wrote:Nahkep Narmelion wrote:This probably wont .... I wouldn't be forcing anyone to do anything they wouldn't want. .... 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.
Force those who want to make more isk. I don't think anyone is against more rewards for more risk. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 22:12:00 -
[184] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Nahkep Narmelion wrote:Ersahi Kir wrote:Commander Ted wrote:Nahkep Narmelion wrote:This probably wont .... I wouldn't be forcing anyone to do anything they wouldn't want. .... 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. Force those who want to make more isk. I don't think anyone is against more rewards for more risk.
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....).
|
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
95
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 23:25:00 -
[185] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:
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....).
No i don't but I bump freighters a lot. (more talking out the side of my mouth) the more dangerous it is for jump freighters the better. I thought the pos was a best case scenario. Now unless you can cyno right on top of the gate I think it would be cool to have to take at least 1 jump through a low sec gate or be able to be ganked making people who use wormholes and small volume ships compete better, then you have to protect your really expensive asset making the profit margins even better for those who don't have 8bil. Maybe even keep the jump freighter as a toy for the big 0.0 alliances.
Also can't you cyno in like 15km away with the bumper already lined up going full speed? Tell me, its vital i know before I argue anything else because either Jump freighters will be stupid easy to use or trade volumes will be low.
So I will overview what I think or at least hope will happen. 1. Ice and minerals won't cost exactly the same everywhere helping to bolster industries in different areas give each empire a advantage in building its local ships 2. Players will fight to keep trade routes open in low sec be it by breaking gatecamps, building safe cyno pos's, or escourting groups of industrials 3. Trading will have multiple flavors, the slower safer wormhole/cloak based trading and the large volume fast trade caravans 4. No more AFK freight which is boring 5. Increase immersion https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Crimeo Khamsi
AirHogs Zulu People
43
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 23:31:00 -
[186] - Quote
Quote: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. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
95
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 23:36:00 -
[187] - Quote
Crimeo Khamsi wrote:Quote: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 think it is relevant because the difficulty of using jump freighters means whether or not most trade will be conducted by jump freighters or if necessity requires use of other methods.
If we just remove all safe cyno stations at the entrances will it be to risky to use jump freighters? Will we see big badger caravans?
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.12.01 00:41:00 -
[188] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:
No i don't but I bump freighters a lot. (more talking out the side of my mouth) the more dangerous it is for jump freighters the better. I thought the pos was a best case scenario. Now unless you can cyno right on top of the gate I think it would be cool to have to take at least 1 jump through a low sec gate or be able to be ganked making people who use wormholes and small volume ships compete better, then you have to protect your really expensive asset making the profit margins even better for those who don't have 8bil. Maybe even keep the jump freighter as a toy for the big 0.0 alliances.
The more dangerous the better? For whom? The more dangerous the less likely people will be to use it. Seriously, what is it with Eve players who think things will be just grand with a smaller less efficient economy? I just don't f---ing get it.
"If we shrink the economy the game will be so much better!!! People not being able to buy the ship they want! Having to scrounge for ammo, more time grinding for isk!!! It will be glorious!!"
Sorry, but to me that looks like something that sucks. I like knowing there are plenty of whatever I want available.
Quote:Also can't you cyno in like 15km away with the bumper already lined up going full speed? Tell me, its vital i know before I argue anything else because either Jump freighters will be stupid easy to use or trade volumes will be low.
You could, but if you miss (when somebody cynos in they land in a random spot in a 5km sphere around the cyno), and if you do, and have a MWD doing to get an good bump...well it will take time to get set up to bump again.
Quote:So I will overview what I think or at least hope will happen. 1. Ice and minerals won't cost exactly the same everywhere helping to bolster industries in different areas give each empire a advantage in building its local ships
Minerals are not really a problem since the number of belts in any region isn't really and truly limited. I mentioned this before, maybe you thought I was joking. I wasn't.
Quote:2. Players will fight to keep trade routes open in low sec be it by breaking gatecamps, building safe cyno pos's, or escourting groups of industrials
The only fighting will likely be ganks of opportunity. People will use scouts, and possibly even multiple routes to circumvent fighting. Risking an 8 billion isk JF with a 5 billion cargo is not something smart players will do...at least not all that often. S**t does happen but the smart players will do everything and anything to minimize risk. For example, a dead end system might make an ideal mid point if one is needed. That way you can go up the pipe a system or 2 and get advanced warning of incoming hostiles. Also, watch the map to see if any system is getting a build up of pilots and/or learn where hostiles might have titans logged to do bridges.
And this brings up another idea, those most likely to benefit would be large organizations....like alliances from null. They'll have the man power to do scouting, set up POS chains, if necessary, and the resources to hold said POS.
This change will hurt the small time corps, alliances, single players, etc. Which I imagine would correlate somewhat with newer players too.
Also, there are somethings a cloaky just can't haul in a cloaky, and I doubt many people will try wormholes...after all the exit has to be near your destination and that isn't always guaranteed, and I'm pretty sure some W-space denizens are good at scanning people down (e.g. AHARM). Some things simply wont get moved.
Quote:4. No more AFK freight which is boring
There will be AFK freight intra-empire. |
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.12.01 00:44:00 -
[189] - Quote
Crimeo Khamsi wrote:
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.
To quote one of my son's favorite shows, Archer,
"Nooooooope!"
You cannot light a cyno in high security space. Only 0.4 and lower. |
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.12.01 00:51:00 -
[190] - Quote
And ice shouldn't be a huge problem either for the JF pilots. The fuel bay is plenty big, and you can always stash some in the mid point POS corp hangar array if truly necessary.
Another thing to consider....the range of a JF with JDC 5 is 11.25 light years. If this "belt" is not big enough a JF pilot can jump into an empty system with a hi sec exit and a webbing alt on stand by, and then warp to gate, jump and boom....done.
You'll basically need an entire low sec region between each empire....maybe more. That is alot of of systems to add to the game. Converting existing systems would likely make high sec very small. |
|
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
296
|
Posted - 2012.12.01 03:00:00 -
[191] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:And ice shouldn't be a huge problem either for the JF pilots. The fuel bay is plenty big, and you can always stash some in the mid point POS corp hangar array if truly necessary.
Another thing to consider....the range of a JF with JDC 5 is 11.25 light years. If this "belt" is not big enough a JF pilot can jump into an empty system with a hi sec exit and a webbing alt on stand by, and then warp to gate, jump and boom....done.
You'll basically need an entire low sec region between each empire....maybe more. That is alot of of systems to add to the game. Converting existing systems would likely make high sec very small.
Added via edit:
Right now, I could jump from Dodixie straight to Map Enderailen (a station system--i.e. land on the station in case I need to dock) then warp to Rairomon a high security system, and then AFK autopilot to Jita.
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. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
95
|
Posted - 2012.12.01 03:37:00 -
[192] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:Nahkep Narmelion wrote:And ice shouldn't be a huge problem either for the JF pilots. The fuel bay is plenty big, and you can always stash some in the mid point POS corp hangar array if truly necessary.
Another thing to consider....the range of a JF with JDC 5 is 11.25 light years. If this "belt" is not big enough a JF pilot can jump into an empty system with a hi sec exit and a webbing alt on stand by, and then warp to gate, jump and boom....done.
You'll basically need an entire low sec region between each empire....maybe more. That is alot of of systems to add to the game. Converting existing systems would likely make high sec very small.
Added via edit:
Right now, I could jump from Dodixie straight to Map Enderailen (a station system--i.e. land on the station in case I need to dock) then warp to Rairomon a high security system, and then AFK autopilot to Jita. 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.
1.Low sec is easily crossed. Unless someone was capable of setting up 40+ rancer hell camps then the new low sec would be easily traversed in even an iteron with a scout. Then you also have people dropping JFs directly on the gate like you said. 2. Security status is not determined by the empires, it is how strong the CONCORD enforcement is. Factional warfare systems have a heavy military presence but no concord. A very good description of why the scenario you named is silly https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2226551#post2226551 3. If we separated the factions then everything would be encouraged to be built close to where it is sold, if things get really really expensive then obviously a industrialist will want to capitalize on that by building ships where things are expensive and a lot of people want it. That would balance out prices. 4. If everyone lived in caldari space and mined caldari ice and got caldari faction items then as a carebear I could make more money doing my carebearing somewhere else. It is not like solitude where it is just a exact copy of gallente space but shittier. 5. Not even the goons will be able to stop the jump freighters, cloaky haulers, and people who just use wormholes. 7. (you skipped 6) No it wouldn't, it would make competition a lot more interesting. Sure it would be a lot more likely that you will be the first person to a trade but still now you can actually fight against your fellow traders. 8. Suiciding lots of people is a lot easier than maintaining a gate camp over every single gallente low sec entrance, even now their are quite a few. Even if goons had the will to do it they would be so spread out and vulnerable to retaliation that lots of people could and would retaliate. 9. No mostly because of reasons I have already named. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
95
|
Posted - 2012.12.01 03:54:00 -
[193] - Quote
So since we determined that their is no way of stopping jump freighters from crossing low sec safely other than nerfing them or putting a giant hole in the middle of the map then lets look at what might happen.
1. Trade would DECREASE since most people do not own jump freighters at this time. 2. People who do not have 7-8bil will use cloaky haulers, wormhole based freighters, or scout iterons. 3. fuel prices increase. 4. Jump freighters are still slow once they get to high sec. I can still race them and beat them to a trade that isn't 5 battleships with a smaller vessel. 5. The gaps in prices will increase between hubs but the average CPI (consumer price index) will stay similar. Players who like to trade will have more profits and more engaging gameplay that is worth doing. 6. All this extra jump freighter traffic will increase ice prices 7. Pirates will have more **** to do. 8. Personal courier contracts will be worth more money 9. People can still trade within a single empire and make a nice chunk of change. 10. The difficulty for some industrialists who do not have jump freighters will help homogenize the concentrations of industry throughout high security space. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.12.01 06:03:00 -
[194] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:So since we determined that their is no way of stopping jump freighters from crossing low sec safely other than nerfing them or putting a giant hole in the middle of the map then lets look at what might happen.
1. Trade would DECREASE since most people do not own jump freighters at this time. 2. People who do not have 7-8bil will use cloaky haulers, wormhole based freighters, or scout iterons. 3. fuel prices increase. 4. Jump freighters are still slow once they get to high sec. I can still race them and beat them to a trade that isn't 5 battleships with a smaller vessel. 5. The gaps in prices will increase between hubs but the average CPI (consumer price index) will stay similar. Players who like to trade will have more profits and more engaging gameplay that is worth doing. 6. All this extra jump freighter traffic will increase ice prices 7. Pirates will have more **** to do. 8. Personal courier contracts will be worth more money 9. People can still trade within a single empire and make a nice chunk of change. 10. The difficulty for some industrialists who do not have jump freighters will help homogenize the concentrations of industry throughout high security space.
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.
|
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
95
|
Posted - 2012.12.01 06:12:00 -
[195] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:
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.
I infer based on what I know. Their are really common wormholes that connect two high security systems with no w-space system in between. I click jump on the whole and I go from high sec system to high sec system, and they can fit a freighter going back and forth once. As for a trip that involves crossing a wormhole system if you jump through the wormhole with your freighter and you enter warp the moment someone shows up to kill you the wormhole is sitting their in range for you to jump back through. If you scout the other end and see no bubbles your nearly 100% safe and can go straight through once you arrive. As for odds of getting where you want to go that is the catch. If you find a wormhole that takes you somewhere else in high security space odds are that it is going to take you to another empire and you can make a trade.
Also responding to the number points 1. More ice of one type = lower prices for that ice. The less people mining minmatar ice the higher prices for people who run minmatar poses and capitals. This means more isk/hour for minmatar ice miners and icebears will move to minmatar space to mine their ice. 2. High ends matter don't they? 3. Station production and research slots along with planets for PI.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.12.02 01:44:00 -
[196] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:
I infer based on what I know....
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.
Okay, fair enough. However, let me point out that while a worm hole might very well connect 2 high sec systems, the issue is do they lead where the trader/supplier wants them to go? Also, sure you can go from point A to B and back via a wormhole....if nobody else goes through. If they do, you might end up stuck. Obvious solution, use a scanning alt. But that raises the requirement to use worm holes meaning less people can use them, at least in the short run. And no you aren't nearly 100% safe, a go w-space corp/alliance could see you pass through the first time and lay a trap with a cloaked dictor or hictor. Maybe better than low sec, but for lots of cargo maybe not worth the risk. I just don't see this a seriously viable alternative.
Regarding cloaked haulers:
Yeah, I can max out the hull space too. But in getting through a camp that is counter productive. In that case you would want less space and more agility and then speed. Align time and speed are what can get you away from the camp and into warp safely. And still, go do the math, 10,000 robotics in a 10,000 m3 crane. You'll need to make six trips. Each robotic takes up 6 m3. Even an iteron V with max cargo space will take at least 2 trips. You just doubled your risk or more. Fortunately, robotics are pricey to jumping 10,000 around in a JF may very well be worth it. But then what you are doing is shifting wealth from those who don't have it, to those that do. If you have a JF in game, you are "rich" relative to the guy with a freighter.
Regarding Minmatar ice:
Economies are dynamic, not static. Economics is incorporating evolutionary theory these days. Stochastic dynamic general equilibrium models are the state of the art now. Yeah, sure Minmatar ice would see its price go up....one possibility is that people stop using minmatar POS. The minmatar capitals might become less common as well. Thus the long run effect could very well be for less Minmatar ice and the price goes down and those ice belts become less populated. List the titans in order of popularity:
Erebus/Avatar > everything else.
Super carriers:
Nyx/Aeon > everything else.
Carriers:
Archons/Thanatos > everything else.
And that is right now. A significant rise in the price of Minmatar ice could cause people to substitute away from the various items in game that use that ice. The general increase in prices will likely cause an income effect further reducing demand in the long run.
Regarding high ends:
The come from null and are unlikely to be heavily influenced by this change.
Regarding station slots and PI:
PI in null and wormhole space is far, far more productive and many people out there do it to make isk. So again, unlikely to be significantly impacted.
As for station slots, you yourself admit prices will go up. As prices go up inventors/builders can afford to actually put manufacturing arrays on their POS and given the ubiquity of moons it may not be an issue for very long.
Yes, what you are claiming might come to pass....it also might not. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
96
|
Posted - 2012.12.02 03:52:00 -
[197] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:Commander Ted wrote:
I infer based on what I know....
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. . good idea.
Where you want them to go is the drawback to them being safe. It is not supposed to be as good as it is now. A person who handles courier contracts will have to take into account whether or not they can actually get to said location before accepting one which I think is an acceptable drawback. If you end up stuck and are a trader that is a risk to your productivity you take, however as a trader you probably can make a new trader from where you are stuck at and then get to another space which I think will be only a minor issue. If you need to do something else then you can pod yourself, jump clone, or make a run for it. You don't need a scanning alt necessarily but it does help a lot. You can use one charecter to find the wormhole then run back and move your freighter to it and hope your dscan can pick up the other wormhole and make sure the coast is clear. Not to mention you can always just ask a friend to do it really quick since it will only take a few minutes. Also once you enter warp any warp bubble placed after that point will not affect you. When your aligning for warp just keep spamming dscan or have your alt see.
As for a cloaky hauler your cloak + a mwd should be the ultimate solution for any camp unless you are terribly unlucky. Even then if you do not go for the cargo efficiency route and still carry billions worth of loot. Also my previous post said the crane will not be hauling 10k robotics, the iteron taking two trips is not that bad anyway not to mention it can go back and forth between two hubs faster than a freighter anyway. As for a jump freighter an iteron doesn't cost 7 billion isk and fuel (which even being as cheap as it is will be subtracted from your trade.)
Seriously? everyone who currently has a minmatar pos up and uses minmatar capitals will just switch? What if I said gallente? I would be more willing to buy a mackinaw somewhere else than having to completely redo my entire pos setup and sell all my minmatar capital ships. Certain pos types have advantages over others and their will always be a demand. Not to mention caldari capitals suck so then won't caldari ice prices bottom out?
I also neglected to mention missioners who will face a similar scenario. People aren't going to stop using federation navy stasis webifiers and republic fleet warp disruptors. Missioners are going to have to keep farming those missioners. If everyone did caldari missions then caldari items will be cheap as **** making those missions worth less. Carebears are going to need ammo and ships and someone is going to have to build and move that stuff to the other regions.
As for station slots being limited causing prices to go up that means people will want to use station slots somewhere else. If people want to start setting up poses for industry and want a gallente pos they are going to cause gallente ice prices to spike because according to you ice miners want to be near jita. Ice prices spike and miners start to move. So that means INDUSTRIALISTS WILL MOVE HAHAHAHHA I WIN. Also when I say prices go up I mean that certain items will go up in value while others drop averaging out to be nearly the same as they are now. So in Jita Federation navy stasis webifiers will go up while caldari navy invulnerability fields will drop. Then the exact opposite happens in Dodixie.
So people will move out homogeneously, inter empire trade will drop but still be alive while yielding greater profits and low sec is now more meaningful as part of the greater eve economy. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
VegasMirage
250
|
Posted - 2012.12.02 09:48:00 -
[198] - Quote
+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 likes watching grown men cry-á (Gōŧn+ĶGōĶ,) |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
98
|
Posted - 2012.12.02 17:46:00 -
[199] - Quote
YOU AND YOUR IRRELEVANT OPINIONS VEGAS. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Nahkep Narmelion
The Scope Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.12.04 00:56:00 -
[200] - Quote
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.
Quote:Seriously? everyone who currently has a minmatar pos up and uses minmatar capitals will just switch?
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.
Quote:Ice prices spike and miners start to move. So that means INDUSTRIALISTS WILL MOVE HAHAHAHHA I WIN.
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.
Quote:So people will move out homogeneously, inter empire trade will drop but still be alive while yielding greater profits and low sec is now more meaningful as part of the greater eve economy.
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. |
|
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
102
|
Posted - 2012.12.04 20:05:00 -
[201] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote: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.
Your suggesting that something unlikely could happen which is stupid, people won't just stop mining the other empires ice and ore because they can't use jita easily, Missioners will do what makes them the most isk which isn't everyone humping the same LP store flooding the market with caldari items. People aren't stupid.
Quote: 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.
Maybe Eve players aren't all moronic sheep and will start to move when the caldari ice market is crazy flooded? Maybe they would never move in this first place?
Also moving **** through low sec isn't hard (your chances of survival are very high with a scout) and don't jump your freighter through a wormhole with its mass missing?
Quote: 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.
Profits for traders I mean. Industrialists probably won't see much of a drop off in production because they can still do everything they did before although they might have to build what the conditions in the particular area are best for. Maelstroms will get more expensive in Jita and Rohks are more expensive in Rens. An industrialist with the will or resources will be able to move his products to different areas and make more isk or he can do the easier thing and sell locally for less isk. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
102
|
Posted - 2012.12.05 18:38:00 -
[202] - Quote
I was hoping that gate guns would only shoot you if you pod someone however I was mistaken. My idea would be much better if CCP would remove gate guns making frigates and destroyers more viable in low. I suppose it is mostly a matter of opinion though. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
VegasMirage
260
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 16:22:00 -
[203] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:I was hoping that gate guns would only shoot you if you pod someone however I was mistaken. My idea would be much better if CCP would remove gate guns making frigates and destroyers more viable in low. I suppose it is mostly a matter of opinion though.
"making frigates and destroyers more viable in low" - lulwot?
if you mean making frigate/dessy "GATE CAMPERS" more viable then ya, you should quietly turn off your computer and go GTL likes watching grown men cry-á (Gōŧn+ĶGōĶ,) |
Tawnia Baker
Interstellar Hollistic Agency A Point In Space
10
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 16:42:00 -
[204] - Quote
@vegas: nooo ted only wanna make entire eve a game for coward gankers who can shoot any unarmed player and destroy him just for fun. He want that people must move through low sec so earn some ISK and at the same time he want that low sec become a total coward ganker funpark.
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.
So Ted tell me what would your idea wiht forced low sec really change for most of the players? Only one thing, gankers get more fun for a limited time and normal people stop playing the game or stay in 1 or 2 sectors dont make muhc isk and cannot produce much. so what happens then? you liltle ganker then need to find other targets, possible some targets that can shoot back and what happens then? Yep you need new ships but this ship would then have very high prices cause not many people are left to make this ships. But hej why not then you can go out and do some ganking in your starter noob ship.
And yes its true miners wont stop mining , but you can be sure ore prices would raise like hell. Or do you really think that miners then dont raise ore prices so they can also risk loosing a ship? But yep woul dbe fun if Tritanium then cost around 600 ISK every unit and not 6. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
103
|
Posted - 2012.12.08 05:33:00 -
[205] - Quote
Tawnia Baker wrote:
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.
Stay out of rancer? Other than a few exceptions their are hardly any gatecamps at all in lowsec. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
103
|
Posted - 2012.12.08 07:13:00 -
[206] - Quote
New Idea, extremely shaky on a lore level but perhaps the high sec empires should very greatly spread out, instead of the eve map being like and onion where high sec in in the center surrounded by low and then null, perhaps it should be inverted with each empire being very distant. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
VegasMirage
260
|
Posted - 2012.12.08 19:02:00 -
[207] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:New Idea, extremely shaky on a lore level but perhaps the high sec empires should very greatly spread out, instead of the eve map being like and onion where high sec in in the center surrounded by low and then null, perhaps it should be inverted with each empire being very distant.
Yaknow sapce is 3 dimensional - unflatten your map - problem solved likes watching grown men cry-á (Gōŧn+ĶGōĶ,) |
Imrik86
Underdog Corp
33
|
Posted - 2012.12.09 18:54:00 -
[208] - Quote
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. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
113
|
Posted - 2012.12.09 19:17:00 -
[209] - Quote
Imrik86 wrote: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.
So what happens to all the people who live in .5 space? Also of course you need more lowsec because the current low sec has to many choke points. Having "kind of" unsafe space is a terrible idea because then its just abused into unsafe space which produces terrible pvp and keeps out carebears.
Also for a freighter pilot their is a big difference between .5 and .6, its the difference between being suicide ganked by 5 taloses or 10. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
123
|
Posted - 2012.12.11 21:41:00 -
[210] - Quote
Someone else had a similar idea I guess. http://evenews24.com/2012/12/05/submission-titan-bridges-are-only-a-symptom-not-the-problem/ https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Michael Loney
Skullspace Industries
41
|
Posted - 2012.12.11 21:59:00 -
[211] - Quote
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. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
123
|
Posted - 2012.12.11 22:04:00 -
[212] - Quote
Sounds more clunky than my idea, but perhaps both could be implemented at the same time? I like prices being more influenced by players actions (like piracy) than artificial taxes. Not to mention not that many people have trash standings with 1 empire in particular so its affect would probably be minimal and only inconvenience a portion of the eve population. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
VegasMirage
260
|
Posted - 2012.12.12 00:38:00 -
[213] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Sounds more clunky than my idea, but perhaps both could be implemented at the same time? I like prices being more influenced by players actions (like piracy) than artificial taxes. Not to mention not that many people have trash standings with 1 empire in particular so its affect would probably be minimal and only inconvenience a portion of the eve population.
In addition, I think all wormholes MUST open to low sec or null sec. likes watching grown men cry-á (Gōŧn+ĶGōĶ,) |
fukier
244
|
Posted - 2012.12.12 04:40:00 -
[214] - Quote
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... At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box. |
Thor Kerrigan
Guardians of Asceticism
324
|
Posted - 2012.12.12 08:54:00 -
[215] - Quote
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). |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
136
|
Posted - 2012.12.13 05:45:00 -
[216] - Quote
fukier wrote: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...
Changing the sec status of already existing systems is a very dangerous thing to do. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox
2536
|
Posted - 2012.12.13 08:47:00 -
[217] - Quote
I'm down for this. It would certainly make things much more interesting. Especially since currently, the fact that certain items are only available in certain empires means absolutely nothing in highsec. If you could only get certain skills/BPOs/ores from one area without bumming through lowsec instead of all of them, it would make things much more interesting, and I think bring things much closer to EVE's core vision.
Torn from grace, gotta find your faith or the devils gonna claim your soul
|
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
142
|
Posted - 2012.12.13 17:15:00 -
[218] - Quote
Thor Kerrigan wrote: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).
Maybe at first allies could be connected but it would be far more interesting to see all of them separated. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Seranova Farreach
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Exhale.
35
|
Posted - 2012.12.13 19:56:00 -
[219] - Quote
the eve map just needs to be BIGGER for the amount of players we have. |
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
142
|
Posted - 2012.12.13 19:59:00 -
[220] - Quote
Seranova Farreach wrote:the eve map just needs to be BIGGER for the amount of players we have. That wouldn't really change anything, and making it bigger wouldn't be at all like what im proposing. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Isu Okaski
The Break Room
10
|
Posted - 2012.12.13 20:00:00 -
[221] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: Right now If they condensed hisec into 2-3 systems that had all the asteroid belts, industry slots, and agents I think the only thing that would change are travel times.
And lag, don't forget lag!
|
Commander Ted
Dookie on the flowah
142
|
Posted - 2012.12.13 20:02:00 -
[222] - Quote
Isu Okaski wrote:Commander Ted wrote: Right now If they condensed hisec into 2-3 systems that had all the asteroid belts, industry slots, and agents I think the only thing that would change are travel times.
And lag, don't forget lag! from a gameplay perspective I mean. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
156
|
Posted - 2012.12.23 08:06:00 -
[223] - Quote
Perhaps if these regions were added the space between the currently existing areas would be expanded? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
383
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 01:08:00 -
[224] - Quote
Be such an easy thing to implement, do this please? It would be awesome! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
VegasMirage
348
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 14:48:00 -
[225] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Be such an easy thing to implement, do this please? It would be awesome!
will never happen, go use your time more constructively like learning how ASB's work and when not to engage a bc fleet at zero in a Talos likes watching grown men cry-á (Gōŧn+ĶGōĶ,) |
Ferdinand Camine
Iynx Teledyne Armory The Chogo Ri Commonwealth
2
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 16:47:00 -
[226] - Quote
I just want to state my full support for this idea. |
Tediously Useless
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.01.11 22:00:00 -
[227] - Quote
I like this idea. |
VegasMirage
356
|
Posted - 2013.01.12 04:07:00 -
[228] - Quote
Tediously Useless wrote:I like this idea.
You inceptionfag using alt to support main's ideas, very very bad form Ted. likes watching grown men cry-á (Gōŧn+ĶGōĶ,) |
Malcorian Vandsteidt
Black Dawn Rising
20
|
Posted - 2013.01.13 01:02:00 -
[229] - Quote
I approve of this 100%, although the POS cyno thing may be a bit much unless you mean allow more then one pos in the system. |
Xavier Schlosser
0
|
Posted - 2013.01.13 03:50:00 -
[230] - Quote
Fully support this idea. |
|
sabre906
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
576
|
Posted - 2013.01.13 05:05:00 -
[231] - Quote
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 Standings Improvement Service https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=19454 |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
404
|
Posted - 2013.01.13 07:58:00 -
[232] - Quote
sabre906 wrote: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 When was this? I don't think it ever was like that. In fact if I remember all four empires connected to Yulai and we had a CCP chosen super hub. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
429
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 00:43:00 -
[233] - Quote
So now that we know that this hasn't been tried does anyone else have any objections? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Dzajic
99
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 01:17:00 -
[234] - Quote
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. |
Fey Ivory
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
47
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 01:53:00 -
[235] - Quote
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... |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
429
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 01:54:00 -
[236] - Quote
Dzajic wrote: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 looked up the **** your saying about the beginnings of eve and this was never true unless you can link it, I asked people and read the patch notes from 2003 and in fact travel between the empire was even more trivial because they all went to yulai with super highway gates.
Secondly your idea of everyone moving to caldari space is utterly stupid because then who is going to get other factions faction items and mine ice for other peoples poses? Who is going to sell modules to all those people then? Then who is going to sell modules to the people who war dec the carebears? Who is going to be patient enough
How many of those pirates do you think actually made their isk doing piracy? Yea they paid for everything with a constant stream of 5bil mission derps running around and scooping up t2 loot and don't do other things to make isk. I also specifically mention why suicide ganks are lame on one of the earlier posts.. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
429
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 01:55:00 -
[237] - Quote
Fey Ivory wrote: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... How is this a nerf to high sec. You will still be able to do all the missions you want safely, do all the mining you want, basically everything you already can do. Trading would be the only thing affected. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Fey Ivory
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
47
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 02:09:00 -
[238] - Quote
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 |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
429
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 02:14:00 -
[239] - Quote
Fey Ivory wrote: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 Well low sec is easily crossable in a frigate, and it would be good if ores had different distributions since it would change prices and add extra isk incentive to trade in order to offeset the risk and create new isk making opportunities for carebears to exploit to be even richer. Not to mention ores can be jump freightered across space and poorer mining corporations can move their minerals via cloaky hauler, wormhole with a freighter, or even transplant their entire mining operation temporarily via wormhole. Also high sec is broken because its the best place to make isk in the game, however I wouldn't be nerfing high sec here and that is not the objective or this idea. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
430
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 18:38:00 -
[240] - Quote
The amount of already existing low sec entrances is very large so the chances of all of them being camped are terribly low. Not to mention safe trade would still exist for carebears (to a lesser degree yea) between minor hubs, and missioner hotspots. Of course low sec seriously isn't that dangerous, especially without bubbles and fast tackle frigs getting instantly blapped by gate guns. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Drake Doe
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
17
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 18:43:00 -
[241] - Quote
I'm just going to add something to this thread, I've never died in low with the intent only to get to the system past it, it's always been a result of me stopping to rat(and forgetting about sentries) |
Galphii
Clandestine Vector THE SPACE P0LICE
112
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 04:06:00 -
[242] - Quote
I like this idea. It makes sense that the frontiers of each faction's borders would be lowsec, where FW takes place, and systems move back and forth in ownership. I'm hoping to see freighters with module & rig slots in the future, so they could be fortified for journeys into this bold new frontier Plus, it'd revitalize lowsec a great deal, which isn't a bad thing at all. X |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
510
|
Posted - 2013.03.02 23:29:00 -
[243] - Quote
If low sec doesn't have better rats, better ore, or better safety than null than whats the point of it? It should be integrated as part of the High sec dynamic to make it more useful. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
NocturnalDeath
0ne Percent. Transmission Lost
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.12 17:50:00 -
[244] - Quote
Love this idea, and it could be interated over time. Start by switching a few systems from hi-sec to low sec each expansion until there is no direct route from empire to empire. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
99
|
Posted - 2013.03.12 18:51:00 -
[245] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:If low sec doesn't have better rats, better ore, or better safety than null than whats the point of it? It should be integrated as part of the High sec dynamic to make it more useful.
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. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
541
|
Posted - 2013.03.12 19:43:00 -
[246] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:Commander Ted wrote:If low sec doesn't have better rats, better ore, or better safety than null than whats the point of it? It should be integrated as part of the High sec dynamic to make it more useful. 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.
I dare you to take a cruiser and go into low sec, with a few minor exceptions you will find that it is completely safe and any threats are exaggerated by carebears who had their mission boat ganked or who are just terrified of low sec.
I only die in low sec when I choose to get into a fight. On my alt that does trade for a null sec corporation I use wormholes that lead to empire low sec open constantly and I have moved through iterons with hundreds of millions in them about 10 times (give or take) anywhere from 2-9 jumps.
Give up your false belief that low sec is only for antisocial monsters that just want to make you cry like a baby. Most gate camps with a few minor exceptions (rancer and ammamake) are quickly broken up by the local residents who would much rather kill fail pirates than sit for hours to gank badgers. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
102
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 00:51:00 -
[247] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:Commander Ted wrote:If low sec doesn't have better rats, better ore, or better safety than null than whats the point of it? It should be integrated as part of the High sec dynamic to make it more useful. 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. I dare you to take a cruiser and go into low sec, with a few minor exceptions you will find that it is completely safe and any threats are exaggerated by carebears who had their mission boat ganked or who are just terrified of low sec. I only die in low sec when I choose to get into a fight. On my alt that does trade for a null sec corporation I use wormholes that lead to empire low sec open constantly and I have moved through iterons with hundreds of millions in them about 10 times (give or take) anywhere from 2-9 jumps. Give up your false belief that low sec is only for antisocial monsters that just want to make you cry like a baby. Most gate camps with a few minor exceptions (rancer and ammamake) are quickly broken up by the local residents who would much rather kill fail pirates than sit for hours to gank badgers.
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. |
Fango Mango
University of Caille Gallente Federation
86
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 01:16:00 -
[248] - Quote
I always thought that there should be low sec between factions at war, a short high sec route to their allie and a long high sec route to their "not really at war" partner.
So, if you were in gallente high sec, you should be able to take a short high sec route to minmatar space or a long high sec route to amarr space.
If you wanted to get from Gallente to Caldari space you would need to take a "long" high sec route just to get into amarr space, then into caldari space OR head into Minmatar space and take the long route along to caldari space.
There should of course be lots of possible low sec paths (of varying safety/lengths) between the empires. I'm fine with bottleneck routes through high sec, but I think low sec should allow more possible comparable routes.
Also, low sec is not dangerous. Short of a couple of systems it is safer than high sec. If I need to make a run of 15 jumps through high sec or 15 jumps through low sec in my transport ship with 10 billion of cargo I will take the low sec route. It is no easier to catch/kill a ship in low sec and there are a LOT less people/gankers there.
-FM |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
544
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 01:43:00 -
[249] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:
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.
Open map, look at statistics, see where people are and have died, ????, profit. Game shouldn't be made idiot proof to noobs, its better they die in the beginning and quickly adopt a mindset of how the sandbox works. Protecting the noobs does more harm in the long run to them and prevents fun.
Also how on earth would this prevent bots? Jita is already infested with market bots that not only do .01 isk wars but can also fill freighters and move them back and forth. The fact that it is so easy to cross empire space is the very reason jita exists in the first place providing the perfect breeding grounds for a market bot.
As for alts their is absolutely no reason a person can't do trade through low sec or wormholes with no scout at all. My isk making alt does not require any other charecters assistance ever. If a route is dangerous I use a cloaky hauler and can move billions of isk of t2 modules in a single trip. In empire low sec the risk of being caught is nearly 0. If a camp is heavy enough that it will catch any cloaky hauler I can easily see that on my map ahead of time because it owuld require a very substantial camp to cover the gate enough to decloak me before I warp.
Your claims are exaggerated and baseless.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
103
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 03:11:00 -
[250] - Quote
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. |
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
544
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 03:58:00 -
[251] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:My point was that it would ruin the game for those that are NOT bots.
I think I made it fairly clear I understand that, and I must ask "why". I already made it clear why that doesn't make sense.
Mike Voidstar wrote:
This harms those that want to actually play the game part of the game, not the part where they are space pinata.
I made it very clear that you can easily avoid being a space pinata unless your a lobotomized lemming.
Mike Voidstar wrote: 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?
Because laziness and autopilot. The current low sec routes only save you on average maybe 5 jumps and the effort spent crossing low sec safely makes it not worth taking usually or its just to much effort to actually ensure your going safely. If the high sec route was unavailable these routes would make sense and the traffic between empires would be reduced (which is the point). People who aren't stupid can easily take advantage of the safe ways of travel and make more isk than they do now. People who are stupid are stupid and we shouldn't make a game catering to them.
Also wouldn't this stop bots? im confused... already 90% of all trade (90% is no exaggeration) is centered in Jita that makes it so .01 trading bots have an advantage due to the large quantity of competiton. So your point about bots makes utterly no sense.
Mike Voidstar wrote: 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.
wut? At this point stop talking. You gotta be shitting me, I told you exactly how to evade the pirates. You are putting false labels on me and that makes me angry. Your saying random drivel painting yourself as a poor persecuted carebear, I must be a senseless pirate and not just someone who has a lick of sense and knows just how ******* easy it is to evade the campers. Get a scout for your iteron, fly a cloaky hauler, get a wormhole with a high sec static. Try backing up your points.
Of course trade wont happen in the same volumes, and thats the point and there is no harm in that, but you can make exactly the same amount of money if not more for the time spent moving things if this changed happened. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Sir Dragon
Einherjar Yggdrasils
20
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 05:35:00 -
[252] - Quote
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.. [Lt. Cmdr. Data]: "Perhaps. Perhaps not, sir." [Capt. Picard]: "That's hardly a scientific observation, Commander. "[Data]: "Captain, the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is, 'I do not know'. I do not know what that is, sir." |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
546
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 06:14:00 -
[253] - Quote
Sir Dragon wrote: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..
Well I did make things happen in my lore explanation, the caldari perform a science experiment that opens a new region and disrupts gate travel in the pre-existing gate connections, the ammatar defect and try to block off the amarr, and the gallente and amarr invade part of the new caldari's areas because they are big.
I wouldn't change any currently existing spaces sec status because that is dumb and will **** some people over. The current low security space regions have way to many choke points anyway so new regions are a 100% must for this idea to work. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Roime
Shiva Furnace
2222
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 07:11:00 -
[254] - Quote
This is the way the game should be.
CCP do eeeeet!
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
547
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 07:32:00 -
[255] - Quote
Wish for downvotes so I could see how many people support me and how many think this is a bad idea. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Caitlyn Tufy
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
205
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 08:16:00 -
[256] - Quote
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. |
Sinigr Shadowsong
War Tactical Groups SOLAR FLEET
57
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 09:14:00 -
[257] - Quote
I like this idea though I personally don't want it to be implemented without addtitional limitations.
It will all be about gatecamps. To make it more realistic borders between empires at war should have a much harder military presence at gates. Just an empire forces (not a Concord), but much more dangerous than simple sentry turrets at low sec.
E.g. Caldari-Gallente border:
+ High-Sec (Caldari) - Low-Sec (Caldari, heavy military presence) - Low-Sec (traditional) - Low-Sec (Gallente, heavy military presence) + High-Sec (Gallente)
This way it well be less about gatecamps at a gate between High-sec and Low-sec. Probably there will be camps in contested space but entering low-sec should be relatively safe, but activities in it should be dangerous. CCP could even make those systems more profitable than 0.0 (because of constant war threat there are no companies to mine etc) so it will be good for Risk/Reward. |
StoneCold
House of Sparrows
84
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 11:15:00 -
[258] - Quote
I like the idea + what Sinigr said.
People should be able to enter lowsec without (or low) risk (if highsec-isles are implemented). Why? It-Ķs good to have people in lowsec. Oh, don-Ķt put npc-stations in the very first lowsec system after highsec ;-). Disclaimer: All depicted violent acts relate only (and exclusively) on ingame events. I support Psychotic Monk for CSM8 |
Sentinel zx
Shadow Phoenix Special Forces
14
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 12:12:00 -
[259] - Quote
-1 don-Ķt like the idea, sounds only on paper good, i think still it will be bad for eve economy |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
103
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 14:41:00 -
[260] - Quote
It ruins it for those that are not bots because all it does is screw up markets and force people that like to move around high sec for whatever reason into low sec--- an area of space rightfully avoided by most of the population as a murderious wasteland. It's not that it's impossible, overly difficult, or overly costly in terms of ISK to survive there----It simply isn't worth the hassle the gankers represent to even pass through there. YOUR point may be about getting haulers through there. I have nothing to do with haulers other than buying their stuff from station buy orders, and I've never been to Jita.
You made it clear that you can soft sell the dangers inherant in playing the space pinata. At no point are you willing to take on the role for yourself, or even simply put up the orders that would lure brave pinatas to their doom in systems you want to 'hunt' in. As soon as any risk attaches to your side of the equation you become disinterested. You want to make to set up a situation where people are not allowed to choose their risk (sandbox) but rather are forced into the role you want them to play because working to set up the situation you want is too hard, takes too long, or is too risky for you.
Last I checked, Laziness wasn't against the games rules. Autopilot is a tool to be used as the pilot sees fit. Feel free to go forth and gank a hauler in highsec autopiloting for eternity to the next gate. It will cost you a ship, but that is the price you should be willing to pay upon undocking anyway. Laziness also doesn't appear to just be on the side of the hauler... you yourself are so frustrated in your hunting that you want the game changed so that all you have to do is wait in one spot for prey forced into your target box. Pirate lifestyles are all about being proactive--- go find something to do and quit complaining that other subscribers won't agree to be your helpless prey.
I don't have a point about bots, except that they would not be affected by your changes. It may get their creators to alter them a bit, but the changes you want made are almost purely a quality of life change to force behaviors into a paradigm you want, and that affects a botter not at all. Bots are all about makeing poor game design based on tedious repetitious tasks a non-issue. You seem to be wild about them, one way or another, but nothing you have proposed will do more than inconvienence their creators for a day or 3.
You telling people exactly how to evade the changes your are proposing is something that comes across as completely altruistic and trust worthy. Really. It is completely clear you totally have nothing in your heart but the wellfare of the game and all those who play it, regardless of their chosen playstyle.
I'm not a 'poor persecuted carebear'. I actually play the game actively and intellegently and get harrassed only rarely. I don't haul anything, I do some exploration and missions, because that's what is fun for myself and my friends. The only reason I even have an industrial is to carry spare fittings and ammo into areas otherwise lacking in local markets, and when it gets full to carry more valuable loot out to where I can get a somewhat better price.
Your idea is just bad. It's a self serving mass of wishful thinking and hypocrisy designed to steal fun from other players and give it to you. |
|
Roime
Shiva Furnace
2224
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 15:15:00 -
[261] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:It ruins it for those that are not bots because all it does is screw up markets and force people that like to move around high sec for whatever reason into low sec--- an area of space rightfully avoided by most of the population as a murderious wasteland.
You are just full of ignorance and prejudice- but it's ok, most hiseccers are like that. Lowsec is the most fun area in New Eden, and people who avoid it miss out.
This change would affect markets, but not in the way you imagine. First of all, jump freighters.
- importance of regional markets would grow, possibly decreasing the dominant role of Jita - cross-regional trade would frow more dynamic, creating new opportunities - new gameplay available for anti-pirates to keep routes clean, and more incentives for co-operation between bears and players - more excitement for everyone
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
VegasMirage
368
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 15:21:00 -
[262] - Quote
Roime wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:It ruins it for those that are not bots because all it does is screw up markets and force people that like to move around high sec for whatever reason into low sec--- an area of space rightfully avoided by most of the population as a murderious wasteland. You are just full of ignorance and prejudice- but it's ok, most hiseccers are like that. Lowsec is the most fun area in New Eden, and people who avoid it miss out. This change would affect markets, but not in the way you imagine. First of all, jump freighters. - importance of regional markets would grow, possibly decreasing the dominant role of Jita - cross-regional trade would frow more dynamic, creating new opportunities - new gameplay available for anti-pirates to keep routes clean, and more incentives for co-operation between bears and players - more excitement for everyone
"you are ignorant and prejudice" and "my opinion is the only 1 that counts" in a GAME seems to go well together. Nice.
Some people don't have the time to play your or Ted's style - why is that hard for people to grasp.
likes watching grown men cry-á (Gōŧn+ĶGōĶ,) |
Roime
Shiva Furnace
2224
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 15:56:00 -
[263] - Quote
Ignorant and prejudiced about lowsec, which is an area in a GAME. Happy now?
You don't have any idea how I play or how much, and that is irrelevant to this topic anyway.
Separating empires with lowsec would create a more lively and dynamic New Eden.
Btw, did you know that the empires are at war? Having peaceful borders between nations at war doesn't make much sense from lore perspective either.
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
103
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 16:41:00 -
[264] - Quote
Roime wrote:Ignorant and prejudiced about lowsec, which is an area in a GAME. Happy now?
You don't have any idea how I play or how much, and that is irrelevant to this topic anyway.
Separating empires with lowsec would create a more lively and dynamic New Eden.
Btw, did you know that the empires are at war? Having peaceful borders between nations at war doesn't make much sense from lore perspective either.
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. |
0wl
Pocket Pirates
25
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 16:43:00 -
[265] - Quote
I would love to see the empires being separate, however at the same time I'd like to see space expanded with a large amount of alternative routes through low sec. |
Roime
Shiva Furnace
2225
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 17:01:00 -
[266] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote: 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.
Lively and dynamic domestic markets. New challenges for international traders. Co-operative gameplay between merchants and white knights.
Pirates have never whined that nobody comes to lowsec, because there's plenty of targets in lowsec and very few are interested in shoothing helpless bears like fish in a barrel. You just spew more of your prejudiced ignorance.
Quote: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.
You wouldn't have to. You can keep playing your "playstyle" in your secluded area of the sandbox just like you do now.
Quote: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.
Fun fact: the mouth breathers all live in hisec. Suicide gankers, war deccers, undock "duellists", podkillers, scammers, new corp awoxers, mission gankers and runners all thrive under the anti-social protection of the omnipotent CONCORD. Lowsec, like the rest of the non-CONCORD areas of EVE are mostly populated by people who aren't scared to interact with others, enjoy challenging themselves in an environment where other players actually mean somethind and treat other players with respect when they deserve it.
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
Velicitia
Open Designs
1233
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 17:11:00 -
[267] - Quote
Roime wrote:Lowsec, like the rest of the non-CONCORD areas of EVE are mostly populated by people who aren't scared to interact with others, enjoy challenging themselves in an environment where other players actually mean somethind and treat other players with respect when they deserve it.
Surprisingly, this is true. One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia Malcanis for CSM8 |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
550
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 17:46:00 -
[268] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:
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.
Your only a fat easy kill if you are incompetent. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
550
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 17:57:00 -
[269] - Quote
Caitlyn Tufy wrote: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. Nobody is being forced to do anything, missions won't be affected in any way since they hump the same agent for months at a time mostly, miners still gonna mine, builders still gonna build, and traders can still trade within an empire or do it via wormhole space (an extremely safe practce).
The only thing that would change is that they could make MORE money if they took the risk of moving their stuff to other empires where their ice/ore/lp items are more rare. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
103
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 19:39:00 -
[270] - Quote
Quote:Lively and dynamic domestic markets. New challenges for international traders. Co-operative gameplay between merchants and white knights.
We are talking about the same game, right?
Lively and dynamic? Try skyrocketing prices and material shortages. New challenges? You mean like the exploding gate camps once everyone is forced through low sec? Cooperative gameplay between merchants and white knights? You mean big alliances own all international trade, and scam merc corps kill off the rest.
Quote:You wouldn't have to. You can keep playing your "playstyle" in your secluded area of the sandbox just like you do now.
I am an active and mobile explorer/mission runner. My 'playstyle' involves moving from empire to empire on a regular basis to join friends in their preferred areas. I know more than a few that do as I do. A change of this nature would limit our options and destroy one of the most enjoyable aspects of EVE for me.
Quote:Fun fact: the mouth breathers all live in hisec. Suicide gankers, war deccers, undock "duellists", podkillers, scammers, new corp awoxers, mission gankers and runners all thrive under the anti-social protection of the omnipotent CONCORD. Lowsec, like the rest of the non-CONCORD areas of EVE are mostly populated by people who aren't scared to interact with others, enjoy challenging themselves in an environment where other players actually mean somethind and treat other players with respect when they deserve it.
Pull the other one.
I have never been suicide ganked, the only war I've been in was in Null, the only undock games I have seen were in Low, Podkillers were also in Low, scammers are everywhere. I have avoided awoxers by only inviting personal friends to my corp. I've dealt with ninjas, but never been ganked except when I engaged foolishly in a mission. Almost all of the mouth breathing baby eaters I have had personal experience with have been in lowsec except for my local branch of TEARS. Ancedotal evidence from all of my circle of friends backs that up--- you don't go into lowsec with anything you expect to get back out in. Pass through to null, or stay in high... low sec is too much hassle to make any amount of potential ISK worth it, unless I'm going in looking for a fight. It's fine for that--- unless the pirates realize you are there for them and not in PvE boats.
You can paint Low as some sort of idyllic paradise of fascinating game play if you want, but the fact remains that the vast bulk of the players stay out of it because all of that lively interaction you seem so fond of is one sided and weighted against doing anything but PvP. For a player like myself, Low is wasted space given over to the most toxic elements of the game. Their actions may insulate EVE from the sort of gold farming pay to win setups that plague other games, which is why I stick with EVE, but the fact is those elements consider the victimization of their fellow player as their version of fun, and most will choose to stay as far from that sort as possible given the choice---which is what this proposal wants to remove.
Quote: Your only a fat easy kill if you are incompetent.
Or if I choose to play the game rather than run everytime a neut shows up in local. That is the core of the problem--- if I could be competant while also playing the part of the game I enjoy, I would have no issue with what you propose. As things stand now, the idea is bad. If things change, so does the merit of the idea.
Quote:Nobody is being forced to do anything, missions won't be affected in any way since they hump the same agent for months at a time mostly, miners still gonna mine, builders still gonna build, and traders can still trade within an empire or do it via wormhole space (an extremely safe practce).
The only thing that would change is that they could make MORE money if they took the risk of moving their stuff to other empires where their ice/ore/lp items are more rare.
Nobody is forced to do anything---except travel through lowsec if they want to leave their current empire space with any degree of certainty knowing where they are going. Some missioners hump the same agent for months, but I and my friends aren't among them. The rest will alter dramatically as the logistics of transport change, and not for the good of anyone but the pirates.
The benefit of higher profits in lowsec already exist, and any that feel it is worth the hassle can already exploit that. |
|
Cy-nogene Midgard
Legion Noire de Midgard Silent Ascension
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:31:00 -
[271] - Quote
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 ! |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
553
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 17:04:00 -
[272] - Quote
Cy-nogene Midgard wrote: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 !
How? If ccp Added 10 routes between each empire it would be nearly impossible for goonswarm to camp them all, then you still have jump freighters, and wormhole based ships that slip through.
Then permenatly stationing those resources their would probably not net them much isk, burn jita was barely sustainable for a weekend, the ice interdiction directly made goonswarm money, and suicide ganking makes isk for their line members. Gate camping for hours along one of many routes would probably be ungodly boring. Not to mention would that route be the route used by morons? It's extremely unlikely that big alliance could and would bother. I mean even EC-P8R isn't camped constantly, and it requires far less effort to camp than a low sec gate. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Dzajic
123
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 17:57:00 -
[273] - Quote
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. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
562
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 18:08:00 -
[274] - Quote
Dzajic wrote: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.
Im just going to give up trying to be nice to carebears completely in this thread and say, anyone who has sworn to never go to lowsec because they are scared is a total moron who fears it due to their ignorance of how easy it is to travel through and unfounded fears. K, and also I did not expect everyone to go through low sec, this is supposed to be a trade limiter.
I have already said probably 5 times why Caldari space would not be concentrated and you seem to ignore my points every time.
Solitude is empty because it has absolutely 0 advantage over gallente space other than nobody lives their.
If everyone lived in caldari space then caldari ores, LP items, and ice would be ******* insanely cheap. All station slots would have 4 year long ques, it would suck balls. If carebears move to other empires, then war dec corps will follow. If their is a high demand for replacement goods traders will follow.
So if items in other empires are more valuable, that means living in other space has an advantage, unlike solitude. So your point is not thought through and ignorant.
The reason everyone is in Jita is because it is so easy to get to other empires. Having a central super hub is convenient since the money it saves is so great versus the time their is no reason not to. I believe in the 2012 fanfest or maybe 2011 the CCP economist deduced that excluding Jita the populations in the empires are equal in population. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
VegasMirage
369
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 09:34:00 -
[275] - Quote
this old thread again? likes watching grown men cry-á (Gōŧn+ĶGōĶ,) |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
239
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 09:52:00 -
[276] - Quote
ah another pirate boost :( i wonder why these so called "pirates" think it is everybodies best interest to let pirates freely rampage if you want to make pirating more realistic ,then do this: every empire station closes its doors to pirates , shots pirates on sight and send out patrol fleets to hunt them down even in low sec ,no more cloneing on empire related stations and this should apply to everyone who supports the pirates with ships ammo or even isk, also looted items should be flagged as pirated and in high sec police would start questioning where did you get the items :D maybe add a black market thingy so you can trade those pirated items
so if you are a pirate ,then you have to live under a pos or criminal org station aka npc 0.0
do this then ask for more options to pirating oh wait you suddenly dont like to become a real pirate? I thought you wanted than not just LET ME SHOOT MORE PEOPLE THAT WONT FIRE BACK bruhuhu |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
112
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 14:06:00 -
[277] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Im just going to give up trying to be nice to carebears completely in this thread and say, anyone who has sworn to never go to lowsec because they are scared is a total moron who fears it due to their ignorance of how easy it is to travel through and unfounded fears. K, and also I did not expect everyone to go through low sec, this is supposed to be a trade limiter.
It's not fear. It's hassle, and to a lesser extent risk far above and beyond the reward.
I know you are not aiming your proposal at my type of PvE, and yet it would still significantly impact my style of play. The same can be said of a great many other playstyles, not just haulers. You are trying to toss a grenade into a crowd and claiming it's surgery with a scalpel. That is why it's a bad idea.
EVE is not your Idyllic gankers paradise, and is should not be, anymore than it should be my idyllic PvE utopia. Sandbox is what its billed to be, and that means some things won't be how you like, because it's not your sandbox, it is ours together. Sandbox gameplay is about options, and you want to remove some from a certain segment of players to make your hunting easier. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
569
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 16:59:00 -
[278] - Quote
VegasMirage wrote:this old thread again? your the one subscribed to it giving me bumps. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Bum Shadow
Es and Whizz Hedonistic Imperative
29
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 17:26:00 -
[279] - Quote
I'd be up for this for sure! I guess allowing an "industrial" cyno that can be used for JFs in highsec would be cool. Make the divide between the empires big enough that you need jump skills 5 to span it in a single JF jump from high to high. But that 3s and 4s would get you most of the way.
That gives the bears a method of avoiding the DMZs by paying black/blue/red frog to jump their stuff over. Or they can train for that high end platform themselves. The rest either have to risk the run, organize escorts, or learn to scout. All things that will break the lowsec ice and probably get them enjoying it and being better players :)
You could even remove the traditional null/low/high status. Make them contested zones where events like faction war dictate the safety level and control in that area.
There are all sorts of ways you could implement this and make it a bit more interesting than just "make it low sec" it could become a feature. Though making it low sec would be a good start. |
Arronicus
Shadows of Vorlon The Marmite Collective
483
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 17:29:00 -
[280] - Quote
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. |
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
580
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 17:32:00 -
[281] - Quote
Arronicus wrote: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. The empires hate each other. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
580
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 19:42:00 -
[282] - Quote
This article on the mittani fits in perfectly with this plan right here. So imma just do a little bump right here... https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
652
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 17:06:00 -
[283] - Quote
So now that nullsec will be buffed there goes a huge chunk of Jita's market.
So another reason to do this.
Also with the rebalance to the economy coming then it seems like the perfect time to do this and make the empires unique. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
143
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 17:29:00 -
[284] - Quote
Between warring countries? Yep. And more losec is a good thing. I still feel losec should be the space with three times the gates and twice as many systems as hisec, and pockets six deep should never be more than a few jumps from any hisec system.
Give losec a reason why concord doesnt keep it safe: too much space to cover and too many side roads and alleys to effectively control. If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality.-á That 'griefer/thief' is probably more sane than you are.-á How screwed up is that? |
Gimme more Cynos
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 17:34:00 -
[285] - Quote
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? |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
144
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 17:42:00 -
[286] - Quote
Gimme more Cynos wrote: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?
Because the dumb players with the 2bil ship and expensive loot drops and the lack of wherewithal to protect themselves are mostly in hisec.
If you ever tried to pirate, you would realize that haunting hisec and its gates is the same as fitting the right tank/gank for missions ... smart.
If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality.-á That 'griefer/thief' is probably more sane than you are.-á How screwed up is that? |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
2308
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 17:59:00 -
[287] - Quote
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. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
653
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 18:01:00 -
[288] - Quote
Gimme more Cynos wrote: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?
Well because warfare in those zones in small groups have very little purpose.
In 0.0 you can roam around for hours and find nothing or just be blobbed quickly, and when you do get a fight what did it accomplish other than just fun? FW ok but it doesn't appeal to many people. Piracy in Eve is not really piracy. Groups like Shadow Cartel mostly fight against other pirates and bash poses, which often nets little gain other than the fun of the kill, those who do gate camps get bored to tears and then curb stomped by a roaming gang because gate campers are most likely idiots.
If their are lots of gate camps going on in low sec, then wouldn't there also be lots of groups who want to disrupt those activities? That would mean more fights and more interesting opportunities for people who like to evade gate camps to do trading? Gate camping is an opportunity to make money through pvp and will attract people to fight you for the right to do so. Gate camping itself blows, but competition for the right to do so is fun.
Your comments about me being a boring scrub gate camper hurt me because they are simply untrue. Also it has already been proven many times in this thread that such a change would disrupt very few peoples activities while benefiting others. Do you seriously care about running the damsel distress once for every empire? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
653
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 18:02:00 -
[289] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote: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. That is so wonderful to hear! Thank you!
I plan to keep bumping this occasionally, maybe once a month. Hopefully Fozzie will eventually reply. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
androch
Shadows Of The Requiem Li3 Federation
54
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 18:55:00 -
[290] - Quote
and i plan to bury this topic every time you do so |
|
Gimme more Cynos
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 20:26:00 -
[291] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Gimme more Cynos wrote: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? Well because warfare in those zones in small groups have very little purpose. In 0.0 you can roam around for hours and find nothing or just be blobbed quickly, and when you do get a fight what did it accomplish other than just fun? FW ok but it doesn't appeal to many people. Piracy in Eve is not really piracy. Groups like Shadow Cartel mostly fight against other pirates and bash poses, which often nets little gain other than the fun of the kill, those who do gate camps get bored to tears and then curb stomped by a roaming gang because gate campers are most likely idiots. If their are lots of gate camps going on in low sec, then wouldn't there also be lots of groups who want to disrupt those activities? That would mean more fights and more interesting opportunities for people who like to evade gate camps to do trading? Gate camping is an opportunity to make money through pvp and will attract people to fight you for the right to do so. Gate camping itself blows, but competition for the right to do so is fun. Your comments about me being a boring scrub gate camper hurt me because they are simply untrue. Also it has already been proven many times in this thread that such a change would disrupt very few peoples activities while benefiting others. Do you seriously care about running the damsel distress once for every empire?
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.
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
653
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 22:19:00 -
[292] - Quote
Gimme more Cynos wrote: 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.
So you confirm my point that this wont interfere with anyone's gameplay.
You put opportunities in quotes, why.... Those who would rather avoid pvp have plenty of extremely easy options to not be caught that even the laziest and stupidest people can do. Cloaked haulers. Wormholes. Red Frog. Jump Freighter.
Then you can still do trading inside a single empire. Those who are capable of evading camps can do so and those who are poorer can go through with a scout and hopefully not get caught. Traffic at entry gates that is stupid will increase producing higher incentive to gate camp, and higher incentive for their to be fleets that kill gate campers. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Gimme more Cynos
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 22:38:00 -
[293] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: You put opportunities in quotes, why....
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. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
654
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 01:11:00 -
[294] - Quote
Gimme more Cynos wrote: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.
Force? Nobody is being forced to do anything. How in Chribba's name am I forcing anyone, carebear or otherwise to go into lowsec. You said yourself that you just run minmatar and gallente missions, and I clearly outlined how trade bears can evade low sec (with reduced volumes of trade).
What if I want to evade/kill the camps? A forum alt trying to paint me as nothing more than a simple carebear murderer without doing any research on my background with a simple search on battleclinic.
Also yes how about I go camp providence and then be noob swarmed by CVA for a few frig kills.
Creating more gate camps is not the primary goal, it is secondary, if a increase in gate camps were to happen, then an increase in gate camp busting would also occur. That would mean easy to find stationary chances for fleet versus fleet pvp.
Im not going to be scolded by a forum alt where to find the l33t pvp. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
sabre906
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
1025
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 01:35:00 -
[295] - Quote
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. Standings Improvement Service https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=19454 |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
654
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 01:51:00 -
[296] - Quote
sabre906 wrote: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.
Wasn't that also before there was even warp to 0, and don't tell me about making bookmarks because I doubt that many people had them during beta if any. Or cloaks. Or wormholes. Or Jump Freighters. Or a heavy proliferation of scout alts. Or a large network of intel channels. Titan Bridges. Carriers even. etc etc.
Also it isn't a necro if it had only been 3 weeks since my last post. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
146
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 13:11:00 -
[297] - Quote
I have many suggestions for fixing losec. I'll break them down here, give them a post of their own later, and turn into a losec supporter before much longer. But here's the argument.
The biggest issue with losec is that it lacks people. Not just carebears and the like, but people in general. CCP has decided to use gates, stations and complexes to guarantee action, and this same use of bottlenecks is what drives the droves of 'casual' gamers out of losec. On top of the bottlenecks, you have the lackluster rewards that are in losec.
What if you drastically increase the content available in losec? First, you start by adding more losec systems. Massively large systems. Double or triple the current amount of non-warzone (fw) losec.
Secondly, you defeat the chokepoints. Add entry gates into non-warfare losec from hisec down, offering multiple redundant passages into losec. Nulsec should be about owning a piece of space, not losec. Reduce the ability of these systems to be camped up and locked down by any group. Then, add 'alley' gates between losec systems that rotate on how operational they are (whether they are online today or not, for example) and are not labeled on the map and cannot be plotted using autopilot. Basically, if you live in that area you'll know your shortcuts.
Please note: This means that going from hisec to losec should be easy, as the number of gates and paths to get to losec increase dramatically. And moving between losec should be easier, as now you have much more legitimate and alley gates to offer pathways. Losec becomes a spiderweb of gates and such, much harder to simply camp up and cut off like a highway. BUT, you do not increase the movement from losec into nulsec. Those remain static highways. Nor do you change faction warfare systems much, beyond a pirate gate here and there.
Increase the number of everything. Each system has 30 belts. Each system has two dozen moons. Each system has five or six stations. Each system has plenty of sites and exploration and wormholes. Allow so much content that it's not fully used.
Now, how do you bring players here? Who are you trying to get into losec? Casual gamers who currently reside in hisec but aren't risk averse. So you increase the rewards. More minerals mined from the roids in shorter time, for instance. More research and manufacturing slots. Better refining options (requires a maximum hisec refine rate or 30% in stations to make the losec rate more profitable). More manufacturing and research slots. A lot of other rewards that are already in losec would remain, and simply increase in value with the increase in content options.
There's an apex point of value where you'll go from no change, and no additional players, to a player surge. First it'll be pirates bringing some of their casual friends in, because they're already there reaping the benefits. Then a corp or two will move into some distant corner. It's a harder, less static life than nulsec or hisec. But if the rewards and options are there, it will draw in players.
If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality.-á That 'griefer/thief' is probably more sane than you are.-á How screwed up is that? |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
655
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 16:22:00 -
[298] - Quote
Do you have any idea what your talking about? Half of low sec is almost entirely empty so adding new systems is pointless, nobody bitches about the lack of belts and if you think it is hard to get into low sec current then your in for a huge surprise.
Its trivial, entry gates are hardly ever camped except for a few notable exceptions.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
154
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 16:28:00 -
[299] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Do you have any idea what your talking about? Half of low sec is almost entirely empty so adding new systems is pointless, nobody bitches about the lack of belts and if you think it is hard to get into low sec current then your in for a huge surprise. Its trivial, entry gates are hardly ever camped except for a few notable exceptions.
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. If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality.-á That 'griefer/thief' is probably more sane than you are.-á How screwed up is that? |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
655
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 16:33:00 -
[300] - Quote
Ruze wrote:
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.
Control by who? Any pirate gang who claims to control anything will be limited to 1-3 systems at the most.
If you just make it bigger then carebears will simply move in with a scout alt a jump out and warp out and dock as soon as anyone comes close, promoting boredom.
So essentially your suggesting making lowsec the same as null, but even more boring.
Ill roam looking for something to kill for even more jumps, and instead of finding nothing I find hulks docked in the station. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
47
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 16:39:00 -
[301] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Do you have any idea what your talking about? Half of low sec is almost entirely empty so adding new systems is pointless, nobody bitches about the lack of belts and if you think it is hard to get into low sec current then your in for a huge surprise. Its trivial, entry gates are hardly ever camped except for a few notable exceptions. Hunting miners in low and null is one of the most painful things possible, especially without bubbles. The moment local has a single new face in it they all warp to station. Trying to attract hulks who don't fight back and won't have anyone to fight for them is a terrible idea and you should feel bad for suggesting it. Research slots will just promote more carebear alts who won't undock for the next two years sitting in local. Gates on the other hand would be lucrative constant streams of kills that allow for other groups to easily come and engage you because you and a decent sized gang will be sitting still, promoting fights which are fun.
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. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
655
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 16:46:00 -
[302] - Quote
Xavier Thorm wrote:
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.
He put up an idea, I said why it was a bad one. baaaaaaw.
I didn't realize discussion meant everyone says whatever they want without any kind of argument. I guess whenever someone criticizes my idea I should just say "Good job!" and the thread would end after 3 posts? Maybe instead of people whining about having an argument you should just point out why I am wrong and be able to actually defend your idea. If you can't defend your idea then its obviously a bad one and that line of discussion will end.
Wouldn't it be trivial for someone to compile a website with the gates on them like dotlan or people to buy packs of bookmarks like they used to do before warp to 0?
If they could be built/destroyed that might be cool, but also somewhat game breaking, seems unnecessary. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
154
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 16:48:00 -
[303] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Ruze wrote:
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.
Control by who? Any pirate gang who claims to control anything will be limited to 1-3 systems at the most. If you just make it bigger then carebears will simply move in with a scout alt a jump out and warp out and dock as soon as anyone comes close, promoting boredom. So essentially your suggesting making lowsec the same as null, but even more boring. Ill roam looking for something to kill for even more jumps, and instead of finding nothing I find hulks docked in the station.
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. If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality.-á That 'griefer/thief' is probably more sane than you are.-á How screwed up is that? |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
154
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 16:51:00 -
[304] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:
Wouldn't it be trivial for someone to compile a website with the gates on them like dotlan or people to buy packs of bookmarks like they used to do before warp to 0?
If they could be built/destroyed that might be cool, but also somewhat game breaking, seems unnecessary.
Fair point about it being trivalized, much like w-space is. You couldn't have static gates. They'd have to shift now and again. And There would have to be enough of them that keeping track of which are active and which aren't any day would be too much.
As far as building and destroying, that might be one alternative. The idea is to make losec feel like an ally, with too many options. Static highways would be one, but getting lost is the best solution.
If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality.-á That 'griefer/thief' is probably more sane than you are.-á How screwed up is that? |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
655
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 16:57:00 -
[305] - Quote
Ruze wrote:
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.
Individuals aren't forced to pass through low sec at all. The only real funnel is Rancer, which is in fact camped 24/7.
Also if you read the first post you would know I don't propose funneling people, I want to add new regions in the gap between the empires to prevent lots of Rancers from forming.
The problem is right now their is 0 reason for anyone to ever cross low sec for reasons other than pvp or supplying their pos with the occasional badger.
Things like fighting for POS structures promote awesome battles all the time, but that mostly requires capital ship groups. FW is pretty fun but it cuts out pirates and all the small gang fights are pirates fighting other pirates or the militia for no reason at all other than killmails.
Also while the empires can mostly be self sufficient there are lots of things that can't be obtained. Namely Ice, Blueprints, faction modules, certain ores are more common in different empires, tags, etc.
So with fuel prices about to spike the competitiveness of non JF trade will increase greatly and suddenly you have lots of reasons to cross low sec. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
sabre906
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
1034
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 17:04:00 -
[306] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Xavier Thorm wrote:
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.
He put up an idea, I said why it was a bad one. baaaaaaw. I didn't realize discussion meant everyone says whatever they want without any kind of argument. I guess whenever someone criticizes my idea I should just say "Good job!" and the thread would end after 3 posts? Maybe instead of people whining about having an argument you should just point out why I am wrong and be able to actually defend your idea. If you can't defend your idea then its obviously a bad one and that line of discussion will end. Wouldn't it be trivial for someone to compile a website with the gates on them like dotlan or people to buy packs of bookmarks like they used to do before warp to 0? If they could be built/destroyed that might be cool, but also somewhat game breaking, seems unnecessary.
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. Standings Improvement Service https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=19454 |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
655
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 17:11:00 -
[307] - Quote
sabre906 wrote: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.
If your an idiot and you will always use shortest route then you will probably die yes. I guess your just not smart enough to learn about that avoid systems function.
To bad? Get a friend? Look at the map and hit avoid system? Fit a cloak? Use your D-scan to see smartbomb camps?
Also speaking of discouraging discussion, look at you Mr. "YOUR IDEA IS DOO DOO".
Perhaps you should reply to my counterpoints on why what the Eve beta was like doesn't matter https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2946371#post2946371
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Theia Matova
Dominance Theory
33
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 17:44:00 -
[308] - Quote
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. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
655
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 15:02:00 -
[309] - Quote
Theia Matova wrote: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.
It is already impossible to get from one empire to another without crossing 0.5 space. The risk when crossing those areas is negligible unless goonswarm is bored or your an idiot with to much loot in their hold.
Also I propose this idea as a boost to piracy, not necessarily faction warfare. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Stegas Tyrano
GLU CANU Open Space Consultancy
401
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 15:24:00 -
[310] - Quote
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. Herping your derp since 19Potato --á[Proposal] - Ingame Visual Adverts |
|
Theia Matova
Dominance Theory
33
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 15:44:00 -
[311] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: It is already impossible to get from one empire to another without crossing 0.5 space. The risk when crossing those areas is negligible unless goonswarm is bored or your an idiot with to much loot in their hold.
Also I propose this idea as a boost to piracy, not necessarily faction warfare.
Actually its possible to move between Amarr and Rens without crossing any 0.5s systems. I was actually surprised to find that out. Its not like Amarr and Minnies are the best pals after all.
Some stuff are worth alone by themselves to haul over 0.5s and because of their size you have to do it in freighter. Sometimes you simply can't avoid it.
I would like that faction warfare would be boosted. Right now I do not have the feeling that the factions are at war. EVE could really use buff to faction warfare. I think faction warfare low secs in between the empires would be the start. Since they are low sec it would of course also give more opportunities for pirates.
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.
|
Tilio Janau
Concordiat Spaceship Samurai
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 17:06:00 -
[312] - Quote
Your idea to separate the the 4 major npc factions by low sec is a nice idea in theory at least, however it would plunge the market into chaos.
first of all no freighter pilot in there right mind is going to transit through a low sec system they just take forever to align making the risk to reward so deadly the base price on the most basic of goods will go up to high the market would crash
put your self in a charon that you just brought for 1.4 billion would you really fly it into low sec
of cause eve would adjust the freighter would die people would just train to the jump freighter to make the jump missing those low secs
At the end of the day it will always come down to risk / reward and in this case although i do like the idea the risk involved would either cause the market price to jump by a factor of 10 or the untimely death of the freighter class ship
|
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
169
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 18:14:00 -
[313] - Quote
Tilio Janau wrote:Your idea to separate the the 4 major npc factions by low sec is a nice idea in theory at least, however it would plunge the market into chaos.
first of all no freighter pilot in there right mind is going to transit through a low sec system they just take forever to align making the risk to reward so deadly the base price on the most basic of goods will go up to high the market would crash
put your self in a charon that you just brought for 1.4 billion would you really fly it into low sec
of cause eve would adjust the freighter would die people would just train to the jump freighter to make the jump missing those low secs
At the end of the day it will always come down to risk / reward and in this case although i do like the idea the risk involved would either cause the market price to jump by a factor of 10 or the untimely death of the freighter class ship
Keep in mind that empire trade is run by players. After the fall of the highway gates, WE the players moved our trade hubs. When Jita burns, trade goes on. When hulks explode, trade goes on.
CCP is already aligning themselves with this mentality. Empire markets are too similar. They are taking a lot of the need for hisec industry (low end minerals and production options and refining loss) and we'll watch the market fall, stabilize, and adapt. Because the players as a whole adapt.
Sorry, history argues against your point on chaos, which may even NEED to happen anyway. If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality.-á That 'griefer/thief' is probably more sane than you are.-á How screwed up is that? |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
658
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 18:31:00 -
[314] - Quote
Stegas Tyrano wrote: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.
It already is funneled into a few choke points, ever been to niarja?
The thing is their are already lots of low sec systems between the empires, it just everyone goes into the hisec route because unless your an idiot or unlucky you are pretty much invulnerable. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
119
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 18:33:00 -
[315] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:
The problem is right now their is 0 reason for anyone to ever cross low sec for reasons other than pvp or supplying their pos with the occasional badger.
Even if this was true (it's not), why is this a problem? |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
658
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 18:33:00 -
[316] - Quote
Theia Matova wrote:
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.
I honestly think that any chaos caused by this change would be minimal and only for a short time.
All of the empires have industrialists in them who make things, the thing is they move everything to Jita.
With the upcoming buff to nullsec reducing the need to use Jita this may be a better time than ever to do this.
If Jita suddenly became starved it would only be a short term hiccup that would smooth itself out over time, like the removal of the super highway gates to Yulai. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
658
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 18:38:00 -
[317] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Even if this was true (it's not), why is this a problem?
Because a large demographic of players is starved for content. FW and nullsec don't appeal to lots of players who would rather work in small groups as pirates. It's hard to pirate if the only place you can do it in has nobody in it.
Also it is in fact true, the only industry in null is done inside stations or at a POS. Almost zero traffic goes through gates other than gangs of pvpers who have no purpose other than to shoot each other for shootings sake. (other than FW but that still excludes pirates).
Of course im sure your the low sec master who is very experienced doing pvp right? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
170
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 18:42:00 -
[318] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Theia Matova wrote:
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.
I honestly think that any chaos caused by this change would be minimal and only for a short time. All of the empires have industrialists in them who make things, the thing is they move everything to Jita. With the upcoming buff to nullsec reducing the need to use Jita this may be a better time than ever to do this. If Jita suddenly became starved it would only be a short term hiccup that would smooth itself out over time, like the removal of the super highway gates to Yulai.
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.
The individual elements and strength of each empires industry system has to be set off a number of values: ore availability, mining production, refining, manufacturing slots, research slots, and individual mineral dispersion.
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.
If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality.-á That 'griefer/thief' is probably more sane than you are.-á How screwed up is that? |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
658
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 18:48:00 -
[319] - Quote
Ruze wrote:[
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.
Well I actually did suggest somewhere in these 15 pages that ammatar space be given over to the minmatar.
Also while perhaps amarr space will have more manufacturing due to all those stations I think its important to note that things like Ice, LP items, and certain ores will be in shorter supply. If everyone moved to amarr space then the isk you can make in minmatar space would go up greatly, and where you put mining bears, industrialists will follow, and then war deccers will arrive.
The Amarr LP store doesn't have all the best items, so obviously missioners who have a brain cell in their head would move to somewhere else if they like isk. Then you have missioners, who are constantly shooting off ammo, wouldn't it be easier to setup a hulk near rens and build ammo there over constantly moving in badgers from amarr?
So yea the bigger space will have more people, problem? At least it wont be like Jita where x4 as many people as any of the other hubs sit their, it would be proportional to the number of people who live nearby. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
170
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 19:45:00 -
[320] - Quote
Personally, as a fledling industrialist, I'm glad for Jita. Everything sells better away from the the trade nexus. If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality.-á That 'griefer/thief' is probably more sane than you are.-á How screwed up is that? |
|
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
119
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 20:00:00 -
[321] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:
Even if this was true (it's not), why is this a problem?
Because a large demographic of players is starved for content. FW and nullsec don't appeal to lots of players who would rather work in small groups as pirates. It's hard to pirate if the only place you can do it in has nobody in it. Also it is in fact true, the only industry in null is done inside stations or at a POS. Almost zero traffic goes through gates other than gangs of pvpers who have no purpose other than to shoot each other for shootings sake. (other than FW but that still excludes pirates). Of course im sure your the low sec master who is very experienced doing pvp right?
Please explain how this would add content for those players?
I thought that this would not force anyone through low sec, everyone will be able to avoid the pirates just as they do now without problem. You have brought to bear a huge word count asserting this very thing. Perhaps I am missing something. If this is to add content for pirates, how does it do that without forcing people into their hunting grounds?
If we are going off of a 'large demographic', the largest is the high sec carebear population. How does this serve their interests? At the very least, how does this not negatively impact them while providing that 'content' to the much smaller demographic? Barring that, how does it increase their reward for the increased risk this would provide? Where would this increased reward come from without somehow increasing a source of ISK into the game? It seems only reasonable that if this is to benefit a select and small group in one way, they should have to pay for it in another, but that does not seem to be the case here.
In short, how does this provide the benefit you want without taking it from someone else?
There are reasons to go into Low Sec. The environment has richer rewards than what are available in High Sec. Different minerals, level 5 missions, etc. I don't want to do PvP, so I don't have to be a master of it, but there are reasons to go there. It's just that Pirates make it utterly unprofitable. What is worse they make it a huge pain and absolutely ZERO FUN, thus removing any benefit from going through there. Your assertion that there is no reason to go to Low Sec is false... it's just that the pirates remove any and all benefit from doing so.
This is EVE. It is a sandbox. If you are unsatisfied with what you are doing, do something else. Don't try and get the game changed to suit your own narrow and selfish agenda at the expense of the other players. |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
170
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 20:35:00 -
[322] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:Commander Ted wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:
Even if this was true (it's not), why is this a problem?
Because a large demographic of players is starved for content. FW and nullsec don't appeal to lots of players who would rather work in small groups as pirates. It's hard to pirate if the only place you can do it in has nobody in it. Also it is in fact true, the only industry in null is done inside stations or at a POS. Almost zero traffic goes through gates other than gangs of pvpers who have no purpose other than to shoot each other for shootings sake. (other than FW but that still excludes pirates). Of course im sure your the low sec master who is very experienced doing pvp right? Please explain how this would add content for those players? I thought that this would not force anyone through low sec, everyone will be able to avoid the pirates just as they do now without problem. You have brought to bear a huge word count asserting this very thing. Perhaps I am missing something. If this is to add content for pirates, how does it do that without forcing people into their hunting grounds? If we are going off of a 'large demographic', the largest is the high sec carebear population. How does this serve their interests? At the very least, how does this not negatively impact them while providing that 'content' to the much smaller demographic? Barring that, how does it increase their reward for the increased risk this would provide? Where would this increased reward come from without somehow increasing a source of ISK into the game? It seems only reasonable that if this is to benefit a select and small group in one way, they should have to pay for it in another, but that does not seem to be the case here. In short, how does this provide the benefit you want without taking it from someone else? There are reasons to go into Low Sec. The environment has richer rewards than what are available in High Sec. Different minerals, level 5 missions, etc. I don't want to do PvP, so I don't have to be a master of it, but there are reasons to go there. It's just that Pirates make it utterly unprofitable. What is worse they make it a huge pain and absolutely ZERO FUN, thus removing any benefit from going through there. Your assertion that there is no reason to go to Low Sec is false... it's just that the pirates remove any and all benefit from doing so. This is EVE. It is a sandbox. If you are unsatisfied with what you are doing, do something else. Don't try and get the game changed to suit your own narrow and selfish agenda at the expense of the other players. I would argue the largest demographic would be the the hisec carebear alt.
If we're focusing on players, seems to me that this is nulsec carebear mains.
Hisec may soon lose either title if nulsec industry is boosted sufficiently.
Risk averse, or carebears, are made of many reasons. Some are simply averse without appropriate reward. This idea *could* generate that. If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality.-á That 'griefer/thief' is probably more sane than you are.-á How screwed up is that? |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 04:46:00 -
[323] - Quote
I like this idea. It would make hauling more lucrative, it would make piracy viable and it would give anti-pirates something to do. It would give a stronger identity to each race individually. It may give high sec corps greater reason to exist, and potentially a good place to learn the ropes for pvp. (Just think how hard it is for experienced people to get in a good roam then think of new corps.) And because of the cost of JF fuel (and the fact that it's going up) it would take a pretty good margin of difference for JF pilots to be able to make jumping worth it.
This change doesn't make space any less safe, it just makes it so there are greater risk vs reward opportunities for hauling piracy and anti-piracy. |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
176
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 04:53:00 -
[324] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:I like this idea. It would make hauling more lucrative, it would make piracy viable and it would give anti-pirates something to do. It would give a stronger identity to each race individually. It may give high sec corps greater reason to exist, and potentially a good place to learn the ropes for pvp. (Just think how hard it is for experienced people to get in a good roam then think of new corps.) And because of the cost of JF fuel (and the fact that it's going up) it would take a pretty good margin of difference for JF pilots to be able to make jumping worth it.
This change doesn't make space any less safe, it just makes it so there are greater risk vs reward opportunities for hauling piracy and anti-piracy. 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. If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality.-á That 'griefer/thief' is probably more sane than you are.-á How screwed up is that? |
Super spikinator
Hegemonous Conscripts Hegemonous Pandorum
156
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 04:56:00 -
[325] - Quote
Ruze wrote:Erutpar Ambient wrote:I like this idea. It would make hauling more lucrative, it would make piracy viable and it would give anti-pirates something to do. It would give a stronger identity to each race individually. It may give high sec corps greater reason to exist, and potentially a good place to learn the ropes for pvp. (Just think how hard it is for experienced people to get in a good roam then think of new corps.) And because of the cost of JF fuel (and the fact that it's going up) it would take a pretty good margin of difference for JF pilots to be able to make jumping worth it.
This change doesn't make space any less safe, it just makes it so there are greater risk vs reward opportunities for hauling piracy and anti-piracy. 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.
Your idea is intriguing. Not entirely empty quoting. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
658
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 04:57:00 -
[326] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote: Stuff So rather than have things worth countering pirates for youd rather just have no pirates?
Bring me proof that the majority of the game likes to shoot little red boxes as their primary source of fun.
Secondly Low-Sec is more profitable if you have a clue on how pirates work. With my Ishtar and Buzzard alt I did exploration in low sec for months and was never caught. I even did a few escalations in null sec when the mood struck me, and I never died. Level 5 missions can be done similarly if you watch D-Scan and aren't a toad.
Mining isn't worth it because despite the fact there are plenty of corners where you can do it safely its just hard enough where you can't be AFK and not worth the ****** ores.
Finallyy I would argue if someone can't cause consequences to my gameplay then this game isn't worth playing, if as a trader I have no risk of failure then I see no reason to be proud of my success. Low Sec is the medium by which I can achieve that success and this method does not intrude on your gameplay. You already have a location where you can carebear without anyone being able to kick down your sandcastle in the sandbox. Even after this would happen I have already explained over and over and over again how this can be done nearly risk free for less profit.
If this feature was implemented I am completely at a loss as to who would suffer other than people who feel the need to run damsel in distress for every empire. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
658
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 05:08:00 -
[327] - Quote
Ruze wrote: 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.
Well if some pvp afraid carebears livelyhood is tied to a pvp activity then that may be frustrating, id rather just remove the high sec route totally. Also what happens if you log off in a system that changes sec status and you aren't in FW? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
176
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 05:46:00 -
[328] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Ruze wrote: 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.
Well if some pvp afraid carebears livelyhood is tied to a pvp activity then that may be frustrating, id rather just remove the high sec route totally. Also what happens if you log off in a system that changes sec status and you aren't in FW? Log off in any system, and you could log in to a different world. But to humor the sidetrack, possibly add an indicator to each system, much like the lowsec warning, stating that the systems sec status may change.
And the risk averse being forced to rely on the risk takers in some distant way? I have no remorse for wanting this, as I feel its right.
You try to post on a tablet while drunk on cheap vodka! If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality.-á That 'griefer/thief' is probably more sane than you are.-á How screwed up is that? |
Tsobai Hashimoto
Mayhem and Ruin
143
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 05:50:00 -
[329] - Quote
I like it......would make JFs 10times more important |
Alx Warlord
SUPERNOVA SOCIETY Last Resort.
445
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 06:11:00 -
[330] - Quote
Man, this would Turn EVE into a Hell!!!!! How could you even think on suggesting it???
First of all, This changes will turn EVE economic into something really more complicated, due to the ore type dispersion.
Second, You would Break JITA 4-4 as the main trade hub importance. And we would have bigger price changes between the trade hubs
Third, this will be much more realistic, as the security of cities and countries lay stronger near the capitals.
So, in resume. I loved this Idea, as it will set the world on fire!!!!!
But the question is, what will be the distance between the hi-sec areas? The further it get the more intense will be the consequences.
May It have a "Bridge solar system"? like a single hi-sec connection that link the pockets? it would be called a "Gank gate" by the suicide gankers...
although. This will drastically hit Incursions.... Please read these! > New POS system > New SOV system |
|
Felsusguy
Archimedes RD Company
102
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 06:17:00 -
[331] - Quote
Alx Warlord wrote:Third, this will be much more realistic, as the security of cities and countries lay stronger near the capitals. And borders... How droll. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
661
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 14:29:00 -
[332] - Quote
Felsusguy wrote: And borders...
Sec status =/= military presence https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
121
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 14:34:00 -
[333] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote: Stuff So rather than have things worth countering pirates for youd rather just have no pirates? Bring me proof that the majority of the game likes to shoot little red boxes as their primary source of fun. I have a hard time believing that the game that advertises its sandbox pvp world while featuring some of the worst pve in the MMO market today is mostly made up of people who don't ever pvp. Secondly Low-Sec is more profitable if you have a clue on how pirates work. With my Ishtar and Buzzard alt I did exploration in low sec for months and was never caught. I even did a few escalations in null sec when the mood struck me, and I never died. Level 5 missions can be done similarly if you watch D-Scan and aren't a toad. This may be unfair to say but if you don't know how to warp away when you see pirates your bad and should feel bad. At the very least move away from the warp in and be aligned to a safe spot, you will never die. Perhaps an ISD will remove this but mike, have you ever considered you might just be incompetent? Mining isn't worth it because despite the fact there are plenty of corners where you can do it safely its just hard enough where you can't be AFK and not worth the ****** ores. Finallyy I would argue if someone can't cause consequences to my gameplay then this game isn't worth playing, if as a trader I have no risk of failure then I see no reason to be proud of my success. Low Sec is the medium by which I can achieve that success and this method does not intrude on your gameplay. You already have a location where you can carebear without anyone being able to kick down your sandcastle in the sandbox. Even after this would happen I have already explained over and over and over again how this can be done nearly risk free for less profit. If this feature was implemented I am completely at a loss as to who would suffer other than people who feel the need to run damsel in distress for every empire.
Left as things are, it is impossible to balance the risk of piracy to rewards in Low Sec. As has been discussed before, so long as PvE requires flying pi+Ķatas and allows pirates to do as they do for as long as they wish with no meaningful penalties to make them stop then the rewards would have to be hundreds of millions per minute. I have seen a gang effectively lock a smaller corp in stations for an entire weekend for no better reason than to do so. This speaks volumes for the inability of the corp to fight, and just as much for the pirates willingness to spend large amounts of time enjoying griefing others for no real reward.
Proof? What would you accept? Look at the quarterly reports that CCP puts out. The vast majority of the game is played in High Security space. I can see the crowds in Jita from where I'm docked in Minmatar space atm. I agree that the PvE side of things needs improving very badly, but almost everyone I've ever spoken too about the game came for the cool internet space ships, and most of them left due to the unchecked actions of pirates.
I know low sec is more profitable.... your claim was that there was no reason to go to Low Sec. There is, the higher profits. What you wish to create is not a reason to go there, but a requirement. To the pirate mindset, Non-consent only applies to allowing them to do as they wish to others, not about making them change their own actions.
I understand how pirates work. I know how to maintain safe spots, watch D-scan, keep an eye on local, and not get caught. That sort of gameplay is simply not fun to the carebears you want to hunt. The added profit of low sec is made irrelevant by the pirates that call the place home.
It's possible I'm incompetent, but if that is the case, so is the vast majority of EVE players that won't go into lowsec for it's higher rewards despite what you want to claim is 'minimal risk'. How about all the highsec alts fueling their main's PvP habit? All of them claim that PvE is so boring and they hate doing it, yet almost none will do it in Low Sec where profits are higher and apparently risk is nearly non-existent despite the fact that they could do the hated PvE for less time and get back to whatever it is they do faster. I guess those people are just bad at PvP too.
Your comment on mining is exactly my point. The rewards are there, but simply not worth the increased pain in the rear that doing anything but piracy in Low Sec entails.
I would point out that someone is causing consequences to your gameplay. You are dissatisfied with both the value and frequency of haulers where you want to hunt. This will force you to either change activities or locations. You are not a trader, and you have no right to determine their standards of satisfaction or success. That is the nature of sandbox gameplay. It is what you make of it. Rather than take personal responsibility for your own enjoyment or success, you want to change the game to remove those qualities from someone else to enhance your own.
There are alternatives, but they require a lot of work, dedication, and team building to achieve. You could gather like minded pirates, and put your own ISK and efforts on the line. You could create a new trade hub in Low Sec by selling things at or below cost, and buying them at a premium, making up the difference by supplying your hub with the proceeds of your pirated goods---do this with enough people for long enough, establish a modicum of security in the area yourself and the shortened supply chains would draw business from Null Sec alliances away from Jita to your own.
The problem isn't that you are starved for content. The problem is that you are too lazy to adjust your play to reality
|
Daedalus II
The Oasis Group TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
159
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 15:31:00 -
[334] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:I like this idea. It would make hauling more lucrative, it would make piracy viable and it would give anti-pirates something to do. It would give a stronger identity to each race individually. It may give high sec corps greater reason to exist, and potentially a good place to learn the ropes for pvp. (Just think how hard it is for experienced people to get in a good roam then think of new corps.) And because of the cost of JF fuel (and the fact that it's going up) it would take a pretty good margin of difference for JF pilots to be able to make jumping worth it.
This change doesn't make space any less safe, it just makes it so there are greater risk vs reward opportunities for hauling piracy and anti-piracy. I agree with this and the original poster. |
Vesan Terakol
Almost Deliberate
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 16:07:00 -
[335] - Quote
As I rudely introduce myself in this discussion, I want to state, that I'm a relatively new player to EVE - only a year of active play and most of the time I've spent dipping into low and trying to get the rare jewels you can find there. Whether it will be ratting in my absurdly fitted Cynabal or ninja mining in a Retriever (crazy, ain't i?), I've always noticed only a single time, when an organized corporation mining fleet jumped in with a Rorqual, several miners and combat escorts, probably to mine a nice grav site. And i kept wondering - if you can do that, why don't? Cant you get some friends to guard your backside while you do your stuff? Of course you can, but there's no reason to, as you can do pretty much the same all alone somewhere else. So, is the average EVE player that antisocial? Is the local chat intended only to spam your scams in trade hubs or shout insults at people you killed/refuse to fight you (I had one of those wannabe pirates trying to mock my aforementioned Cynabal for having a cloak)? Why I haven't met a single person that wants to play a vigilante in low sec? Isn't that what the first trailer of EVE i've ever seen presented it to be like? In short, I would support ANY idea that will greatly incentivise, even force cooperative play. Sure, it could be just me lacking the social skills to make a nice lowsec mining fleet happen (an old dream of mine), but some help from game's design perspective is always nice. Just think of what was mentioned repeatedly during Fan Fest in different forms - CCP wants the players to drive game - not NPCs. If people need to be mildly forced into interacting with each other - so be it!
P.S.: Just to clarify why i mentioned the game driven by players vs NPC - isn't high sec exactly a place where NPCs take over a significant percentage of the gameplay, allowing us to play singe and in the meantime shout "I play the best MMO out there"? |
Theia Matova
Dominance Theory
34
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 16:22:00 -
[336] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Theia Matova wrote:
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.
I honestly think that any chaos caused by this change would be minimal and only for a short time. All of the empires have industrialists in them who make things, the thing is they move everything to Jita. With the upcoming buff to nullsec reducing the need to use Jita this may be a better time than ever to do this. If Jita suddenly became starved it would only be a short term hiccup that would smooth itself out over time, like the removal of the super highway gates to Yulai.
It would plunge market into chaos but yes it would stabilize over time. This is not one of the significant things but also player transport and podding should be considered. New players would need access to some kind of scout frig that was easy to gain access to perhaps cloaky shuttle? With bit longer align time than the original shuttles. This would affect basically everything it would also give more opportunities for industrial playing capsuleers due to fluctuating market. |
Loki Feiht
Feiht Family Clan
59
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 16:42:00 -
[337] - Quote
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? More NPC thread https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=220858 |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
663
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 16:47:00 -
[338] - Quote
Loki Feiht wrote: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?
If you add enough bypasses then it should be fine.
Ammamake is not camped 24/7 anymore and rancer is rancer because if you look at the map, there is 0 method of getting around it. It is as bottleneck as a bottleneck can get. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Montevius Williams
Eclipse Industrial Inc
478
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 16:55:00 -
[339] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: Post in the thread if you like this idea help! A simple "I like this idea!" would be nice!So moving stuff from place to place in eve isn't really all that dangerous, difficult, interesting, or that profitable most of the time. Piracy isn't all that profitable either. So why not add more lowsec between the 4 empires. By more I mean, it would be utterly impossible to get from gallente space to caldari space without crossing lowsec at some point. This would buff trading by making it harder, weird i know but hear me out. The less freighters going back and forth from jita to dodixie moving ice, the more expensive ice is in the area's where it can't be mined. Faction modules become items that must be smuggled across dangerous open waters. Pirates actively hunt badgers full of ore, trading corporations setup large fleets to escort freighters, etc. When I watch TV and see pirates they are plundering trade routes and making commerce harder, eve pirates don't really affect commerce at all. 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. Imagine all the fun that can be had when you actually have to be at risk to move things? Sure their is suicide ganking but that only happens if your hauling a stupid amount of things or are just unlucky. If this change was added i would consider a cloaking hauler to move items myself since I am not as inclined to do research to exploit the market under the current landscape. Also with this change certain changes could be made to hauling ships to make them more capable of defending themselves, or be more easily escorted and defended from attackers by logistics vessels. On top of that the fact more gate camps would start popping up. Now I know Gate camps suck, however think about the implications of having a bunch of fleets on every gate, finding fights would be trivial in low sec. Control of the gate camps would be something actually worth fighting over instead of random brawls and roams for no reason that dot low sec. Many people say "HOW DARE YOU INTERFRE WITH MY PLAYSTYLE!" To that I respond how important to you is it that you run the damsel in distress once in every empire with your 2 billion isk mission boat? Those who fear low sec would still easily be able to live in one empire with almost nothing changed about their gameplay. ADDITION Ore distribution in the four empires would be changed along with ship mineral costs. Minmatar ships will be built with ores found more commonly in minmatar space etc. Not a necessity for this idea to work but it would be cool. Also fix nullsec industry while your at it. New thread about this topic started in CSM Assembly Hall https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=175823&find=unreadProposed layout of the new regions and lore explanation https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2234451#post2234451
I like some elements of this idea., but I'd do it as such
Leave low sec mechanics the same so in space, anything goes, but as someone else stated, Border low sec gates should have faction police at the gates and any criminal activity would be punished accordingly.
These faction police would only be at border gates, not regular low sec gates. "The American Government indoctrination system known as public education has been relentlessly churning out socialists for over 20 years". - TravisWB |
Theia Matova
Dominance Theory
34
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 17:12:00 -
[340] - Quote
Loki Feiht wrote: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?
I believe that people are simply too lazy to do it and when you would actually do it with real people it would fast become so expensive that no one wanted to do it anyway. It would perhaps get more better if freighter cargo bay was increased and it was higher right to fly them. Then you would most likely want to fly escort due to the fact you had that much at stake. Yet I know that you can very well make expensive loads even now ;)
Of course you could change the games rules so far that you have to do it but then probably lot of people simply quits because they won't see the point anymore.
This is also one thing that actually promotes multiaccounting. Its so simple fly scout / webber for freighter. Its nice that other people can really help freighter pilots but its sad that its so appealing to do with multiaccount. Anyway thats a different topic. |
|
Loki Feiht
Feiht Family Clan
61
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 22:46:00 -
[341] - Quote
I think its strange we get hulkaggedon and burn jita type events but never a make it safe event eh? More NPC thread https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=220858 |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
183
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 23:28:00 -
[342] - Quote
Loki Feiht wrote:I think its strange we get hulkaggedon and burn jita type events but never a make it safe event eh? 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. If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality.-á That 'griefer/thief' is probably more sane than you are.-á How screwed up is that? |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 05:27:00 -
[343] - Quote
You know, when the Battle for Caldari Prime thing happened there was something said about things changing with the caldari breaking the pact with CONCORD or something to that effect. Maybe there is already stuff in the works to this effect. Maybe it's sooner than expected :) |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
663
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 13:29:00 -
[344] - Quote
Ruze wrote: 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.
Lived in hisec for a long time wardecing carebears. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Claire Raynor
NovaGear Limitless Inc.
117
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 15:44:00 -
[345] - Quote
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! |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
665
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 17:49:00 -
[346] - Quote
Claire Raynor wrote: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!
There ya go, CCP.
Do this. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
General Guardian
The Guardian Knights
6
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 23:17:00 -
[347] - Quote
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 theyre |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
666
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 22:58:00 -
[348] - Quote
General Guardian wrote: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
We shouldn't design the game to accommodate the ignorant people who have been playing long enough to have expensive implants and not realize that low sec is dangerous. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
6
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 01:35:00 -
[349] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:General Guardian wrote: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 We shouldn't design the game to accommodate the ignorant people who have been playing long enough to have expensive implants and not realize that low sec is dangerous.
Agreed
You do get a warning when you enter low sec anyways. |
Job Valador
Super Moose Defence Force
35
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 01:59:00 -
[350] - Quote
I am a trader and ship builder and I approve of this idea as well. Good idea Ted, we need more ways to create emergent game play and this would defenately be a good step forward.
As someone already said, "true traders corp would emerge and escort their goods creating conflict and not these ten man alt corp"
[IMG]http://imageshack.us/a/img836/7059/c00286794da9496e2b391.jpg[/IMG]
Rule 34 ^ |
|
sabre906
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
1071
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 03:53:00 -
[351] - Quote
Job Valador wrote:I am a trader and ship builder and I approve of this idea as well. Good idea Ted, we need more ways to create emergent game play and this would defenately be a good step forward.
As someone already said, "true traders corp would emerge and escort their goods creating conflict and not these ten man alt corp"
Oh look, your alt thinks it's a good idea. And lol @ "escort." Standings Improvement Service https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=19454 |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
668
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 14:28:00 -
[352] - Quote
sabre906 wrote:Oh look, your alt thinks it's a good idea. And lol @ "escort."
If you don't have anything to contribute leave. I already debunked your points and you for some reason choose not to actually argue but to instead troll.
If you can do nothing but make false accusations then maybe there is something wrong about the viewpoints you are trying to put forward. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Llyona
Posthuman Society 10110001100111101000
17
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 14:47:00 -
[353] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Ruze wrote: 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.
Lived in hisec for a long time wardecing carebears.
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. EVE is an illness, for which there is no cure. |
Caljiav Ocanon
4
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 15:05:00 -
[354] - Quote
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. Though I fly through the valley of death, I shall fear no evil, for I am aligned to a safespot and warping out. - Me 2013 |
Nahkep Narmelion
CALIMA COLLABORATIVE Atrox Urbanis Respublique Abundatia
53
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 15:10:00 -
[355] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:
I have already said probably 5 times why Caldari space would not be concentrated and you seem to ignore my points every time.
You keep having to say it because your reasons are note very good. You've already admitted that this goal of this is to reduce trade. One outcome might be that even more is concentrated in Jita than prior to this change. I've noted way back up stream I used to do invention and manufacturing. I did it in Gallente space. After this change I'd have incentive to pick up shop and move it if I could (and if I considered) it still profitable enough (this one is questionable--invention is click intensive and boring).
Of course not everyone would move, but Jita is already the main trade hub. Would this change break that? IDK, but null sec people might still want to use it (maybe Amarr for people in the south).
Quote:If everyone lived in caldari space then caldari ores, LP items, and ice would be ******* insanely cheap. All station slots would have 4 year long ques, it would suck balls. If carebears move to other empires, then war dec corps will follow. If their is a high demand for replacement goods traders will follow.
Or not. If everyone lived there, there would also be higher demand. Thus it is possible prices might not change, could be higher or could be lower. You really make yourself look foolish with the statements couched in absolute certainty. You don't know what the **** would happen. Neither do I, but I admit it.
Quote:So if items in other empires are more valuable, that means living in other space has an advantage, unlike solitude. So your point is not thought through and ignorant.
It depends on the demand doesn't it. Sure a T1 blaster might cost 3x what it does in Gallente space vs. Jita post change, but if I can't even sell enough to earn the same profit as I could selling a larger batch in Jita at a lower price/gun...why bother? Price isn't everything. Price changes tell you where to re-allocate resources. To take an extreme example, prices, after a disaster, for things like water and canned goods sky rocket. Why? That is the market "saying"--"Hey, over here we have considerably shortages and unsatisfied demand; send lots more stuff ASAP." You can also see it with monopolists. A monopolist could maximize the price he charges. Do monopolists do this? No.
Quote:The reason everyone is in Jita is because it is so easy to get to other empires. Having a central super hub is convenient since the money it saves is so great versus the time their is no reason not to. I believe in the 2012 fanfest or maybe 2011 the CCP economist deduced that excluding Jita the populations in the empires are equal in population. Jita might remain the biggest hub after this change if large alliance would continue to purchase their goods from there.
Exactly why the change you've been pimping might not work. You've finally admitted it. Players like having a super-hub. After this change, they might still like having a super-hub and this may do nothing to stop that. At best it might make a second super-hub (Amarr). Might it be at the expense of Jita? Possibly, but it could very well be at the expense of Rens and Dodixie. |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
203
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 15:53:00 -
[356] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:Commander Ted wrote:
I have already said probably 5 times why Caldari space would not be concentrated and you seem to ignore my points every time.
You keep having to say it because your reasons are note very good. You've already admitted that this goal of this is to reduce trade. One outcome might be that even more is concentrated in Jita than prior to this change. I've noted way back up stream I used to do invention and manufacturing. I did it in Gallente space. After this change I'd have incentive to pick up shop and move it if I could (and if I considered) it still profitable enough (this one is questionable--invention is click intensive and boring). Of course not everyone would move, but Jita is already the main trade hub. Would this change break that? IDK, but null sec people might still want to use it (maybe Amarr for people in the south). Quote:If everyone lived in caldari space then caldari ores, LP items, and ice would be ******* insanely cheap. All station slots would have 4 year long ques, it would suck balls. If carebears move to other empires, then war dec corps will follow. If their is a high demand for replacement goods traders will follow. Or not. If everyone lived there, there would also be higher demand. Thus it is possible prices might not change, could be higher or could be lower. You really make yourself look foolish with the statements couched in absolute certainty. You don't know what the **** would happen. Neither do I, but I admit it. Quote:So if items in other empires are more valuable, that means living in other space has an advantage, unlike solitude. So your point is not thought through and ignorant. It depends on the demand doesn't it. Sure a T1 blaster might cost 3x what it does in Gallente space vs. Jita post change, but if I can't even sell enough to earn the same profit as I could selling a larger batch in Jita at a lower price/gun...why bother? Price isn't everything. Price changes tell you where to re-allocate resources. To take an extreme example, prices, after a disaster, for things like water and canned goods sky rocket. Why? That is the market "saying"--"Hey, over here we have considerably shortages and unsatisfied demand; send lots more stuff ASAP." You can also see it with monopolists. A monopolist could maximize the price he charges. Do monopolists do this? No. Quote:The reason everyone is in Jita is because it is so easy to get to other empires. Having a central super hub is convenient since the money it saves is so great versus the time their is no reason not to. I believe in the 2012 fanfest or maybe 2011 the CCP economist deduced that excluding Jita the populations in the empires are equal in population. Jita might remain the biggest hub after this change if large alliance would continue to purchase their goods from there. Exactly why the change you've been pimping might not work. You've finally admitted it. Players like having a super-hub. After this change, they might still like having a super-hub and this may do nothing to stop that. At best it might make a second super-hub (Amarr). Might it be at the expense of Jita? Possibly, but it could very well be at the expense of Rens and Dodixie.
Honestly, I like the idea because I feel that it will minimize the 'central trade hub' idea a lot and start pushing local hubs a lot more. The centralized hub of Jita, in my mind, needs a lot of it's oomph taken out and more placed in regional and local hubs.
Plus, if it's dangerous to haul goods, the value of said goods will vary more greatly in each region. I'll have lasers all day in Amarr, but getting missiles or autocannons might cost me more than they would in their areas.
Finally, as mentioned earlier, I hate the fact that mass-trade is mostly a solo endeavor. Single accounts living in NPC corps, flying freighters to and from Jita. They stick to NPC corps to keep from getting war dec'd, to avoid loss. I like the fact that this idea would sincerely push those who are willing to make trade into a group endeavor into more profitable territory, while nuking the solo trader's profit margin considerably.
If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality.-á That 'griefer/thief' is probably more sane than you are.-á How screwed up is that? |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
668
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 15:56:00 -
[357] - Quote
Llyona wrote:
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.
>Says no one cares, then proceeds to ramble off topic. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
668
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 15:57:00 -
[358] - Quote
Caljiav Ocanon wrote: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.
Why do you feel you deserve a easy risk free environment for moving across hisec, despite the fact that you would still have hundreds of systems in each empire for you to carebear in? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
668
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 16:13:00 -
[359] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:TL;DR
A super hub is only possible due to how trivial it is to travel to. If i make things, and I load them into the freighter to take them to market, will I move them to dodixie which is 3 jumps away, or Jita. Jita will only take my freighter an extra hour to get to and a fraction of the time to sell my wares, obviously I will go to Jita.
If low sec was in the way, I would not do this.
If everyone wanted to move to caldari space to build things, then all station slots would be eternally buttraped, you would never get a que. You would make no money mining ice because the ice belts would all be instantly mined (ice anoms coming soon) You would make less money running missions because their is only so much demand for caldari navy invulns. You would make less money doing incursions because they are often not in caldari space. You would make less money selling pvp items to the other factions militias. You would make less mining belts because they would be stripped down even faster. You would make less money doing exploration because of competition.
All of these are reasons not to live in caldari space, so the likelihood of people not selling things in jita, is greater then everyone living out of jita.
The possibility of jita becoming a bigger hub is probably one of the least likely of all the possible outcomes of this change. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Caljiav Ocanon
4
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 16:20:00 -
[360] - Quote
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. Though I fly through the valley of death, I shall fear no evil, for I am aligned to a safespot and warping out. - Me 2013 |
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
668
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 16:22:00 -
[361] - Quote
Caljiav Ocanon wrote: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.
Carebear is an Eve only term used to describe anyone who doesn't pvp.
Not derogatory in itself, however since carebear is used mostly in a negative connotation it has become an insult like midget or the r word.
Please stop posting if you can't actually defend your own points or have nothing to contribute except for short statements that don't add anything to the conversation. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
203
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 16:27:00 -
[362] - Quote
Caljiav Ocanon wrote: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.
In EvE, a carebear is someone who avoids pvp at all costs.
Real simple, actually. Carebears can be in hisec, losec, nulsec or w-space. But generally, a carebear will work so hard to avoid pvp that they'll actually petition CCP to change the game so that it is easier for them to be a carebear.
They also seem to hate the idea that the market is pvp, and that they can negatively affect other players' games by simply trying to mind their own business. It's an anti-social sentiment that as long as they don't shoot other players, they are in their own bubble and shouldn't be held accountable for other actions. If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality.-á That 'griefer/thief' is probably more sane than you are.-á How screwed up is that? |
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
74
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 16:44:00 -
[363] - Quote
In response to several different claims that separating the Empires with lowsec space would not disrupt the current system of massive trade hubs, I have this to say: separating the Empires with lowsec should be only part of a larger plan.
If fuel prices climb and nullsec industry actually gets a kick in the pants like it's supposed to in Odyssey (both big "if"s, I know) massive trade hubs will already be taking a hit, and think lowsec (shifting-sec-status FW space, or even nullsec) between Empires would be a good additional step.
|
ravill rivyll
Perkone Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 16:47:00 -
[364] - Quote
I cant say if its good or bad but its definitely interesting... I would go for it.
|
Nahkep Narmelion
CALIMA COLLABORATIVE Atrox Urbanis Respublique Abundatia
53
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 16:48:00 -
[365] - Quote
Ruze wrote:
Honestly, I like the idea because I feel that it will minimize the 'central trade hub' idea a lot and start pushing local hubs a lot more. The centralized hub of Jita, in my mind, needs a lot of it's oomph taken out and more placed in regional and local hubs.
Plus, if it's dangerous to haul goods, the value of said goods will vary more greatly in each region. I'll have lasers all day in Amarr, but getting missiles or autocannons might cost me more than they would in their areas.
Finally, as mentioned earlier, I hate the fact that mass-trade is mostly a solo endeavor. Single accounts living in NPC corps, flying freighters to and from Jita. They stick to NPC corps to keep from getting war dec'd, to avoid loss. I like the fact that this idea would sincerely push those who are willing to make trade into a group endeavor into more profitable territory, while nuking the solo trader's profit margin considerably.
Feel? You like it because it makes you feel something. I like the idea of me staying home all day playing Eve while I collect $80,000 from the government so I can...I like it because it would make me feel good.
Feelings are great, but I think you should have some sort of reason beyond feeling it will do something. It is entirely possible that Jita and possibly Amarr will get a boost out of this, not a nerf. Did that feeling crop up?
And what exactly does price differentials bring to the game? Greater profits? Maybe. Maybe not. If prices go up, but the demand goes down you might not see any change in your profit. As I noted price is not everything.
As for trade, you don't trade do you. Sure, the hauling alt may very well be in an NPC corp, but the rest of the operation probably is not. Depends on what that person is doing. For example, when I was doing invention and manufacturing I had several alts all in the same corp doing various things. Why? I needed a POS, can't have a POS in high sec in an NPC corp. Having them all in the same corp allowed for sharing a hangar as well that made doing all that crap easier.
It would be nice if you guys actually knew what you were talking about. |
Nahkep Narmelion
CALIMA COLLABORATIVE Atrox Urbanis Respublique Abundatia
53
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 16:51:00 -
[366] - Quote
Ruze wrote:[quote=Caljiav Ocanon]
They also seem to hate the idea that the market is pvp, and that they can negatively affect other players' games by simply trying to mind their own business. It's an anti-social sentiment that as long as they don't shoot other players, they are in their own bubble and shouldn't be held accountable for other actions.
Then this proposal is decidedly anti-market PvP. Market PvP has another name. Competition. To the extent that a guy who is set up in say Caldari space already making say, Amarr T2 items, will have less competition if most of the other Amarr T2 inventors/manufacturers are in Amarr, Gallente or Minmatar space.
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. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
668
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 16:55:00 -
[367] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:
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.
Won't prices drop for other things at the same time? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
205
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 17:03:00 -
[368] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:Ruze wrote:[quote=Caljiav Ocanon]
They also seem to hate the idea that the market is pvp, and that they can negatively affect other players' games by simply trying to mind their own business. It's an anti-social sentiment that as long as they don't shoot other players, they are in their own bubble and shouldn't be held accountable for other actions. Then this proposal is decidedly anti-market PvP. Market PvP has another name. Competition. To the extent that a guy who is set up in say Caldari space already making say, Amarr T2 items, will have less competition if most of the other Amarr T2 inventors/manufacturers are in Amarr, Gallente or Minmatar space. 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.
As for both posts, I see that your personal opinion is wrapped in this. Else why would you be so insulting? As far as I can tell, this is a fairly civil discussion.
I argue that with the break up of the one trade hub and (hopefully) the practice of penny bidding that is so very common in Jita (so common that the devs have to work extra hard to crack down on third-party programs that are abusing the trade system), you'll see more market variance. More market variance between hubs creates more price variance. The person importing trade goods has an actual means to make a profit. The cost of local goods goes down, and the cost of others go up.
What Jita is doing is baselining all the items to at, or sometimes even below, their actual production value. Great for buyers, bad for sellers. It is actually stifling competition, when you combine the mass of products, the ease and regional access of the market database, and the penny bots.
If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality.-á That 'griefer/thief' is probably more sane than you are.-á How screwed up is that? |
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
74
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 17:06:00 -
[369] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:Ruze wrote:[quote=Caljiav Ocanon]
They also seem to hate the idea that the market is pvp, and that they can negatively affect other players' games by simply trying to mind their own business. It's an anti-social sentiment that as long as they don't shoot other players, they are in their own bubble and shouldn't be held accountable for other actions. Then this proposal is decidedly anti-market PvP. Market PvP has another name. Competition. To the extent that a guy who is set up in say Caldari space already making say, Amarr T2 items, will have less competition if most of the other Amarr T2 inventors/manufacturers are in Amarr, Gallente or Minmatar space. 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.
You complain about other people making unsupported claims you go off like this... |
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
282
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 17:11:00 -
[370] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Gate camping =! True piracy
Shouldn't that be != ? We are recruiting talented pilots for innovative small gang PvP
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=175061
http://www.thedeadrabbitsociety.com |
|
Nahkep Narmelion
CALIMA COLLABORATIVE Atrox Urbanis Respublique Abundatia
53
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 17:13:00 -
[371] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Nahkep Narmelion wrote:
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.
Won't prices drop for other things at the same time? I would say the competition in medium hubs like amarr and dodixie is fairly adequate. If all the hubs were equal they would all probably have average local populations of 700, making for an adequate amount of competition everywhere, unlike hek and rens which are so small they just are terrible.
Noting that prices for something you produce will drop while the prices of things I produce does not negate what I said.
And there is nothing in this proposal/suggestion that indicates trade hubs will become more equal. They might, but that is unlikely. Think of it this way. The possibilities are:
1. Hubs become more equal. 2. Jita and/or Amarr get increased shares of trade.
We have two outcomes, so an a priori non-informative probability assessment would be to put the chances of these two events happening at 50-50.
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?
Or if I thought Amarr was going to get a buff, what would keep me from moving to Amarr prior to the change. That I might get awesome prices for the T2 autocannons I was making in Dodixie?
See, what I'd do is look at the demand in systems like Dodixie. I'd look at the price. I'd then have to come up with how many guns I'd have to sell at different prices to keep things going and make a profit. If the demand is weak that would necessitate a higher price post-change. If Idon't think I'm going to get it, I just might scoot over to Caldari or Amarr space thinking that many null alliances will still use Jita or Amarr.
|
Nahkep Narmelion
CALIMA COLLABORATIVE Atrox Urbanis Respublique Abundatia
53
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 17:14:00 -
[372] - Quote
Xavier Thorm wrote:Nahkep Narmelion wrote:Ruze wrote:[quote=Caljiav Ocanon]
They also seem to hate the idea that the market is pvp, and that they can negatively affect other players' games by simply trying to mind their own business. It's an anti-social sentiment that as long as they don't shoot other players, they are in their own bubble and shouldn't be held accountable for other actions. Then this proposal is decidedly anti-market PvP. Market PvP has another name. Competition. To the extent that a guy who is set up in say Caldari space already making say, Amarr T2 items, will have less competition if most of the other Amarr T2 inventors/manufacturers are in Amarr, Gallente or Minmatar space. 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. You complain about other people making unsupported claims you go off like this...
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.
Its pretty ******* simple. |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
207
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 17:18:00 -
[373] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:Commander Ted wrote:Nahkep Narmelion wrote:
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.
Won't prices drop for other things at the same time? I would say the competition in medium hubs like amarr and dodixie is fairly adequate. If all the hubs were equal they would all probably have average local populations of 700, making for an adequate amount of competition everywhere, unlike hek and rens which are so small they just are terrible. Noting that prices for something you produce will drop while the prices of things I produce does not negate what I said. And there is nothing in this proposal/suggestion that indicates trade hubs will become more equal. They might, but that is unlikely. Think of it this way. The possibilities are: 1. Hubs become more equal. 2. Jita and/or Amarr get increased shares of trade. We have two outcomes, so an a priori non-informative probability assessment would be to put the chances of these two events happening at 50-50. 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? Or if I thought Amarr was going to get a buff, what would keep me from moving to Amarr prior to the change. That I might get awesome prices for the T2 autocannons I was making in Dodixie? See, what I'd do is look at the demand in systems like Dodixie. I'd look at the price. I'd then have to come up with how many guns I'd have to sell at different prices to keep things going and make a profit. If the demand is weak that would necessitate a higher price post-change. If Idon't think I'm going to get it, I just might scoot over to Caldari or Amarr space thinking that many null alliances will still use Jita or Amarr. I argued this same point earlier in this post. Amarr space is considerably larger than the other empires. What would stop players from moving to Amarr in order to use the larger quantity of available stations and belts?
That is a fair argument. The markets don't necessarily balance out. Sure, if everyone moved to Amarr, the markets in Minmatar space would get higher rates. But you can already sell things for above market value in Khanid or Derelik. You can already get better prices further from the central hub.
If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality.-á That 'griefer/thief' is probably more sane than you are.-á How screwed up is that? |
Za'kerak
7
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 17:19:00 -
[374] - Quote
step closer to WOW |
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
76
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 17:35:00 -
[375] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:Xavier Thorm wrote:Nahkep Narmelion wrote:Ruze wrote:[quote=Caljiav Ocanon]
They also seem to hate the idea that the market is pvp, and that they can negatively affect other players' games by simply trying to mind their own business. It's an anti-social sentiment that as long as they don't shoot other players, they are in their own bubble and shouldn't be held accountable for other actions. Then this proposal is decidedly anti-market PvP. Market PvP has another name. Competition. To the extent that a guy who is set up in say Caldari space already making say, Amarr T2 items, will have less competition if most of the other Amarr T2 inventors/manufacturers are in Amarr, Gallente or Minmatar space. 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. You complain about other people making unsupported claims you go off like this... 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. Its pretty ******* simple. BTW, you do know what a conditional statement is, right? You know, "if...., then..."?
"Reducing trade reduces competition" is not an argument, it is a claim that needs to be supported by an argument.
One reason I would be happy to see the scope of common trade within Empire space reduced is so that systems/stations other than the current trade hubs would have a better chance to grow more, since there would be incentive for traders/manufacturers to NOT move their goods to the centralized hubs. This could (and I think would) open up new opportunities for daring traders to move goods between empires in smaller volumes to take advantage of the price difference. It would also probably reduce the extent to which real players have to "compete" with trade bots, by spreading them out.
Further, with less traders concentrated in a single area, it could potentially lower the barrier to entry (or at least the perceived barrier to entry) on marketing for new players, increasing the competition by bringing more people into the market, over a wider area.
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
668
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 19:50:00 -
[376] - Quote
Za'kerak wrote:step closer to WOW what crack are you smoking, WoW has PvE servers that prevent all non consensual combat. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
668
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 19:51:00 -
[377] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:
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.
No no no no.
What is the difference between competition from someone who is moving things in with an obelisk and competition from someone who produced it locally?
Massive ******* facepalm right their. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
669
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 19:59:00 -
[378] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote:
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?
Lack of demand and resources,duh.
Jita right now has the best prices and the most demand, an extremely large part of that is 0.0 alliances buying things to JF and that is probably one of the biggest reasons jita is a super hub, which is about to be nerfed. The fact that lots of demand in Jita encourages more items, making more people move in, forming a self feeding cycle, all of these people don't care about location really because traveling across space is safe so it doesn't matter where you live.
If even more of that demand were cut out by people from other regions not coming to Jita, then Jita has less demand. Consumers (mission runners and pvp pilots in empire space) will not want to move to caldari space because it cuts off access to their preferred LP rewards and combat zones. If you took the average populations per system for all of the empires (excluding Jita) then you would find the populations of these places are fairly homogenous. If anything Amarr would become the biggest hub because it has the most space to live in.
Many industrialists can't go to Jita due to lack of ice/station slots. Ice will soon be in finite supply, and caldari capital ships aren't that great. Certain minerals are also not as common in certain empires, incentivising production of certain ships in their home space. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Sakkar Arenith
Amarrian Vengeance
62
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 20:07:00 -
[379] - Quote
agreed
the empires ought to be more "isolated". That will actually boost regional/empire markets and actually give reason to not shop in jita ll the time |
Nahkep Narmelion
CALIMA COLLABORATIVE Atrox Urbanis Respublique Abundatia
53
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 20:08:00 -
[380] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:stupid blathering....
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.
|
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
671
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 20:29:00 -
[381] - Quote
Nahkep Narmelion wrote: 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.
Station slots aren't just used for invention and your completely ignoring my biggest argument, YOU CAN'T GET OTHER FACTIONS LP ITEMS AND ICE IN CALDARI SPACE.
If people aren't buying goods from 0.0 in jita because they make it themselves, and 75% of the missioners, militia pilots, and wardecers are in the other empires, who is going to buy your ****.
Also what I said about the populations is true ask CCP's official economist: http://youtu.be/7MZD6-vGQms?t=6m53 The CCP economist also says that space is in fact getting limited, thats right an economist just confirmed what I have been telling you this entire time, nobody is going to cram in caldari space because their isn't enough ****.
Youtube link is ****, just go to 6m 53 seconds https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Llyona
Posthuman Society 10110001100111101000
17
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 22:04:00 -
[382] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Llyona wrote:
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.
>Says no one cares, then proceeds to ramble off topic about something people care less about.
Seems I struck a nerve there. Also, I said no one cares about you war decing carebears in high sec. It's like bragging about beating up old ladies in wheelchairs. Either way it only makes you look ridiculous.
Anyway, my point illustrated that shooting at carebears in high sec gives SOME lulz, whereas cloaky camping military 5 systems yields a whole new level of tears. I'm actually starting to think you may be one of the sources of those tears.
As for the topic, it's absurd and will never happen for a couple reasons:
- The empires spent centuries securing trade lines between their main hubs. They're not going to suddenly give that up because you want targets given to you on a platter.
- A highly secure trade route is important for multiple reasons, the main being the smooth movement of goods to a central marketplace. A central marketplace allows everyone a single place to compete on prices, or for buyers to receive the cheapest prices available.
- Security of trade has always been paramount to the vitality of a market. There's a reason financial institutions and trade organizations spend the most on security of all industries.
Long story short, your "idea" flies in the face of lore and common sense. Anyone with two neurons to rub together would realize this. Then again, you missed my previous point in a laughable manner.
Caljiav Ocanon wrote: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.
"I like to make up my own definitions"
EVE is an illness, for which there is no cure. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
671
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 22:08:00 -
[383] - Quote
Llyona wrote: Seems I struck a nerve there.
>Interprets a 1 line response to be proof of being mad. /facepalm
Jita is not a good thing, it is a cancer that enables .01isk bidding and basically removes the need for any sort of trade between empires. Their is no real trade, just everyone drops off their goods to be sold in one spot, which really benefits nobody except nullsec alliances who move everything by jump freighter (which will soon not be the case) and trade bots.
The empires have not spent centuries securing those lines, especially since they were just at war and concord is a recent invention, and since sec status is determined by concord, the security status and military build up should be two mutually exclusive things. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Job Valador
Super Moose Defence Force
37
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 22:28:00 -
[384] - Quote
Just quickly butting in again because of the bugger who posted after me earlier... I am not an alt >.> [IMG]http://imageshack.us/a/img836/7059/c00286794da9496e2b391.jpg[/IMG]
Rule 34 ^ |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
9
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 23:41:00 -
[385] - Quote
So the piddly arguments are TL;DR if not just totally vague. I think this is a great idea from a content point of view. What are the counter arguments to this idea? Please make it plain to understand. I will state some Pros.
1: This will create game content that is desperately needed in EVE overall. 2: This will give Low Security space more reason to exist than just as a buffer to Null sec. 3: The heart of Eve online is the PvP content. This change would put PvP at the heart (or center) of Eve (New Eden). 4: New high sec corps would know where to go to find fights when they want to learn/fail PvP. 5: The hauling profession would have new life breathed into it and would become much more interesting than Mining/Scanning/missioning. 6: People would redistribute themselves around the empires. If importing becomes necessary then probably around the border zones. 7: Racial Identity would probably become quite a bit stronger for new players since they'll be spending more time in their faction's space before they're ready to fly through Low Sec.
I'm sure i could think of more if i had a little bit longer but here are just a few of the positive implications (based subjectively on my oppinion of positive).
Like i said before, this doesn't make space any less safe. You can still choose to never leave Empire, but this would definitely promote making the leap to low. |
Vega Umbranox
Eternal Darkness. Fatal Ascension
2
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 12:48:00 -
[386] - Quote
i like this idea itd be alot better |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
12
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 04:30:00 -
[387] - Quote
Be there no rebuttles?
Does this mean everyone is on board with a change like this? |
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
82
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 14:51:00 -
[388] - Quote
Llyona wrote:As for the topic, it's absurd and will never happen for a couple reasons:
- The empires spent centuries securing trade lines between their main hubs. They're not going to suddenly give that up because you want targets given to you on a platter.
- A highly secure trade route is important for multiple reasons, the main being the smooth movement of goods to a central marketplace. A central marketplace allows everyone a single place to compete on prices, or for buyers to receive the cheapest prices available.
- Security of trade has always been paramount to the vitality of a market. There's a reason financial institutions and trade organizations spend the most on security of all industries.
Long story short, your "idea" flies in the face of lore and common sense. Anyone with two neurons to rub together would realize this. Then again, you missed my previous point in a laughable manner.
Wat? I can't even just let this one go.
1). The Empires are in a state of cold war, which (given that in the case of the Minmatar and Gallente they just slaughtered a couple thousand of each others military service people and destroyed over a dozen Dreadnaughts) could escalate to full war at any time. Nations don't just keep trading with each other when they go to war in the real world because they've been doing it for a while. And that's entirely discounting the Empire factions that weren't already friendly with each other. Yeah, there's been a lasting peace for a while, but I doubt trade between the Minmatar and Amarr was ever that much of a priority for either Empire, and even the Gallente and Caldari massively distrust each other. Honestly, you're claiming it would be illogical for them to stop trading, but I think it's more illogical for them to currently have as open commerce as they currently do.
2). A central marketplace which allows everyone a single place to compete on prices, etc. etc. is pretty much exactly what proponents of this change are against. As multiple people have pointed out: it raises the barrier to entry to become involved in the market, reduces the advantage from specializing in particularly regional goods production, limits the existence of actual trade (by which I mean the shipment of goods from one location to another because of price differences), homogenizes the empires, eliminates a lot of danger from market activity, and draws people away from other regions of the game.
3) Security of trade should be paramount to the market, but it should be made possible by the players, not by game mechanics that allow the nearly danger-free movement of goods from one end of high security space to another. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
130
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 15:16:00 -
[389] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Be there no rebuttles?
Does this mean everyone is on board with a change like this?
There is plenty of rebuttal. Supporters of this idea have chosen to downplay, ignore, or outright delude themselves regarding the glaring flaws. It's been pointed out repeatedly that a change like this would not have the intended effect. It will screw up the markets for no real gain except a few pirates get some more targets. It's entirely possible to work toward the goal of making a low sec trading hub already, but the kind of people that like rolling freighters are too risk adverse to put their own ISK on the line making it happen. It's as simple as investing in a few bulky and expensive items and putting them up on a sell order for a very good price, then catching the freighters that come to get them on the way out, in turn putting whatever they have in their holds when you catch them back up for sale at bargain prices... Get together with friends, pool resources, hire traders to stock your station, supplement with the proceeds of your piracy, attract Null Sec business with shorter supply chains that can be more easily secured with jump freighters, etc... It does mean effort, financial risk, and doing something other than shooting anything that lights up your gate, but nothing in life or in EVE is free.
It's a suggestion meant to boost the temporary satisfaction of a small segment of toxic players at the expense of the majority, and will result in large alliances owning trade routes and freezing smaller operators out---probably to the ultimate conclusion of overall cancelled subscriptions and dissatisfied customers on all levels. |
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
82
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 15:29:00 -
[390] - Quote
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. |
|
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
130
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 15:51:00 -
[391] - Quote
I'm actually against the idea only in limited fashion.
I keep posting hoping to see the idea developed into something not bad. The majority of the problem is actually a function of low sec space itself, and the culture that exists there. Part of that can be fixed by fixing the disparity of PvE vs. PvP, which is beyond the scope of this proposal. However, as things stand now, it's a ludicrously bad idea.
The bulk of the problems as a proposal are pretty simple:
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. This is unlikely to work as hoped, rather than result in frustrated and angry players quiting, goods becoming more scarce, and things reaching an equilibrium with the current situation except that everything costs more with fewer people buying and transporting stuff. It is exceedingly likely that the increased profits and restricted access to goods will result in large alliances moving to secure their own trade routes, ending with them pretty much establishing permanent pipelines and using their superior force projection to dominate anyone not in a large alliance and dictating prices to the entire server.
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. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
675
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 16:03:00 -
[392] - Quote
Xavier Thorm wrote: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. I believe it was mike who argued that most players are hisec carebears. Here is a link contradicting him http://youtu.be/7MZD6-vGQms?t=8m36s
Also the same video proves what I have been arguing to Nahkep that one hisec empire couldn't support all of the population so everyone moving to jita is dumb. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Claire Raynor
NovaGear Limitless Inc.
118
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 16:06:00 -
[393] - Quote
Ohh - come on everyone. I've commented before - I think this is a top suggestion. It believe it would be great fun.
Clumps of High security space seperate by low security space - like islands - and there already are a few of these - are fun. They develop communities around them, (or at least the Orien one that I know has), and it's kind of refreshing because there doesn't seem to be that much "local character" to the vast expanse of high sec - just a few locals you always see. The Orien Island has it's own channels, there are a few corps / small alliances there, but they all have an identity and identify with being "Islanders".
I think seperating the empires would add more identity and charac |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
675
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 16:11:00 -
[394] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:
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.
The reason pirates lack targets is because their is no good reason to interact with pirates. Also what "traps" are you talking about? Warping to a lone mining ship that has been dicking around for 20 minutes? The player base is not responsible for the natural outcome of the sandbox. It's the same thing with Goonswarm, you can't blame them for accomplishing whats possible in nullsec, and you can't blame pirates for choosing to attack players in the pvp zone.
I have said before avoiding pirates in low sec currently is extremely trivial. Doing level 4s in lowsec and exploration are done frequently for long periods of time, if you take the proper precautions you are nearly invulnerable to death. What things would pirates have to do to attract people in to low sec now? Stop pirating? I must cite my opinion that you are ignorant to how pirates do their activities, and that you are talking out of your area of expertise.
Also once again I must state that this is not forcing anything on anyone in any single way, which i think is the biggest fallacy in your argument. Something like moving all level 4s to lowsec would be forcing something on carebears, removing all hisec asteroid belts would be forcing something on carebears, however removing a route to a location that is completely unnecessary to them is not forcing anything on them. Everything you could possibly want to do is available in one empire, as I said in the first post, do you seriously need to run Damsel in Distress once for every empire? Also as for trading, I clearly outlined the safe alternatives. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Claire Raynor
NovaGear Limitless Inc.
118
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 16:15:00 -
[395] - Quote
P.S. - I really don't get this whole "carebear" thing. I'm defo a bear because I don't like competative elements of EVE but do like PvE and I like to grind and mine and PI - but IRL I like fishing, (jugging), and walking in the hills - and I HATE competative stuff like sport. PvP for me in EVE is not getting my Mammoths and Provi's blown up, it's about not losing my Loki when I'm exploring, it's about avoiding the fight rather than the actual fight - because I can't win against that Talos gang when I'm in a Mammoth or a Providence, PVP to me is also about identifying and protecting market opportunities.
All of the above gets more interesting with more opportunities and more variation with bigger borders and high sec islands - like what the OP proposed. |
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
83
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 16:32:00 -
[396] - Quote
For the record, I don't have any particular beliefs or opinions about how this would effect lowsec piracy. My concern has to do with the problem I have with Jita as a massive market hub and with trade genrally being too easy and safe in EVE.
I don't like that large nullsec alliances like my own are required to do almost literally none of our own production to keep our war machine working (and thus we have no infrastructure to attack other than out of alliance jump freighters).
I don't like that there is little use for blockade runners because the vast majority of trade can be accomplished safely in less expensive ships.
I don't like how homogenous prices are across New Eden.
I don't like how the current lack of separation of Empires and lack of security around the borders breaks immersion for me.
I don't like how a the current arrangement of one contiguous block of hisec allows new players to convince themselves that everything outside of hisec is big and terrifying. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
147
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 19:27:00 -
[397] - Quote
Xavier Thorm wrote:For the record, I don't have any particular beliefs or opinions about how this would effect lowsec piracy. My concern has to do with the problem I have with Jita as a massive market hub and with trade genrally being too easy and safe in EVE.
This could make it worse.
Quote:I don't like that large nullsec alliances like my own are required to do almost literally none of our own production to keep our war machine working (and thus we have no infrastructure to attack other than out of alliance jump freighters).
This is not a requirement, but more likely a result of the fact that:
1. Null sec manufacturing sucks. 2. High sec manufacturing is so damn easy. 3. Manufacturing in general is not alot of fun for most players.
Odyssey might change that, hopefully. And as a result places like Jita and Amarr might lose some of their market share. Maybe.
Quote:I don't like how homogenous prices are across New Eden.
I don't get the issue with this one. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
675
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 19:52:00 -
[398] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:
This could make it worse.
No it can't, seriously.
Missioners, Ice miners, and exploration pilots can not all cluster in one spot, Caldari LP store items aren't good enough to be able to make money for every missioner in Eve, Caldari Ice doesn't hold enough demand and it will be soon in finite supply to be mined, and asteroid belts will be chewed through to quickly. Where the carebears go the hisec pvp pilots will follow, Non Caldari/Amarr militia pilots would be cut off removing even more demand. What keeps Jita so large is the fact items come in from every corner of hisec. That could not possibly be sustained if there was neither the demand or the supply incoming.
CCP's in house economist has said himself that players are starting to spread themselves out across due to population constraints in caldari space.
Teckos Pech wrote: I don't get the issue with this one.
Its hard to make money doing trade if items cost the same in every region. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
87
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 22:43:00 -
[399] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:This could make it worse.
I'm honestly not sure how. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I don't see a reason for it. If moving a bunch of stuff that only exists in one region (like faction goods) or is easier to produce in that region to Jita suddenly involves crossing lowsec, I think less people will do it. Yes, trade across Empires will still exist, and should become more profitable for those who partake in it, but Jita/Rens/Amarr/Dodixie will not be the one-stop-shopping super-hubs they currently are.
And before anyone asks or brings this up, hell yes I shop in Jita currently. I would like to have more reason not to, that's what I'm saying.
Teckos Pech wrote:This is not a requirement, but more likely a result of the fact that:
1. Null sec manufacturing sucks. 2. High sec manufacturing is so damn easy. 3. Manufacturing in general is not alot of fun for most players.
Odyssey might change that, hopefully. And as a result places like Jita and Amarr might lose some of their market share. Maybe.
You just supported my point... One of the reasons I would like to see this change is that High sec manufacturing is so easy. This wouldn't change the manufacturing directly, but it would change the distribution, which would encourage more industry in other regions. Including nullsec. Entirely theoretical, I know, and yes I would want to see other changes as well, but I think this is a good direction to start in.
Teckos Pech wrote: I don't get the issue with this one.
Commander Ted already answered this (sort of) but yeah, basically homogeneous prices make trade (in the traditional sense of loading up your ship in one region, selling your supply where it is valued, picking up whatever is manufactured there, and moving to where that is needed) largely nonexistent.
If it was more difficult to move everything from any point in the galaxy to any other, doing so would be more profitable for people willing to take the risk. |
Blueclaws
Rainbow Dash Goes Red Rainbow Dash Friends
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 23:10:00 -
[400] - Quote
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. |
|
Llyona
Posthuman Society 10110001100111101000
17
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 00:51:00 -
[401] - Quote
Xavier Thorm wrote: 1). The Empires are in a state of cold war, which (given that in the case of the Minmatar and Gallente they just slaughtered a couple thousand of each others military service people and destroyed over a dozen Dreadnaughts) could escalate to full war at any time. Nations don't just keep trading with each other when they go to war in the real world because they've been doing it for a while. And that's entirely discounting the Empire factions that weren't already friendly with each other. Yeah, there's been a lasting peace for a while, but I doubt trade between the Minmatar and Amarr was ever that much of a priority for either Empire, and even the Gallente and Caldari massively distrust each other. Honestly, you're claiming it would be illogical for them to stop trading, but I think it's more illogical for them to currently have as open commerce as they currently do.
You're confusing The State with The Market. It's a common mistake made by many simpletons. You see, taxes from The Market pay for all those shiny dreads and soldiers The State throws away in wars. Also, taxes pay for all that CONCORD protection all those Hbears receive when transferring goods. So, you see, it's in each faction's interest (and CONCORD's) that goods keep flowing freely between markets.
Also, I have no clue how you can interpret increased military presence on borders as creating less security for trade routes. If anything, a war between the factions would increase security of their own systems for anyone except rivals to their faction. So, a war between the factions would actually cause the opposite result of the one you'd like.
Xavier Thorm wrote: 2). A central marketplace which allows everyone a single place to compete on prices, etc. etc. is pretty much exactly what proponents of this change are against. As multiple people have pointed out: it raises the barrier to entry to become involved in the market, reduces the advantage from specializing in particularly regional goods production, limits the existence of actual trade (by which I mean the shipment of goods from one location to another because of price differences), homogenizes the empires, eliminates a lot of danger from market activity, and draws people away from other regions of the game.
If anything you said were true, there wouldn't be massive mark ups in Amarr, Dodixie and Rens compared to Jita. Check the market data to and you'll see there are genuine price differences between the main hubs on certain commodities and that trade volume actually occurs. I make massive profits on buy orders that are at 80% Jita price in a 0.7 system that's connected to several 0.5 systems on low-sec borders. People constantly sell me billions in goods simply because they either don't have the sec status to go above 0.5, or because they're too lazy to ship the items to Jita themselves. However, according to you, this never happens because you think every player has huge freighters to move everything anywhere they want.
Xavier Thorm wrote: 3) Security of trade should be paramount to the market, but it should be made possible by the players, not by game mechanics that allow the nearly danger-free movement of goods from one end of high security space to another.
You were going great until you said "but". Security to The Market is paramount to survival of The State and The Citizenry. Imagine an empire that allows it's roads to it's neighbors to be ransacked by pirates. Such empires rarely last very long.
Let's face it, the only reason anyone would want this change is to allow easy targets on a silver platter. Unfortunately for you, this will never happen. EVE is an illness, for which there is no cure. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
676
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 01:32:00 -
[402] - Quote
Blueclaws wrote: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. Would they even want to trade goods with their enemies? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
219
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 01:33:00 -
[403] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Blueclaws wrote: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. Would they even want to trade goods with their enemies?
Seems blockades and embargo's are the common thing to do with enemies. If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality.-á That 'griefer/thief' is probably more sane than you are.-á How screwed up is that? |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
219
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 01:42:00 -
[404] - Quote
Llyona wrote: Let's face it, the only reason anyone would want this change is to allow easy targets on a silver platter. Unfortunately for you, this will never happen.
Let's clarify, through the insults and character smearing, that your position is largely dedicated to this last line. Or to be more honest, it seems to me that this is your real stance.
However it has been argued time and again that any means to make low security space more viable, profitable or necessary to it's occupants and visitors, is a means to enhance piracy.
This kind of baseless thinking is why, 10 years later, losec is still some of the least useful space in ... well, space. When players support improving it in any way, the inherent danger of the area causes others, who wish to avoid that danger at all cost (oft-times having never lived or traveled in losec outside exceptional incidents) to come up and begin insulting and haranguing anyone as an 'evil mass murderer', or some such.
Now, I've made newbie alts just to sit in NPC corps and tell players that, no, losec is not that dangerous. A quick scan of your map tools, a little help from a buddy, and watching the ever powerful local ... and losec is actually easy. Your heart races a bit, and you get a little jittery, but it's not actually a bad place where pirates camp every corner.
Despite my inherent and versed disagreements with commander ted's idea, I still will stolidly support nearly any idea that gives losec more of a reason to be. By making it required in order to move between empires? Simply makes sense! It's logical, and sound. It may not, however, be balanced.
But it's not just about targets. It's about differing lifestyles and types of players, and RESPECTING each.
I'm a hisec industrialist, who's played a pirate and nulsec instigator. What are YOU? If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality.-á That 'griefer/thief' is probably more sane than you are.-á How screwed up is that? |
Blueclaws
Rainbow Dash Goes Red Rainbow Dash Friends
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 01:57:00 -
[405] - Quote
to the OP, the empires wouln't trade with enemeies.
Still war would mean more military presence. So there would be more security. Either way, it doesnt make a lot of sense.
|
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
87
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 02:30:00 -
[406] - Quote
Blueclaws wrote:to the OP, the empires wouln't trade with enemeies.
Still war would mean more military presence. So there would be more security. Either way, it doesnt make a lot of sense.
Well, the military presence could be in lowsec, and since the security status of systems is actually a measure of CONCORD response to capsuleer actions and not of the stance of the Empires, to me it makes sense that CONCORD would not want to put as much effort into policing a militarized border zone as they would with "secure" space.
To respond generally to Lyonda:
You're the one claiming the empires would secure trade routs, so you're already assuming the state is directly intervening in the market. Further, you are correct that taxes would pay for the expenses of the Empires, but again, that would be a good reason for them to restrict trade with foreign powers. Reducing exports would both drive up demand (and therefore prices and therefore taxes) of locally produced goods, and would also encourage more local commerce, which would increase their ability to collect transaction taxes from capsuleers in their stations.
You are absolutely correct that there are price differences between the large trade hubs, but I would not describe them as "massive mark ups". However, making a counterargument based on something I didn't even see does not address the rest of my argument and thus makes it seem as if you are trying to deflect from a conversation you have no real point to make in.
I'm amused that you continue to accuse me of having some kind of interest in piracy in lowsec, considering that I only ever entered that space to run incursions. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Tribal Band
504
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 03:13:00 -
[407] - Quote
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. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. |
Llyona
Posthuman Society 10110001100111101000
18
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 03:21:00 -
[408] - Quote
Ruze wrote: Let's clarify, through the insults and character smearing, that your position is largely dedicated to this last line. Or to be more honest, it seems to me that this is your real stance.
However it has been argued time and again that any means to make low security space more viable, profitable or necessary to it's occupants and visitors, is a means to enhance piracy.
This kind of baseless thinking is why, 10 years later, losec is still some of the least useful space in ... well, space. When players support improving it in any way, the inherent danger of the area causes others, who wish to avoid that danger at all cost (oft-times having never lived or traveled in losec outside exceptional incidents) to come up and begin insulting and haranguing anyone as an 'evil mass murderer', or some such.
Now, I've made newbie alts just to sit in NPC corps and tell players that, no, losec is not that dangerous. A quick scan of your map tools, a little help from a buddy, and watching the ever powerful local ... and losec is actually easy. Your heart races a bit, and you get a little jittery, but it's not actually a bad place where pirates camp every corner.
Despite my inherent and versed disagreements with commander ted's idea, I still will stolidly support nearly any idea that gives losec more of a reason to be. By making it required in order to move between empires? Simply makes sense! It's logical, and sound. It may not, however, be balanced.
But it's not just about targets. It's about differing lifestyles and types of players, and RESPECTING each.
I'm a hisec industrialist, who's played a pirate and nulsec instigator. What are YOU?
First off, Low-Sec is far from dangerous and should be slightly less useless than high-sec, which it is. In fact, Kspace in general is a giant carebear-fest.
Secondly, I live in wspace, where danger (and ridiculous reward) actually exists. I have an alt who carries product from my 0.7 station to Jita and that's all it does. In fact, this idea wouldn't affect my enterprise at all. The fact of the matter is, low-sec regions between trade hubs makes no sense at all. It doesn't happen in the real world and certainly wouldn't happen in EVE.
What is being suggested is akin to a world where the US Navy (and other nations) no longer patrol major trade routes and simply tell their citizens they have to fend for themselves against pirates. It makes zero sense and no self respecting nation would allow it to happen.
As for the motivation behind these suggestions, it's quite apparent to me that Low-Sec "Pirates" are lazy and generally afraid of risk. They roam around in their faction blobs with cheaply fit tech 1 frigates/cruisers attacking anything they outnumber significantly and station hug the moment an equal fleet is about. Seeing a suggestion that forces traders to move through low-sec only leads me to believe this is another example of the lazy low-sec bear trying to force more indy pilots through low-sec pipes. EVE is an illness, for which there is no cure. |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
219
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 03:52:00 -
[409] - Quote
Llyona wrote: First off, Low-Sec is far from dangerous and should be slightly less useless than high-sec, which it is. In fact, Kspace in general is a giant carebear-fest.
Secondly, I live in wspace, where danger (and ridiculous reward) actually exists. I have an alt who carries product from my 0.7 station to Jita and that's all it does. In fact, this idea wouldn't affect my enterprise at all. The fact of the matter is, low-sec regions between trade hubs makes no sense at all. It doesn't happen in the real world and certainly wouldn't happen in EVE.
What is being suggested is akin to a world where the US Navy (and other nations) no longer patrol major trade routes and simply tell their citizens they have to fend for themselves against pirates. It makes zero sense and no self respecting nation would allow it to happen.
As for the motivation behind these suggestions, it's quite apparent to me that Low-Sec "Pirates" are lazy and generally afraid of risk. They roam around in their faction blobs with cheaply fit tech 1 frigates/cruisers attacking anything they outnumber significantly and station hug the moment an equal fleet is about. Seeing a suggestion that forces traders to move through low-sec only leads me to believe this is another example of the lazy low-sec bear trying to force more indy pilots through low-sec pipes.
Well, you've at least proven my theory of stance. And since your statement shows actual proof that you don't know much about losec as it currently stands, we'll move on from that side of the argument. I'd be remiss if I didn't direct any w-space opinions in your direction. Otherwise, it's essentially invalid.
Your talking international waters with the Navy reference, though, which is and of itself is NOT what sec space is. Period. Its quite possible that by using a misguided analogy, you've sprung upon a great idea: International space. Inter-empire space. We'll drift back to this. First we have to set some points in place:
Point: Trade hubs are player creations, not made by CCP. Not really a necessary point, just background.
Point: If the empire sought to protect it's trade profit before war broke out, it would have allowed trade to exist between itself and all other empires. This is before one of the expansions, I think Empyrean, a few years back.
Point: After war breaks out, buying from an enemy empire would be a traitors act.
Point: After war breaks out, buying from an ally would often be seen as 'okay.'
So if we can trade with allies, but we don't want to be supporting enemies with monies, we'd cut off ties with them. So at the very least, Commander Teds' argument for low security space between warring empires (the Amarr/Caldari might versus the Gallente/Minmatar gaggle) would not be supportive of trade. And since CCP did not, in fact, declare Jita a trade hub, it would probably destabilize the market to a great degree as the Minmatar and Gallente economies would suffer (there simply being more product for sale to Caldari, safe trade to Amarr, and more production capabilities in Amarr).
So we've got the why and why not. What about this new 'inter-empire space'? That's a bunch of funny options. The empty vast that only the navies themselves protect, where traders are supposed to be able to roll in peace, and where pirates prey on the weak. Sounds like losec, I guess. More thought will have to be put into that train. If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality.-á That 'griefer/thief' is probably more sane than you are.-á How screwed up is that? |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
677
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 04:00:00 -
[410] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote: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. Middle sec will just be a no fun space for everyone. Carebears will die and pvpers will be forced out by dicks with enough overwhelming force to ignore the consequences. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
220
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 04:08:00 -
[411] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Reaver Glitterstim wrote: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. Middle sec will just be a no fun space for everyone. Carebears will die and pvpers will be forced out by dicks with enough overwhelming force to ignore the consequences.
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.
If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality.-á That 'griefer/thief' is probably more sane than you are.-á How screwed up is that? |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
677
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 04:17:00 -
[412] - Quote
Ruze wrote:
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.
Fun for most pvpers I mean.
In his proposal large groups of people with logistics ships could overwhelm the security in Middle sec, ganking carebears and preventing any good fleet battles. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mikhael Taron
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
30
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 08:31:00 -
[413] - Quote
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. You can fool some of the people all of the time. You can fool all of the people some of the time. You can make a fool out of yourself anytime.
|
The Breath
Dark Parrot
2
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 08:57:00 -
[414] - Quote
JITA is not high sec, JITA = low sec in ccp mind, In fact, ccp is doing this in other ways , so..... "now --for a breath I tarry,-ánor yet disperse apart -á--take my hand quick and tell me,-áwhat have you in your hear." |
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
87
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 15:27:00 -
[415] - Quote
The Breath wrote:JITA is not high sec, JITA = low sec in ccp mind, In fact, ccp is doing this in other ways , so.....
Could you clarify what you mean by this? |
Raijil Saavuj
Saavuj Industries
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 18:28:00 -
[416] - Quote
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.
You've given many suggestions as to how this MIGHT work, but they are all worse options than hisec carebears already have. You can point, deliver insults, but none of this would convince dedicated hisec players that your proposal would be more fun. It would not be more fun for them. Games that are no longer fun will no longer be played. Less players means even less of a chance for you to have a target for your piratey schemes. A loss of subscriptions would be bad for CCP and they wouldn't implement such a 'feature' (I use this term loosely) because it would decrease their revenue.
There's got to be a better way to enhance lowsec than to royally screw hisec industrialists/traders. I do applaud your attempt to make lowsec more interesting, I just think you're going about it the wrong way.
Until the solution for fixing lowsec is found, I would suggest you focus your piratey depredations in hisec -- There's plenty of targets moving around, you just have to be willing to accept the consequences of your actions. There's plenty of groups that have done this successfully. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
678
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 21:47:00 -
[417] - Quote
Raijil Saavuj wrote: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.
Who would have their gameplay negatively impacted? Missioners? No. Miners? No. Industrialists? No.
People who do interempire trade will still have safe options, because the currently it is easily exploitable by bots, or just being AFK. Not to mention traders who fly around, can still do lots of things in one empire. I have clearly outline safe ways around and through low sec that have little chance of death multiple times in this thread.
That is the great beauty of this idea, it wont impact anyone's gameplay negatively, it simply adds a new more exciting option for others who want it. This would get CCP more subscriptions from people who want excitement without changing anything for the boring people. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
678
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 21:49:00 -
[418] - Quote
Mikhael Taron wrote: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.
That is true, however I think it would be cool if for some reason all the empires went to war for some reason, no idea what, or the new regions that this idea would add would for some reason cut off the two empires, like for example the new area separating them was under amarr rule. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Rayzilla Zaraki
Tandokuno
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 22:14:00 -
[419] - Quote
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. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
680
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 22:16:00 -
[420] - Quote
Rayzilla Zaraki wrote: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.
Shrink the map? 500 systems isn't enough for a noob? Then on top of that how hard is it to go through lowsec by shuttle? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Rayzilla Zaraki
Tandokuno
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 22:40:00 -
[421] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:
Shrink the map? 500 systems isn't enough for a noob? Then on top of that how hard is it to go through lowsec by shuttle?
You may "know" there are 500 systems, but when someone, especially a noob, looks at the map, they see how small "their" space is. But, I don't see a really clean way to allow some sort of free travel between empires.
Having one or two safe routes between empires is an idea, but it would create huge choke points in those system as all players would use them, even ones more than capable of safely passing through low sec space. The solution there would be to make the safe routes a couple dozen jumps long while the dangerous ones would be but a handful.
It sure would elevate piracy as a profession, that's for sure! Not a bad thing. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
682
|
Posted - 2013.05.11 05:28:00 -
[422] - Quote
Rayzilla Zaraki wrote:[quote=Commander Ted]
Having one or two safe routes between empires is an idea, but it would create huge choke. Thats how it already is. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Tenris Anis
Schattenengel Clan
61
|
Posted - 2013.05.11 19:36:00 -
[423] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Gate camping =! True piracy
True Scotsman fallacy. And ironically it would be actually real piracy if people start to gate camp for trade goods instead of for the lulz.
Remove insurance. |
Voith
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
86
|
Posted - 2013.05.11 20:44:00 -
[424] - Quote
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. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
683
|
Posted - 2013.05.11 21:45:00 -
[425] - Quote
Voith wrote: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.
Says the bad ass using a toon who never left the NPC corp to post that has 0 killboard history.
Also most people actually do want to pvp. Proof : http://youtu.be/7MZD6-vGQms?t=8m36s https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
683
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 04:09:00 -
[426] - Quote
The Breath wrote:JITA is not high sec, JITA = low sec in ccp mind, In fact, ccp is doing this in other ways , so.....
I have no idea what this means. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Altered Ego
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 04:49:00 -
[427] - Quote
disregard |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
14
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 16:50:00 -
[428] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:Erutpar Ambient wrote:Be there no rebuttles?
Does this mean everyone is on board with a change like this? There is plenty of rebuttal. Supporters of this idea have chosen to downplay, ignore, or outright delude themselves regarding the glaring flaws. It's been pointed out repeatedly that a change like this would not have the intended effect. It will screw up the markets for no real gain except a few pirates get some more targets. It's entirely possible to work toward the goal of making a low sec trading hub already, but the kind of people that like rolling freighters are too risk adverse to put their own ISK on the line making it happen. It's as simple as investing in a few bulky and expensive items and putting them up on a sell order for a very good price, then catching the freighters that come to get them on the way out, in turn putting whatever they have in their holds when you catch them back up for sale at bargain prices... Get together with friends, pool resources, hire traders to stock your station, supplement with the proceeds of your piracy, attract Null Sec business with shorter supply chains that can be more easily secured with jump freighters, etc... It does mean effort, financial risk, and doing something other than shooting anything that lights up your gate, but nothing in life or in EVE is free. It's a suggestion meant to boost the temporary satisfaction of a small segment of toxic players at the expense of the majority, and will result in large alliances owning trade routes and freezing smaller operators out---probably to the ultimate conclusion of overall cancelled subscriptions and dissatisfied customers on all levels.
I have stated plainly why i think this is a good idea. Please state plainly why it's a bad idea. Your arugment that it doesn't "feel" like a good idea. Is not what we're looking for. Neither is "everyone will unsub" and things like that.
When you say it will screw up the markets you'll have to explain more plainly why. Currently lowsec pirating is the way it is because it's out of the way and if someone get's ganked nobody is bothered. But if we put low sec in the path between trade hubs there's going to be a lot of people out there who will be bothered.
This change would not force anyone to go to low sec. All that it would do is make you think twice about flying to another space.
Think of old world trade from eurpoe to china. If you could get silk and spices in europe you wouldn't need to trade. If there was no risk in the transport, they wouldn't really be worth trading anyways. Nothing is worth trading in eve right now. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
685
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 18:50:00 -
[429] - Quote
Hey, after nearly 10,000 views can I see a dev response? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Aria Ning
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
12
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 19:29:00 -
[430] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:Erutpar Ambient wrote:Be there no rebuttles?
Does this mean everyone is on board with a change like this? There is plenty of rebuttal. Supporters of this idea have chosen to downplay, ignore, or outright delude themselves regarding the glaring flaws. It's been pointed out repeatedly that a change like this would not have the intended effect. It will screw up the markets for no real gain except a few pirates get some more targets. It's entirely possible to work toward the goal of making a low sec trading hub already, but the kind of people that like rolling freighters are too risk adverse to put their own ISK on the line making it happen. It's as simple as investing in a few bulky and expensive items and putting them up on a sell order for a very good price, then catching the freighters that come to get them on the way out, in turn putting whatever they have in their holds when you catch them back up for sale at bargain prices... Get together with friends, pool resources, hire traders to stock your station, supplement with the proceeds of your piracy, attract Null Sec business with shorter supply chains that can be more easily secured with jump freighters, etc... It does mean effort, financial risk, and doing something other than shooting anything that lights up your gate, but nothing in life or in EVE is free. It's a suggestion meant to boost the temporary satisfaction of a small segment of toxic players at the expense of the majority, and will result in large alliances owning trade routes and freezing smaller operators out---probably to the ultimate conclusion of overall cancelled subscriptions and dissatisfied customers on all levels. I have stated plainly why i think this is a good idea. Please state plainly why it's a bad idea. Your arugment that it doesn't "feel" like a good idea. Is not what we're looking for. Neither is "everyone will unsub" and things like that. When you say it will screw up the markets you'll have to explain more plainly why. Currently lowsec pirating is the way it is because it's out of the way and if someone get's ganked nobody is bothered. But if we put low sec in the path between trade hubs there's going to be a lot of people out there who will be bothered. This change would not force anyone to go to low sec. All that it would do is make you think twice about flying to another space. Think of old world trade from eurpoe to china. If you could get silk and spices in europe you wouldn't need to trade. If there was no risk in the transport, they wouldn't really be worth trading anyways. Nothing is worth trading in eve right now.
The value of china silk had very little to do with the risk in the transport. It had more to do that silk was a popular item and only the Chinese knew the secret of its manufacture. However, I do agree that the value of an item due to the associated risk involved does increase the value of it, but first the item needs to have value, not the other way around. The current suggestion won't create any real value of items from trade. Items in Eve don't hold much value from trade simply because they're common in every area of space. The only thing that is not that I can think of (and that's common) is something like Racial Ice. In which case the idea would create some trade value in Racial Ice.
For this idea to work certain high sec regions of space need to have access to items while other regions don't. Otherwise, all you will see are local regions of trade and very few cross regional trade. In other words, Minmatar will stop shipping goods to Jita and only ship them to Rens/Hek and other factions will do the same in their local regional markets. In simple terms this idea will basically be just a nerf to Jita. |
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
686
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 19:40:00 -
[431] - Quote
There is a huge abundance of things only found in one region.
LP Store Rewards, Ice, Exploration loot, datacores, and other things are found only in one spot. Not to mention some minerals are more abundant in certain regions, making racial variants of ships cheaper in some regions. This price difference would create an incentive to conduct trade.
Right now you would think that Republic fleet firetails would be cheaper in rens than in Jita, but they aren't. Why is this? Because people get the blueprints in minmatar space and move them to Jita.
If their was lowsec you would see an incentive to sell them in rens, and people would buy them there and move them to Jita for profit.
Things like battleships that have ungodly mineral costs would be cheaper to be built in there home regions. Due to the difficulty of moving battleships over low sec in bulk, people would start moving the ores that are easier to obtain in some empires to the market they want to sell them in, creating trade. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Aria Ning
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
12
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 20:02:00 -
[432] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:There is a huge abundance of things only found in one region. LP Store Rewards, Ice, Exploration loot, datacores, and other things are found only in one spot. Not to mention some minerals are more abundant in certain regions, making racial variants of ships cheaper in some regions. This price difference would create an incentive to conduct trade. Right now you would think that Republic fleet firetails would be cheaper in rens than in Jita, but they aren't. Why is this? Because people build them in minmatar space and move them to Jita.
All those items you mentioned are small m3 items except for ice. A blockade runner or even a frigate can haul those items without any real risk associated (unless they're mass transporting it, which I am getting into my next paragraph).
Now... Lets get to the manufacture side of this (or mass transit). Lets say I have dozens of different ships/ammo/rigs/modules etc built and I see that the market in Jita is in demand for the items I built (from doing my research of course). Currently the price it costs me to ship 800km3 worth of goods is between 11mil-14mil (using Red Frog or PushX) which is chump change because I can easily make millions of isk from the items made.
However, with your idea of low sec being the gap between empires the price of hauling the goods will skyrocket. Because now I am charged for jump freighter service which is usually around 50-60 million isk and can hold only 320k m3 goods severely crippling my profits. You think I will produce goods or transport goods in Jita? No. At least not mass transit. Instead, I am just going to product for the local market, since I get more profits that way.
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. |
DrysonBennington
Eagle's Talon's
16
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 20:08:00 -
[433] - Quote
I like the idea of having a no mans land between each races territory. Make the boundary maybe three to five jumps deep. Make the Frontier Territory 0.0 security status in all territories and place Frontier outposts of neutral standing in system. Control of all of the outposts in a system would then give the owning race control of the systems where after several months of occupation the systems would slowly achieve a better security status rating eventually becoming high security status with Concord and the occupying races Navy moving in to secure the Frontier Territory. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
686
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 20:34:00 -
[434] - Quote
Aria Ning wrote:
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.
Exactly my point, their is no point in selling things locally because no matter where it comes from, it makes the most sense to sell it in Jita.
Also those small m3 items matter to trade. Also not all LP store items are small m3, ammo can take up quite a lot of space. Not to mention ships will still be cheaper in their home empires because of how much more common there appropriate minerals are.
Also you must consider that even for generic items like t2 modules there would be new trade opportunities. If someone in Amarr buys out every t2 warp core stab there is, it will take time for the local production to make up for the loss, opening up an opportunity for people to cross low sec and make profit. Normally someone would probably have bought all the warp core stabs from Jita and then moved them to amarr space for use, or within an hour someone would have seen the shortage on eve central and moved in one obelisk.
Since economies will be more isolated, they will be more vulnerable to things like a manufacturer going out of business or price manipulation, making it easier for traders to take advantage of such changes. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Aria Ning
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
12
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 20:51:00 -
[435] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Aria Ning wrote: However, with your idea of low sec being the gap between empires the price of hauling the goods will skyrocket. Because now I am charged for jump freighter service which is usually around 50-60 million isk and can hold only 320k m3 goods severely crippling my profits. You think I will produce goods or transport goods to Jita? No. At least not mass transit. Instead, I am just going to produce for the local market since I get more profits that way.
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.
Exactly my point, their is no point in selling things locally because no matter where it comes from, it makes the most sense to sell it in Jita. However if low sec is in the way Jita will die as a super hub. People making things for local consumption will also be a good thing for non traders, since now all four empires will have decent trade hubs. Also those small m3 items matter to trade. Also not all LP store items are small m3, ammo can take up quite a lot of space. Not to mention ships will still be cheaper in their home empires because of how much more common the appropriate minerals are. Also you must consider that even for generic items like t2 modules there would be new trade opportunities. If someone in Amarr buys out every t2 warp core stab there is, it will take time for the local production to make up for the loss, opening up an opportunity for people to cross low sec and make profit. Normally someone would probably have bought all the warp core stabs from Jita and then moved them to amarr space for use, or within an hour someone would have seen the shortage on eve central and moved in one obelisk. Since economies will be more isolated, they will be more vulnerable to things like a manufacturer going out of business or price manipulation, making it easier for traders to take advantage of such changes.
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 the rich in space.
Pretty cool idea but I rather see something like this imposed in null sec space maybe not with trade (since there is no trade) but with resources and have the alliance fight it out. At least there are ships in space. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
687
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 20:53:00 -
[436] - Quote
Aria Ning wrote: 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.
If this change were added they would become as big as Jita. You said so yourself that if this were done you couldn't move things to Jita if this change were added, so it would be starved of supply and the demand from other empires would be cut off as well.
Also how am I suggesting anything of the sort? Explain in detail because otherwise your just wildly speculating my intentions. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Aria Ning
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
12
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 20:58:00 -
[437] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Aria Ning wrote: 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.
If this change were added they would become as big as Jita. You said so yourself that if this were done you couldn't move things to Jita if this change were added, so it would be starved of supply and the demand from other empires would be cut off as well. Also how am I suggesting anything of the sort? Explain in detail because otherwise your just wildly speculating my intentions.
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.
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
687
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 21:00:00 -
[438] - Quote
Aria Ning wrote:
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.
They would be as big because Jita would shrink. Your not understanding what I mean. All the hubs would be equal, probably about 700 people each. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Aria Ning
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
12
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 21:03:00 -
[439] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Aria Ning wrote:
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.
They would be as big because Jita would shrink. Your not understanding what I mean. All the hubs would be equal, probably about 700 people each.
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. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
687
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 21:06:00 -
[440] - Quote
Aria Ning wrote: 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.
Yea i never meant that.
All the empires have populations proportional to the number of systems (excluding Jita). Although caldari space has slightly more people than Amarr. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Aria Ning
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
12
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 21:15:00 -
[441] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Aria Ning wrote: 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.
Yea i never meant that. All the empires have populations proportional to the number of systems (excluding Jita). Although caldari space has slightly more people than Amarr.
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. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
687
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 21:29:00 -
[442] - Quote
Aria Ning wrote:
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.
What if...
Well why would you want to live in two empires? It's really pointless, and the game shouldn't be designed around letting you do pointless things. In the first i put it as, "Do you seriously need to run Damsel in Distress once for every empire?"
Their is no good reason to need combat ships in multiple empires unless your a hisec pvp pilot.
Also your hauling services would not be anywhere close to dead, you will actually make more money. There will be more demand for people to hire others to move goods, and there are ways of moving freighters from empire to empire without low sec, you can use a wormhole and the likelyhood you will be caught is low if not zero. (especially if its an empire to empire direct connect).
Also if your any good at hauling, maybe you could afford a jump freighter?
What if I wanna build 100 maelstroms in Amarr space but I mined the ore in minmatar space because its easier? What if someone wants to setup a second base of operations for their industrial enterprise in another empire and is reusing a pos they already owned? What if someone just evac'ed from a wormhole but they didn't get a wormhole to the place they wanted? What if I found out my friend plays eve but he lives in another empire? What if I am moving to nullsec but the staging area is very far away and I own to much stuff to liquidate?
All perfectly good reasons to hire someone to move things.
If anything right now it is hard to get jobs hauling other peoples **** unless your black frog. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
16
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 06:08:00 -
[443] - Quote
Aria Ning wrote: 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.
This does not show that it's a bad idea at all. Infact all it shows is that you're risk adverse and/because buy ships you can't afford to lose.
You should have a little bit of risk if you want to be in all places. High sec has no risk, but it does have everything. This whole idea is in the spirit of eve. But in the spirit of carebears, you could still go with option C until you can afford option A or B. OR you could find a corp/other people that will go with you. Yeah, thats right you have more options.
The best part about this would be the possible build-ups you can do around this. Say for instance war dec'ing. What if you wardec a corp and it's only in a certain faction's space. That'll appease the carebears but also allow wardec's to continue. I really think if they changed Security Status loss to not drop when you attack someone with a negative sec status. That way when you go to low sec you can shoot people that look shootable and not lose your own sec status. Infact if they did that you'd end up with a +sec vs -sec type of area where pirates be pirates but other people would be less likely to shoot +sec guys. That would really add some elements to the whole trade route thing between the empires.
But really the only negative implications brought up of this idea are based on the "Old People Hate Change" mentality. Don't be afraid of a little change!
Are they any real negative implications anyone can think of? Please be Objective, don't subjective and talk about your feelings. |
Aria Ning
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
12
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 11:13:00 -
[444] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Aria Ning wrote: 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.
This does not show that it's a bad idea at all. Infact all it shows is that you're risk adverse and/because buy ships you can't afford to lose. You should have a little bit of risk if you want to be in all places. High sec has no risk, but it does have everything. This whole idea is in the spirit of eve. But in the spirit of carebears, you could still go with option C until you can afford option A or B. OR you could find a corp/other people that will go with you. Yeah, thats right you have more options. The best part about this would be the possible build-ups you can do around this. Say for instance war dec'ing. What if you wardec a corp and it's only in a certain faction's space. That'll appease the carebears but also allow wardec's to continue. I really think if they changed Security Status loss to not drop when you attack someone with a negative sec status. That way when you go to low sec you can shoot people that look shootable and not lose your own sec status. Infact if they did that you'd end up with a +sec vs -sec type of area where pirates be pirates but other people would be less likely to shoot +sec guys. That would really add some elements to the whole trade route thing between the empires. But really the only negative implications brought up of this idea are based on the "Old People Hate Change" mentality. Don't be afraid of a little change! Are they any real negative implications anyone can think of? Please be Objective, don't subjective and talk about your feelings.
Don't be subjective? I am not talking about my feelings I am simply talking about behavior and how many could react. This change won't draw out more people to low sec. If people don't go to Low sec now why on earth would they then? It would just create a high sec within a high sec.
Besides if your claiming my argument is subjective, then yours is no more or less subjective than mine. As there is no real proof that players will respond in the sense that you think either. |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction Whores in space
227
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 11:19:00 -
[445] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:GizzyBoy wrote:join test concord's not getting in the way of them hitting freighters 300 + so far? Sounds like extremely boring emergent gameplay. Wouldn't you rather be a pirate in a armada of warships trying to take down the caravan of cargo haulers? Or maybe you and a small band of frigates are cruising the space lanes looking for a lone trader who has stuffed his cargo hold with the federation navy stasis webs that are in short supply in jita. Instead of filling the freighter, setting destination, clicking autopilot, then halfway their you get your massive ship bumped like a tennis ball underwater while a group of ships 1 shot you which interrupts you watching tv. I wanna be a pirate, not some guy who runs around looking for asshats running missions to gank or to play grabass with other so called "pirates". I wanna be a adventurous trader looking to make my fortune using my wits to navigate dangerous deep space without pouring over data tables and spread sheets trying to manipulate prices by moving **** from homogenous trade hub to trade hub.
You cannot simply ignore the players psycology. Given what players have shown on risk aversion that woudl simply kill parts of empire and create 2 separated empires with very little communication ebbetween them.. ammarr and calddari. You would NOT get that heavy traffict you expet in low sec. Most players woudl simply live as if empire got shrinked massively.
Those that do not leave now.. would not leave anyway.
The game is already made partially as you wante. The routes trough high sec are much longer than low sec ones. Make the low sec ones have 2-3 different paths and you will already get as much extra traffic as you coudl expect to ever get.
BTw do not think the empire pipes between the great trade hubs are much safer than average low sec.. if you rtavel too much there with too much valuable cargo.. we will one day or other war dec you . |
Aria Ning
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
12
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 11:22:00 -
[446] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Commander Ted wrote:GizzyBoy wrote:join test concord's not getting in the way of them hitting freighters 300 + so far? Sounds like extremely boring emergent gameplay. Wouldn't you rather be a pirate in a armada of warships trying to take down the caravan of cargo haulers? Or maybe you and a small band of frigates are cruising the space lanes looking for a lone trader who has stuffed his cargo hold with the federation navy stasis webs that are in short supply in jita. Instead of filling the freighter, setting destination, clicking autopilot, then halfway their you get your massive ship bumped like a tennis ball underwater while a group of ships 1 shot you which interrupts you watching tv. I wanna be a pirate, not some guy who runs around looking for asshats running missions to gank or to play grabass with other so called "pirates". I wanna be a adventurous trader looking to make my fortune using my wits to navigate dangerous deep space without pouring over data tables and spread sheets trying to manipulate prices by moving **** from homogenous trade hub to trade hub. You cannot simply ignore the players psycology. Given what players have shown on risk aversion that woudl simply kill parts of empire and create 2 separated empires with very little communication ebbetween them.. ammarr and calddari. You would NOT get that heavy traffict you expet in low sec. Most players woudl simply live as if empire got shrinked massively. Those that do not leave now.. would not leave anyway. The game is already made partially as you wante. The routes trough high sec are much longer than low sec ones. Make the low sec ones have 2-3 different paths and you will already get as much extra traffic as you coudl expect to ever get. BTw do not think the empire pipes between the great trade hubs are much safer than average low sec.. if you rtavel too much there with too much valuable cargo.. we will one day or other war dec you .
Exactly, what I've been trying to say as well! |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
17
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 19:18:00 -
[447] - Quote
The psychology is exactly what's wrong with highsec. High sec is too big of a safe bubble, risk adverse activity doesn't really inhibit anything anymore. If you break it down into 4 quadrants then it would give inscentive to risk through reward, or in another point of view you'd lose some freedom by being too risk adverse. This is eve, its about fighting with space ships and junk. And if they really are planning to end war decs then highsec violence will go away to a large extent. And if pirates end up concentrating in an area then people will know where to go to get fights (vs pirates even). If this game was designed around the psychology of the average risk adverse pilot then this would just be a space flight simulator, not a space ship blowing up game.
As for the trade pipes, like you said, if you're transporting expensive stuff in large quantities you'll get dec'd. That means its safe for anyone not doing that. Good job! No risk some reward for small guys, some risk same reward for big freighters. This needs changing and highsec wardecs also need to be changed. |
sabre906
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
1087
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 19:41:00 -
[448] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:The psychology is exactly what's wrong with highsec. High sec is too big of a safe bubble, risk adverse activity doesn't really inhibit anything anymore. If you break it down into 4 quadrants then it would give inscentive to risk through reward, or in another point of view you'd lose some freedom by being too risk adverse. This is eve, its about fighting with space ships and junk. And if they really are planning to end war decs then highsec violence will go away to a large extent. And if pirates end up concentrating in an area then people will know where to go to get fights (vs pirates even). If this game was designed around the psychology of the average risk adverse pilot then this would just be a space flight simulator, not a space ship blowing up game.
As for the trade pipes, like you said, if you're transporting expensive stuff in large quantities you'll get dec'd. That means its safe for anyone not doing that. Good job! No risk some reward for small guys, some risk same reward for big freighters. This needs changing and highsec wardecs also need to be changed.
I am the boss of what Eve is all about, and everyone should play their internet spaceship game that they paid for the way I want. Because I am right, and their free time belong to me.
Get over yourself... Standings Improvement Service https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=19454 |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
148
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 19:42:00 -
[449] - Quote
Xavier Thorm wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:This could make it worse. I'm honestly not sure how. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I don't see a reason for it. If moving a bunch of stuff that only exists in one region (like faction goods) or is easier to produce in that region to Jita suddenly involves crossing lowsec, I think less people will do it. Yes, trade across Empires will still exist, and should become more profitable for those who partake in it, but Jita/Rens/Amarr/Dodixie will not be the one-stop-shopping super-hubs they currently are.
I was thinking just about Jita as a trade hub for T1/T2 goods. LP store items will likely be one of the few things that people can use a transport to cross the low sec systems. Might even remain a big seller of all faction goods simply due to the fact that it is currently a super-hub.
Teckos Pech wrote:This is not a requirement, but more likely a result of the fact that:
1. Null sec manufacturing sucks. 2. High sec manufacturing is so damn easy. 3. Manufacturing in general is not alot of fun for most players.
Odyssey might change that, hopefully. And as a result places like Jita and Amarr might lose some of their market share. Maybe.
You just supported my point... One of the reasons I would like to see this change is that High sec manufacturing is so easy. This wouldn't change the manufacturing directly, but it would change the distribution, which would encourage more industry in other regions. Including nullsec. Entirely theoretical, I know, and yes I would want to see other changes as well, but I think this is a good direction to start in.
Teckos Pech wrote: I don't get the issue with this one.
Commander Ted already answered this (sort of) but yeah, basically homogeneous prices make trade (in the traditional sense of loading up your ship in one region, selling your supply where it is valued, picking up whatever is manufactured there, and moving to where that is needed) largely nonexistent.
If it was more difficult to move everything from any point in the galaxy to any other, doing so would be more profitable for people willing to take the risk.[/quote]
|
Brooks Puuntai
Solar Nexus.
1427
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 19:54:00 -
[450] - Quote
Yes there should be lowsec dividing the different empires. Improving NPE |
|
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
17
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 23:00:00 -
[451] - Quote
sabre906 wrote:Erutpar Ambient wrote:The psychology is exactly what's wrong with highsec. High sec is too big of a safe bubble, risk adverse activity doesn't really inhibit anything anymore. If you break it down into 4 quadrants then it would give inscentive to risk through reward, or in another point of view you'd lose some freedom by being too risk adverse. This is eve, its about fighting with space ships and junk. And if they really are planning to end war decs then highsec violence will go away to a large extent. And if pirates end up concentrating in an area then people will know where to go to get fights (vs pirates even). If this game was designed around the psychology of the average risk adverse pilot then this would just be a space flight simulator, not a space ship blowing up game.
As for the trade pipes, like you said, if you're transporting expensive stuff in large quantities you'll get dec'd. That means its safe for anyone not doing that. Good job! No risk some reward for small guys, some risk same reward for big freighters. This needs changing and highsec wardecs also need to be changed. I am the boss of what Eve is all about, and everyone should play their internet spaceship game that they paid for the way I want. Because I am right, and their free time belong to me. Get over yourself...
You actually made no points at all. Good job, you're so smart!
But anyways, there appears to be a little bit of direction in this idea if you keep up with the Story Line of the game. With the Battle for Caldari Prime, the assassination of Karin Midular, and stuff going on in Amarr looks like not only are we heading to high sec separation. But each of the 4 empires will no longer have allies in the other nations.
http://themittani.com/features/eve-storyline-primer-may-2013
The current state of high/low sec is no good for anyone. A little violence never hurt anyone. ;) |
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
89
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 15:44:00 -
[452] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:sabre906 wrote:Erutpar Ambient wrote:The psychology is exactly what's wrong with highsec. High sec is too big of a safe bubble, risk adverse activity doesn't really inhibit anything anymore. If you break it down into 4 quadrants then it would give inscentive to risk through reward, or in another point of view you'd lose some freedom by being too risk adverse. This is eve, its about fighting with space ships and junk. And if they really are planning to end war decs then highsec violence will go away to a large extent. And if pirates end up concentrating in an area then people will know where to go to get fights (vs pirates even). If this game was designed around the psychology of the average risk adverse pilot then this would just be a space flight simulator, not a space ship blowing up game.
As for the trade pipes, like you said, if you're transporting expensive stuff in large quantities you'll get dec'd. That means its safe for anyone not doing that. Good job! No risk some reward for small guys, some risk same reward for big freighters. This needs changing and highsec wardecs also need to be changed. I am the boss of what Eve is all about, and everyone should play their internet spaceship game that they paid for the way I want. Because I am right, and their free time belong to me. Get over yourself... You actually made no points at all. Good job, you're so smart! But anyways, there appears to be a little bit of direction in this idea if you keep up with the Story Line of the game. With the Battle for Caldari Prime, the assassination of Karin Midular, and stuff going on in Amarr looks like not only are we heading to high sec separation. But each of the 4 empires will no longer have allies in the other nations. http://themittani.com/features/eve-storyline-primer-may-2013The current state of high/low sec is no good for anyone. A little violence never hurt anyone. ;)
I'm glad you brought up the storyline aspect, because I remember back when this thread started I was distinctly thinking "I really like this idea, but it probably won't happen" but after the Caldari Prime stuff, the Minmatar/Gallente Capitals fight, and such, I'm thinking "CCP might have something like this in the works already."
Hopefully all this storyline teasing will actually add up to something cool and new.
|
Drake Doe
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
207
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 16:12:00 -
[453] - Quote
The only points even being made are because of the risk aversion, which the last time I checked this game doesn't reward. If you're afraid to travel through low sec for an escalation, you lose isk, if you're afraid to bait that cloaked camper in your 0.0 ratting system, you lose isk, and if you don't travel through red sov to reach blues, you won't earn nearly as much as you would there if you return to mission running. "The homogenization of EVE began when Gallente and Caldari started sharing a weapon system."-Vermaak Doe |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation black core alliance
18
|
Posted - 2013.05.17 05:30:00 -
[454] - Quote
Drake Doe wrote:The only points even being made are because of the risk aversion, which the last time I checked this game doesn't reward. If you're afraid to travel through low sec for an escalation, you lose isk, if you're afraid to bait that cloaked camper in your 0.0 ratting system, you lose isk, and if you don't travel through red sov to reach blues, you won't earn nearly as much as you would there if you return to mission running.
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. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
689
|
Posted - 2013.05.18 18:14:00 -
[455] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Drake Doe wrote:The only points even being made are because of the risk aversion, which the last time I checked this game doesn't reward. If you're afraid to travel through low sec for an escalation, you lose isk, if you're afraid to bait that cloaked camper in your 0.0 ratting system, you lose isk, and if you don't travel through red sov to reach blues, you won't earn nearly as much as you would there if you return to mission running. 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. Low sec is used, just not nearly as much as it could or should be used.
Its a serious opportunity for fun that is for some reason being completely passed up. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
139
|
Posted - 2013.05.18 18:56:00 -
[456] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Erutpar Ambient wrote:Drake Doe wrote:The only points even being made are because of the risk aversion, which the last time I checked this game doesn't reward. If you're afraid to travel through low sec for an escalation, you lose isk, if you're afraid to bait that cloaked camper in your 0.0 ratting system, you lose isk, and if you don't travel through red sov to reach blues, you won't earn nearly as much as you would there if you return to mission running. 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. Low sec is used, just not nearly as much as it could or should be used. Its a serious opportunity for fun that is for some reason being completely passed up. Really I don't expect anyone to stay in one empire for their entire career, it is only natural that you at least try to cross the gap. This will hopefully encourage people to dip their toes into the more dangerous waters. Not to mention much more interesting gameplay is possible with an extra dimension added on to it, an industrialist who wants to run multiple operations would have much more interesting gameplay to deal with.
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. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
18
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 02:41:00 -
[457] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote: 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.
On the contrary, you still fail to understand that this change will NOT force anyone to do anything. It will add extra risk in the middle of High Sec space but it won't make High Sec space any less safe. It will however create an area of high traffic - lowsec space for the purpose of profiting and pirating.
Low sec will create a type of "Geographical" barrier between trade hubs. Traversing this barrier will have risk but by doing it you'll be able to make some profit. Think of the age of Sailing Navigation and trade. The atlantic ocean was a dangerous place with storms and pirates and allegedly sea monsters, but that didn't stop people from making the journey with goods to trade for profit.
And the current rewards in LowSec compared to it's risk is the reason that low sec is not being used. Highsec rewards are only slightly below and with no risk. Lowsec space has the highest of risk of all space. (not only can you lose whatever you bring with you including potentially titans, but you also lose security status by engaging 95% of people there)
Our intended targets are not the most riskadverse people in the game such as missioners and highsec wardecers. Our intended targets are ourselves and anyone else that's willing to put up a bit of risk for a bit of reward. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
689
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 04:18:00 -
[458] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:
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.
Who are my intended targets? Did I say I wanted to gate camp? Is this the fourth time you have accused me for something I deny? If I want easy targets I can go to hi sec already, do you realize just how many stupid people are just sitting their for the picking? Are you just mentally blocking out the points I want to make and just read LOL CAREBEARS LOL CAREBEARS.
Secondly who says it isn't fun? You, a person who as far as I can tell has never even tried doing things in low sec? Some of the most engaging moments I have ever had were evading gate camps in null sec with a cloaked hauling ship filled with modules I bought using a loan from a friend to sell. No i am not making that up, I jumped through a gate and was bubbled with a sabre 5km from me.
Also the status quo right now is no gameplay, autopilot and go. I also have yet to see an actual reason for anyone to say they NEED to go back and forth between two empires.
Also if you actually get ambushed your an idiot. A complete idiot, who has no reason to go back and forth between the empires anyway. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Dr Ted Kaper
Patriot Security Services
16
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 04:37:00 -
[459] - Quote
This could also backfire, let's let the clone updates settle first. Once PvP is easier this may become more viable, but there's always risk this could also choke trade because care bears will be care bears. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
19
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 05:26:00 -
[460] - Quote
Dr Ted Kaper wrote:This could also backfire, let's let the clone updates settle first. Once PvP is easier this may become more viable, but there's always risk this could also choke trade because care bears will be care bears.
Choke trade? ... ... ...
You do realize that is the whole point right? As trade is choked, the value of moving stuff to another empire increases. As the value increase the risk/reward ratio becomes better. As the reward increases and the risk remains the same the likelihood of someone to take the risk increases, which means there will be more people to do it and an equilibrium will be found where enough people will be willing enough to take that risk. And as the reward increases the likelihood of fighting your way through with a fleet increases also.
What you think of as backfire I think of as success. The bearyist of the careyist carebears can sell to buy orders for peanuts and then those goods can be shipped outside for considerably less cost and considerably greater profit. Carebears are safe, haulers make profit, everybody wins! |
|
Archess Nei
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 07:01:00 -
[461] - Quote
I was already to give my carebear reason why this is a bad idea then i realized something. As a carebear, I'm risk averse so I would just sell to a buy order or refine the item. The person who buys my wares then could ship it to another empire and make even more isk off the transaction. While i'm perfectly safe(sorta) to keep doing what I like to do. The person who then decides to say ship a load of ore from jita, where its wothless, to rens, where the price is crazy would make a ton of isk. All the while the risk averse players could keep doing there thing.
For something like this to work the T1 and T2 indy ships need a major overhaul to make this idea workable. I can almost picture haulers hiring protection to go and clear out gate camps while a fleet of frieghters and indy ships wait for the all clear to jump.
|
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
19
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 07:21:00 -
[462] - Quote
Archess Nei wrote:I was already to give my carebear reason why this is a bad idea then i realized something. As a carebear, I'm risk averse so I would just sell to a buy order or refine the item. The person who buys my wares then could ship it to another empire and make even more isk off the transaction. While i'm perfectly safe(sorta) to keep doing what I like to do. The person who then decides to say ship a load of ore from jita, where its wothless, to rens, where the price is crazy would make a ton of isk. All the while the risk averse players could keep doing there thing.
For something like this to work the T1 and T2 indy ships need a major overhaul to make this idea workable. I can almost picture haulers hiring protection to go and clear out gate camps while a fleet of frieghters and indy ships wait for the all clear to jump.
The indy ships have absolutely nothing to do with this being workable or not. The Deep Space Transport ships have +2 warp core strength and a large low slow fitting, as well as being super tanky. They would probably be the go to ship for low sec transport.
And as for hiring protection to clear gates, i really doubt you'd have to actually pay many people to do this. If there's a good fight to be had then i'm sure someone will do it for free. but then again they miight just turn around betray you. so be careful who you get! |
Archess Nei
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 07:52:00 -
[463] - Quote
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 |
Joan Greywind
I Moan ALOT We Moan ALOT
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 10:24:00 -
[464] - Quote
I don't know if this was mentioned, but if the idea goes through we will see an evolution to 1 major trade hub (probably jita). The other markets will grow much smaller or cease to exist all together, only cheap t1 and t2 items will be sold on those hubs.
Energy will always flow to the path of least resistance. |
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
99
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 15:26:00 -
[465] - Quote
Joan Greywind wrote:I don't know if this was mentioned, but if the idea goes through we will see an evolution to 1 major trade hub (probably jita). The other markets will grow much smaller or cease to exist all together, only cheap t1 and t2 items will be sold on those hubs.
Energy will always flow to the path of least resistance.
A couple other people have also speculated this in this thread, could you explain why you think that would happen, because I honestly suspect the opposite would happen. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
141
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 16:23:00 -
[466] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:
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.
Who are my intended targets? Did I say I wanted to gate camp? Is this the fourth time you have accused me for something I deny? If I want easy targets I can go to hi sec already, do you realize just how many stupid people are just sitting their for the picking? Are you just mentally blocking out the points I want to make and just read LOL CAREBEARS LOL CAREBEARS. Secondly who says it isn't fun? You, a person who as far as I can tell has never even tried doing things in low sec? Some of the most engaging moments I have ever had were evading gate camps in null sec with a cloaked hauling ship filled with modules I bought using a loan from a friend to sell. No i am not making that up, I jumped through a gate and was bubbled with a sabre 5km from me. Also the status quo right now is no gameplay, autopilot and go. I also have yet to see an actual reason for anyone to say they NEED to go back and forth between two empires. Also if you actually get ambushed your an idiot. A complete idiot, who has no reason to go back and forth between the empires anyway.
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. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
689
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 17:29:00 -
[467] - Quote
Archess Nei wrote: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 No, hopefully they would add new regions, which would be a big lore explanation of why this happened in the first place https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
689
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 17:33:00 -
[468] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:
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.
People do take advantage of this sometimes, but rarely as their is no reason to. Not to mention low sec camps are fairly uncommon now anyway, its mostly just smartbomb camps with a few instalock nados popping dumb frigates. Their is no good isk reason to go through low sec when the benefits provide are minimal.
Also once again, their are lots of safe ways to go around low sec you totally ignore. Cloaks Wormholes Red Frog Jump Freighters
Now explain how that is such a gameplay killer for a small minority of afk zombies?
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
141
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 18:25:00 -
[469] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:
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.
People do take advantage of this sometimes, but rarely as their is no reason to. Not to mention low sec camps are fairly uncommon now anyway, its mostly just smartbomb camps with a few instalock nados popping dumb frigates. Their is no good isk reason to go through low sec when the benefits provide are minimal. Also once again, their are lots of safe ways to go around low sec you totally ignore. Cloaks Wormholes Red Frog Jump Freighters Now explain how that is such a gameplay killer for a small minority of afk zombies?
It's not that there is no reason. I just don't find the game play there to be any fun.
What you seem to have a problem with is that there is no requirement. That list of ways to 'safely' get around in low sec is useless to me, because none of it allows me to successfully fulfill my goals in game without the hassle of having to run everytime a neutral enters the system.
You can not like the playstyle of Highsec players all you like, that still does not justify stealing their fun to increase your own. People avoiding lowsec isn't a problem that you can solve with game mechanics. The same dynamic occurs in the lawless areas of the real world too--- only people without choices or a criminal bent in their attitude will live there. The only way to make Lowsec more populated with targets is to remove alternatives from those targets. As this is a game that people not only play willingly but actually pay for, it's a minority that will deal with the hassle of piracy to perform PvE activities in that area rather than just playing a game that is actually fun for them.
Haulers and other PvE minded players are not just going to wake up one morning and realize that their antagonists were right all along and it really is more fun to put yourself in a position to be victimized.
Figure out a way to manage the out of control risk involved in actually playing the game in that area and you will get more players. So long as it's hide in station or whack-a-ship. This is less of a hauler issue than it is a mining/mission running/exploring issue. It's all well and good that it's possible to usually make it to a station... but that's not gameplay either, from the perspective of those that like PvE. |
hellcane
Never Back Down
51
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 21:19:00 -
[470] - Quote
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". |
|
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
99
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 21:31:00 -
[471] - Quote
hellcane wrote: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".
All space in EVE is "pew pew" space. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
690
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 21:40:00 -
[472] - Quote
hellcane wrote: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". or give a reason to pew pew in pew pew space? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
141
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 23:04:00 -
[473] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:hellcane wrote: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". or give a reason to pew pew in pew pew space?
Anyone that wants to Pewpew in pewpew space is already there, pewpewing. This is trying to force (god, yes, I know it's not actually forcing anything, just removing other options so that the ones you want to deal with are all that's left) those who don't want to pewpew into pewpew space for the one sided fun and pleasure of those who like to pewpew with all the reward stacked on their side, and the risk on their target. |
SGT FUNYOUN
Arachnea Phoenix Battalion Hoodlums Associates
64
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 23:21:00 -
[474] - Quote
Making ALL routes go through lowsec... would kill the market and destroy the marketeering career track.
It would also make EVERYTHING in Eve WAY more expensive.
Marketeers would simply station spin and go PVP only, until the ammo and ships finally ran out and CCP had to seed more into the game...
In other words...
... we would be playing the spaceship version of WoW by the end of the month.
NO! |
SGT FUNYOUN
Arachnea Phoenix Battalion Hoodlums Associates
64
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 23:23:00 -
[475] - Quote
Increasing the AMOUNT of low sec systems between high sec systems would maybe do the trick but, there MUST be at LEAST ONE fully 100% green route between each empire, otherwise...
... you risk turning the 4 empires into 4 different versions of North Korea. |
sabre906
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
1093
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 23:26:00 -
[476] - Quote
SGT FUNYOUN wrote:Increasing the AMOUNT of low sec systems between high sec systems would maybe do the trick but, there MUST be at LEAST ONE fully 100% green route between each empire, otherwise...
... you risk turning the 4 empires into 4 different versions of North Korea.
No. There will Jitaland, and then there will be the 3 N. Koreas. Standings Improvement Service https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=19454 |
SGT FUNYOUN
Arachnea Phoenix Battalion Hoodlums Associates
64
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 23:32:00 -
[477] - Quote
Here's MY suggestion... make System Security status be PLAYER movable.
IOW, if a corporation wishes to take on the task...
They could attack Concord and the Navy of that system, thus decreasing the sec status of that system.
Concord and the local Navy would go into a factional war with the player corp, and if the player corp BEAT Concord and the local navy...
... then the SOVEREIGNTY of that system (NO MATTER WHAT Sec status it was) would transfer from the empire to that Corporation.
It would make the NPC's a more engaged part of the game...
... and it would allow me and my Corp a chance actually OWN Jita for a while...
... at least until Concord, the local Navy, and some other Corp teamed up and stomped our collective behinds.
***Also, the longer the war dragged out, the lower the sec status would go. |
Colonel Goatbanger
The Goatbangers Club
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 23:42:00 -
[478] - Quote
No, bad idea. This would be the equivalent of in large part killing all markets and hubs or centralizing them to the extent where the free flow of goods and services is hampered on a large scale. I deem this only a viable option if you are able to circumwent these said systems with the use of jump freighters or some form of specialized transport in hi-sec. The 0.5 systems that usually act as bottlenecks Niarja, Uedama etc are fine as they are.
Besides, can you spell "GATECAMP DELUXE". |
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
100
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 02:03:00 -
[479] - Quote
Blockade Runners and DSTs can all be effectively used to haul through dangerous space, so making trading between empires inherently dangerous would make these ships more useful. |
L4V4
Cisco Enterprises Deep-Space Bazaar
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 02:07:00 -
[480] - Quote
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 ;) |
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
691
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 04:41:00 -
[481] - Quote
L4V4 wrote: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 ;)
Military security =/= sec status.
Would you say the desert on the US Mexico border is safe? No, its a desolate wasteland constantly patroled by DEA agents, people running the border, and drug cartel agents who will send your corpse back do your family with explosives in your skull and your ********* stuck to your face. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
691
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 04:41:00 -
[482] - Quote
Your use of capitalization intrigues me. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
691
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 04:47:00 -
[483] - Quote
sabre906 wrote:SGT FUNYOUN wrote:Increasing the AMOUNT of low sec systems between high sec systems would maybe do the trick but, there MUST be at LEAST ONE fully 100% green route between each empire, otherwise...
... you risk turning the 4 empires into 4 different versions of North Korea. No. There will Jitaland, and then there will be the 3 N. Koreas.
Hey sabre, how come you never defend your arguments? We have already established what you just said is BS in this thread, so why keep saying it? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Xeros Black
Forced Penetration Here Be Dragons
4
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 16:02:00 -
[484] - Quote
This is an interesting concept really. I"m pretty sure if you split high sec up using low sec your going to have more robust market hubs in the various regions, so less people in jita. Jump freighters will be the latest rage in fashion. Prices will necessarily rise as the cost of moving goods between one region and the next will go up. Regional traders will become much more in demand and so therefor much more profitable to be one. Pirates between regions will become a semi profitable profession as they bite into good laden transport ships. I'm still up on the fence on rather its a good idea or a bad idea but its worth the debate at least.
My 2 Cents |
Vincent Gaines
Cold Moon Destruction. Transmission Lost
517
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 16:20:00 -
[485] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:
The indy ships have absolutely nothing to do with this being workable or not. The Deep Space Transport ships have +2 warp core strength and a large low slow fitting, as well as being super tanky. They would probably be the go to ship for low sec transport.
My RSB infinipoint Phobos would love to meet those people who think +2, +3, +whatever is a benefit.
Not a diplo.-á
The above post was edited for spelling. |
IceDe4d
Kath's Menagerie
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 17:00:00 -
[486] - Quote
awesome idea would make sense, to make this right ccp needs to make more routes between the empires. |
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
100
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 17:51:00 -
[487] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote:Erutpar Ambient wrote:
The indy ships have absolutely nothing to do with this being workable or not. The Deep Space Transport ships have +2 warp core strength and a large low slow fitting, as well as being super tanky. They would probably be the go to ship for low sec transport.
My RSB infinipoint Phobos would love to meet those people who think +2, +3, +whatever is a benefit.
They really need to take the +2 warp core strength off DSTs. Their real advantage is their ability to fit MWD+Cloak. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
692
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 18:37:00 -
[488] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote:
My RSB infinipoint Phobos would love to meet those people who think +2, +3, +whatever is a benefit.
catch my viator *****! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
692
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 18:40:00 -
[489] - Quote
Btw I already did propose some rudimentary lore reasons. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2234451#post2234451 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
19
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 05:09:00 -
[490] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote:Erutpar Ambient wrote:
The indy ships have absolutely nothing to do with this being workable or not. The Deep Space Transport ships have +2 warp core strength and a large low slow fitting, as well as being super tanky. They would probably be the go to ship for low sec transport.
My RSB infinipoint Phobos would love to meet those people who think +2, +3, +whatever is a benefit.
Of course if you're alone, then with their tank and larget fitting capacity, they could probably make it back to the gate to jump back or maybe even some ECM. If you're not alone, then someone should have managed to scout.
In any case, that's beside the point. There should not be any 100% safe way to travel between places, but there are measures to take to mitigate that risk.
Flying through low sec is not 100% chance of death either. |
|
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
19
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 05:12:00 -
[491] - Quote
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. |
Deerin
Murientor Tribe Defiant Legacy
156
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 07:48:00 -
[492] - Quote
I love the idea!!!! +1
Actually it could be taken further. Get rid of security status. Use empire standings as security status and reduce/increase empire standings by actions that reduce/increase sec status. Give concord powers to respectivve factions and disband concord.
This way it should be possible for example to be an outlaw in amarr space but a beloved citizen in minmatar space.
Oh the possibilities! |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
694
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 08:24:00 -
[493] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote: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.
Then where do the new regions come from? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Karig'Ano Keikira
Tax Cheaters
52
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 08:25:00 -
[494] - Quote
personally, I am not sure why empires were not separated by low-sec in the first place, I mean, it has ton of pros and very few (bad) cons: - pros: - adds extra dynamic into trade - basically moving resources and goods across empires becomes more interesting and potentially quite lucrative - if trade goes over low sec, it creates good opportunity for proper piracy - piracy in trade pipes also gives option of anti-piracy as activity, to hauler support fleets and similar => more pvp; we need more meaninful pvp and 'bad guy vs good guy' differentiation - lore friendly / realistic (especially when you count empires in open hostility) - possibility to integrate FW, DUST, whatever into this - if you can capture enough systems, you can make them high-sec temporary mechanic or something similar might be quite interesting
- cons: - possibility to totally break trade between empires by just putting big bad fleet on the gate - easily resolved by having many pipes between empires (should be at least 10 between each 2 empires, perhaps > 25), so that camping single gate is not a way to choke down everything - noob traders explode - is this really bad thing? :) - no one trades between empires - don't think this would be a problem, especially if resource distribution is such to favor transferring goods and resources between them (for example ore A in amaar >> ore A in caldari): I think it already exists, but not sure - less trade => more profit for trade => more traders - things should balance out themselves - people have hard time traveling between empires - with enough low sec pipes, it should not be a problem, besides bit of low sec is not that bad. And if you want ot transfer that 8-zillion ISK mission ship between empires, well... keep your bloody eyes open, get a scout, hire hauling corp or whatever... if you die, your own fault - low sec is not THAT dangerous - also we need to tone down that horrible fear and aversion people have of low-sec and I think that being sent through low-sec in cheap ships by starter missions for sisters epic arc and tutorial agents would actually be good for new players - the sooner one gets over 'boo boo I die instantly in low-sec' the better - everyone just uses jump freighters and entire thing is ignored as concept - personally, I think things would quickly devolve into this. Don't have solution for it either except for well... NERF JUMP FREIGHTERS!!!!111 ; no, really, i think that introduction of instant travel to EVE was one of dumbest decisions made by devs like... ever; doubt it will be going away either though, so perhaps, hm... ban them from high sec? sure you can do jf -> regular freighter -> go to high sec, but at least it requires some logistics. Or... increase fuel costs for them like 1000%? at least you will think what to haul with it then... but I am rambling, it is different topic anyway |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
694
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 08:27:00 -
[495] - Quote
Deerin wrote:
This way it should be possible for example to be an outlaw in amarr space but a beloved citizen in minmatar space.
That is how it already is, do enough storyline missions for one faction and they will murder you.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Caljiav Ocanon
16
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 11:16:00 -
[496] - Quote
I still don't get it. You can already kill people in HiSec now, you don't need LoSec space just to blap people going from empire to empire. The game is working as intended.
What you fail to understand is, some people just don't like LoSec and making these changes isn't going to change that fact at all. You will alienate a portion of the player base and these people will probably quit the game which means less targets for you, not more.
I know you will never comprehend this fact but hopefully it gets through to somebody.
Though I fly through the valley of death, I shall fear no evil, for I am aligned to a safespot and warping out. - Me 2013 |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
19
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 18:10:00 -
[497] - Quote
Caljiav Ocanon wrote:I still don't get it. You can already kill people in HiSec now, you don't need LoSec space just to blap people going from empire to empire. The game is working as intended.
What you fail to understand is, some people just don't like LoSec and making these changes isn't going to change that fact at all. You will alienate a portion of the player base and these people will probably quit the game which means less targets for you, not more.
I know you will never comprehend this fact but hopefully it gets through to somebody.
First of all nobody is forcing you to go to low sec in any case. What you don't seem to get is that going to low sec is always a choice no matter what. And if you think low sec is working as "intended" then you should go check it out some time.
This idea is one of the fixes to low sec space to get it to work as intended. Currently there is no reason to go into low sec for anything other than moving to null and just recently for FW which is a fix recently implemented to encourage low sec usage.
FW was a pretty good success as far as new game features (theme park rides) go. What would really generate low sec usage would be player interaction and player driven goals such as inter empire hauling, piracy and antu-piracy. Currently there's no reasons for anyone to go to lowsec other than looking for a fight so you end up with pirate vs pirate or bad vs bad and no real sentiment of good vs evil which is what we really need in this game. If you don't want to get blown up quit eve, if you don't want to be shot at consequence free stay in hgh sec and never leave.
Right now high sec is too good. This would help curve some of the benefits while providing emergent gameplay for those who like a challenge. It also might provide an area for people to learn PvP without rvb and instead of jumping into block blob warfare. |
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
101
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 20:36:00 -
[498] - Quote
Caljiav Ocanon wrote:I still don't get it. You can already kill people in HiSec now, you don't need LoSec space just to blap people going from empire to empire. The game is working as intended.
What you fail to understand is, some people just don't like LoSec and making these changes isn't going to change that fact at all. You will alienate a portion of the player base and these people will probably quit the game which means less targets for you, not more.
I know you will never comprehend this fact but hopefully it gets through to somebody.
Repeated accusations that people advocating for this don't understand your perspective (when they have demonstrated that they do and it is flawed) only suggests that you don't understand it yourself.
I do understand that some people don't like lowsec, the problem is often is not with lowsec itself however, but with those players perception of it. Giving them more reason to interact with it would help get rid of this unreasonable fear for some players.
And yes, you can already kill people in HiSec, which has nothing to do with this. Congrats, you made a point. It's an irrelevant point, but I guess that's still an accomplishment.
Also, the game has been "working as intended" lots of times, and has also been changed lots of times. I'm not whining to CCP and begging for a change, I'm discussing a proposed change in it's appropriate subforum so that (if they feel like it) CCP devs can come here and see some of the pros and cons that players have already considered for this idea. |
Shade Alidiana
PROSPERO Corporation MinTek Conglomerate
45
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 14:09:00 -
[499] - Quote
Did anyone ever consider someone's area of operation is the whole hisec at a time? |
Lai HasCake
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 15:33:00 -
[500] - Quote
This is a good idea but it would require balancing so their are more routes to take to avoid camps, also gate guns should not be removed instead maybe buffed to the point where it would not be viable to attack low value targets for fear an aggression timer would prevent you scoring a bigger catch. |
|
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
146
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 16:51:00 -
[501] - Quote
Xavier Thorm wrote: Repeated accusations that people advocating for this don't understand your perspective (when they have demonstrated that they do and it is flawed) only suggests that you don't understand it yourself.
I do understand that some people don't like lowsec, the problem is often is not with lowsec itself however, but with those players perception of it. Giving them more reason to interact with it would help get rid of this unreasonable fear for some players.
That very bit of reasoning is why it keeps being repeated that some just don't like Low Sec.
No one is just going to wake up one morning and decide that the pirates were right all along and that being victimized really is more fun.
The statement that no one would be forced into lowsec is disingenuous. While technically true, it does seek to remove all other reasonable options for a variety of playstyles. You can go through lowsec, probably with much smaller and/or more expensive ships, or go through wormholes with no idea where you will come out and potentially as great a risk in getting shot and losing cargo. That's just hauling, its intended victim. For others... The reasoning that I should not need to run damsel for all 4 empires is silly. What if I do? What if that's what I enjoy in the sandbox? Why curtail my ability to move to another empire in a PvE ship just to suit the tastes of some gatecamping pirates?
There are reasons to go into lowsec, and even fairly valuable ones if not for the culture that exists there---there is just no requirement to do so. It's much easier to set up a POS in Lowsec, which is the backbone of any serious indy character. Why are not small corps streaming into lowsec to do it? I imagine some are, but for the most part it's not worth the hassle the pirates cause. Higher bounties, bigger rats, level 5 missions, etc... but the pirates make the risk/reward impossible to balance or justify unless you happen to like the fight itself. Those that do are there already.
EvE is an odd game half way between industry and shooter. The regular denizens of lowsec treat it as a pure shooter, sort of a battlefield in space, only with easier targets that can't shoot back. |
Ackilles Shadowfire
Black Storm Cartel
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 16:59:00 -
[502] - Quote
Love this idea |
Xeros Black
Forced Penetration Here Be Dragons
6
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 18:20:00 -
[503] - Quote
I think a separation of empires if the idea was expanded on could further promote trade as a profession. For example by seeding only Amarr BPOs and Skill books in Amarr space would create a solid trade just in the trafficing of skill books and BPOs. People from different regions would be more likely to specialize in their particular racial ship (caldari pilot flying caldari ships.) I do like the idea of navy police taking over concord.. but then again i never really liked the concept of concord and its absolute power sort of breaks the immersion and sandboxyness of the game.
|
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
20
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 20:00:00 -
[504] - Quote
Lai HasCake wrote:This is a good idea but it would require balancing so their are more routes to take to avoid camps, also gate guns should not be removed instead maybe buffed to the point where it would not be viable to attack low value targets for fear an aggression timer would prevent you scoring a bigger catch.
Sounds like a good way to make use of the system security levels. Say at 0.4 the guns are pretty strong and at 0.1 the guns are pretty much negligable. This might make some paths higher traffic but make low traffic paths slightly safer. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
20
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 20:07:00 -
[505] - Quote
Shade Alidiana wrote:Did anyone ever consider someone's area of operation is the whole hisec at a time?
Well if this alleged person does operate in all of highsec at once then hopefully they're using more than one account. They would then not be significantly affected by this change.
And if this really was an arguement then it would be similar to a little sh*t of a kid hogging all of the toys because "he needs them all and he's going to play with that one next.".
And if anyone is able to utilize all of high sec with one character then that needs nerfing. |
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
102
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 20:09:00 -
[506] - Quote
Shade Alidiana wrote:Did anyone ever consider someone's area of operation is the whole hisec at a time?
Yes, and I don't think that it should be as easy to accomplish that as it is now. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
20
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 20:37:00 -
[507] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote: That very bit of reasoning is why it keeps being repeated that some just don't like Low Sec.
No one is just going to wake up one morning and decide that the pirates were right all along and that being victimized really is more fun.
The statement that no one would be forced into lowsec is disingenuous. While technically true, it does seek to remove all other reasonable options for a variety of playstyles. You can go through lowsec, probably with much smaller and/or more expensive ships, or go through wormholes with no idea where you will come out and potentially as great a risk in getting shot and losing cargo. That's just hauling, its intended victim. For others... The reasoning that I should not need to run damsel for all 4 empires is silly. What if I do? What if that's what I enjoy in the sandbox? Why curtail my ability to move to another empire in a PvE ship just to suit the tastes of some gatecamping pirates?
There are reasons to go into lowsec, and even fairly valuable ones if not for the culture that exists there---there is just no requirement to do so. It's much easier to set up a POS in Lowsec, which is the backbone of any serious indy character. Why are not small corps streaming into lowsec to do it? I imagine some are, but for the most part it's not worth the hassle the pirates cause. Higher bounties, bigger rats, level 5 missions, etc... but the pirates make the risk/reward impossible to balance or justify unless you happen to like the fight itself. Those that do are there already.
EvE is an odd game half way between industry and shooter. The regular denizens of lowsec treat it as a pure shooter, sort of a battlefield in space, only with easier targets that can't shoot back.
Please inform us of these variety of play styles that require safe travel to all 4 empires on a consistant basis? Trade? Hauling? Yeah this would be a significant buff to the reward cap of those professions though it would make the consistancy of income harder to maintain safely.
Regardless of that there is nothing currently in any of the empires you can't do in any of the others.
Also your other comments show your lack of knowledge of the non-highsec aspects of the game. Low sec, wspace. The reason people are not streaming into lowsec is because there really is no great rewards to be had there. And your pos becomes susceptible to dread blapps there too.
This idea is to give some reward to risking lowsec through trade. When u make a counter arguement, it is your job to provide examples and not just your feelings and the misconceptions you have about how things currently work. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
698
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 09:18:00 -
[508] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Ignorance.
YOU don't like low sec despite never having done any kind of pvp at any point. You complain about the risks, being totally ignorant to how negligible they actually are. Stop complaining about pirates doing what is only the most rational choice in the current game, shooting what they can. Although the only thing they can shoot are things that DO shoot back, why? Because anyone with half a brain knows exactly how not to die, its utterly trivial. Not to mention you still have no reason to utilize low sec afterwards for making isk!
Also WHO CARES ABOUT MOVING YOUR PVE SHIP? THERE IS NO GOOD REASON TO DO IT, ZIP. ZERO. NADA. Did you know that according to a CCP survey (which if you ask I will link) most players like to Pvp more than pve? Yet you would want to take away gameplay from those people so you can move your ship somewhere else to do the exact same missions as where it already is? In fact what your saying is an insigfuckignificant part of your gameplay, should stand in the way of a total revolution for low sec that may make it the most fun part of the game?
OH! You agree their is no good reason to go into low sec when you can just play afk in hisec!
Hah! Then you have the balls to say that pirates only shoot things that don't shoot back! It has been months since the last time I saw a indy ship in low sec that didn't cloak. Last time I killed a missioner I was drunk and had probes on him for 5 minutes and burned at him from 100km! If anything the only people pirates shoot is other pirates. As you said yourself their is no reason to go into low sec, even for people who like to pvp other than for the soul purpose of pvp. You talk like the moment you jump into low sec the pirates will pounce on you, utterly hillarious from someone who doesn't know at all what they are talking about. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Daichi Yamato
Swamp Bucket Swamp Bucket Empire
761
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 11:52:00 -
[509] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: stuffs
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. There are no vets in EVE. Only varying levels of Noobery. |
seth Hendar
I love you miners
60
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 12:24:00 -
[510] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:Commander Ted wrote: stuffs
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. let's picture how trad would change if all 4 empires were seperated by a few lowsec systems:
1- using freighters for cross empire would become VERY risky, to a point were almost nobody would use them.
2- point above could be mitigated with emergent gameplay, organisation that one pay to ensure a safe trip in this lowsec pipe, wether you pay local pirates, or a protection against said pirates.
3- most would probably use JF then, requiring a bit more organisation, and making exporting stuff a bit more expansive, due to fuel cost + lowered cargo size / trip
the result of all this would be that it cost much to acquire good coming from other empires, while the "local" goods would be cheaper than in any other empire, promoting the use of local goods, thus local production
this would really bring the 4 main hubs to be real hubs, unlike the current situation
i think this would be good for the game, maybe i'm wrong, but that is what i think
and last but not least, this would really help with the overcrowded Jita, spreading the ppl over the 4 hubs a bit more |
|
Daichi Yamato
Swamp Bucket Swamp Bucket Empire
761
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 12:42:00 -
[511] - Quote
i'd expect the effects on markets to be more trivial than u'd expect.
as for escortng freighters through low sec, u'd need friends that would do it for a very small payment. most of the time it will be either more worthwhile for them to do something else, ur u'd have to pay them so much it wouldn't be worth ur while running the gauntlet.
and when ppl say it promotes PvP and such and such a survey says most ppl like PvP, so would making NPC corps deccable and forcing ppl to stay in corp during the duration of a dec. in fact, i'd bet a great many of those involved in the survey would not consider waiting around in low sec for a freighter 'real' PvP. There are no vets in EVE. Only varying levels of Noobery. |
Leper ofBacon
Benzene Inc. Incendia legio scientiae
18
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 17:38:00 -
[512] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:[quote=Xavier Thorm]The statement that no one would be forced into lowsec is disingenuous. While technically true, it does seek to remove all other reasonable options for a variety of playstyles. You can go through lowsec, probably with much smaller and/or more expensive ships, or go through wormholes with no idea where you will come out and potentially as great a risk in getting shot and losing cargo. That's just hauling, its intended victim. For others... The reasoning that I should not need to run damsel for all 4 empires is silly. What if I do? What if that's what I enjoy in the sandbox? Why curtail my ability to move to another empire in a PvE ship just to suit the tastes of some gatecamping pirates?
Don't confuse the concept of a sandbox with 'I should be able to play exactly as I want with no interference'. Your play style exists (and the playstyles of other players that may be in opposition to yours) because, over time, the parameters of the game have allowed it and encouraged it to exist. This thread suggests a change that would alter the parameters by which playstyles exist again.
I think the current setup of the central high sec hub, followed by rings of low and then null sec likely was very appropriate when the game had only a fraction of the number of players as it has now. With more players now there is far more potential to split the empires and introduce new content for those who can take advantage of the divide by trade or by force.
Love the idea. |
Sorana Bonzari
Paradox Collective Choke Point
5
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 17:53:00 -
[513] - Quote
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 ;) |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
698
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 18:42:00 -
[514] - Quote
Sorana Bonzari wrote: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 ;) If noobs blop up on a gate wont someone show up to shoot them? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Sorana Bonzari
Paradox Collective Choke Point
5
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 18:56:00 -
[515] - Quote
ok ok that was a cheap shot but because you are so persistent I will give you 1 reason why this isent going to happen any time soon.
CCP has already stated that prices are nearly out of control. AKA they are to high and need to go down for it to be viable for new players entering eve to have a smooth progression without a significant amount of grinding. With this in mind adding low sec between high sec sovereignty will cause a market reaction of items increasing in price because of the added risk to regional trade. Furthermore this will allow price fixers to better operate in this environment. For this reason until the market is back into CCP's "in control" parameters its not going to happen.
Edit BTW I love noob gate camps I get lots of kills while kiting idiots ;) |
Jacid
nul-li-fy Nulli Secunda
34
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 19:21:00 -
[516] - Quote
Sorana Bonzari wrote:ok ok that was a cheap shot but because you are so persistent I will give you 1 reason why this isent going to happen any time soon.
CCP has already stated that prices are nearly out of control. AKA they are to high and need to go down for it to be viable for new players entering eve to have a smooth progression without a significant amount of grinding. With this in mind adding low sec between high sec sovereignty will cause a market reaction of items increasing in price because of the added risk to regional trade. Furthermore this will allow price fixers to better operate in this environment. For this reason until the market is back into CCP's "in control" parameters its not going to happen.
Edit BTW I love noob gate camps I get lots of kills while kiting idiots ;)
Prices aren't high actually.. if you look at the price on trit, drakes, and talos over the last year the prices are pretty much the same thing last year they are this year..
Its a novel idea to put lowsec inbetween the 4 empires |
Sorana Bonzari
Paradox Collective Choke Point
6
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 20:59:00 -
[517] - Quote
Jacid wrote:
Prices aren't high actually.. if you look at the price on trit, drakes, and talos over the last year the prices are pretty much the same thing last year they are this year..
Its a novel idea to put lowsec inbetween the 4 empires
I was quoting CCP about the prices its not my option so in regards about how CCP feels about the prices its not up for debate, thus this change will not happen untill prices lower to CCP's standards. |
Roime
Ten Thousand Years Shinjiketo
2932
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 21:21:00 -
[518] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote: EvE is an odd game half way between industry and shooter. The regular denizens of lowsec treat it as a pure shooter, sort of a battlefield in space, only with easier targets that can't shoot back.
If you'd actually been to lowsec even once, you would have noticed the impressive amount of control towers and player owned customs offices. Moon goo and PI, both features that marry combat with industry, and require teamwork. Stuff what this game is all about.
Probably bit hard for someone with your attitude to accept, but the low/null/wh players you so desperately try to insult enjoy all aspects of EVE.
Open mind is a sharp mind.
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
Iudicium Vastus
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
22
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 21:25:00 -
[519] - Quote
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. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
698
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 21:27:00 -
[520] - Quote
Iudicium Vastus wrote: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. Oh, what a terrible loss.
Im sure thousands of players will quit because they didn't get to shoot little red boxes in 4 different background types. I am sure the buggy epic arcs that CCP cares so much about with BPCs that can't even be used matter so much to the NPE. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
698
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 21:35:00 -
[521] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:Commander Ted wrote: stuffs
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. What do you mean the rewards will not be raised? Think about that for a second, less trade means less supply. Prices go up, you make more isk for less time put in.
You also are forgetting that jump freighters aren't going to be so cheap to run after odyssey and freighters can use wormholes and cloaked industrials are still viable.
If JFs were jumping back and forth between the empires at rates similar to how freighters move now, then you would probably see a lot of traps set up to kill those JFs. Not to mention you can store billions of isk in loot inside a viator. A freighter can store twice as much as a JF and if you have a wormhole with a hisec static you can easily use that as a route around low sec.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Shade Alidiana
PROSPERO Corporation MinTek Conglomerate
46
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 21:42:00 -
[522] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Shade Alidiana wrote:Did anyone ever consider someone's area of operation is the whole hisec at a time? Well if this alleged person does operate in all of highsec at once then hopefully they're using more than one account. They would then not be significantly affected by this change. And if this really was an arguement then it would be similar to a little sh*t of a kid hogging all of the toys because "he needs them all and he's going to play with that one next.". And if anyone is able to utilize all of high sec with one character then that needs nerfing.
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. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
698
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 21:47:00 -
[523] - Quote
Shade Alidiana wrote:
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.
How hard is it to own two ravens in each empire if you seriously need to run multiple mission types? (Which you don't) Not to mention if you just have a friend scout you in a frigate you can just move the one ship! Also retrievers aren't very expensive. Also I have outlined safe methods of crossing low sec so you can still trade, but make higher profits. Use a cloaked ship and move small things, buy a JF, scan a empire to empire or c1 wormhole. It isn't hard.
Also wtf are you talking about neutral routes in war? That is utter nonsense. In WWI do you think crossing into Germany was just trivial for the swiss? If that was the case why did the Germans starve? In the Korean War how easy was it for neutral countries to dock freighters in korea? Maybe you could get in if your some kind of diplomat but otherwise what your talking about is pure BS. Also the long route version is the current status quo, and nobody uses the short route because they can't do it afk. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
22
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 04:37:00 -
[524] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote: 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.
Isotopes will become more expensive, thus increasing cost to transport with JFs. Also this will put more JFs at risk. Either they get caught more often (with increased jumps into populated systems) or they properly scout and don't make the jump. Thus increasing demand at the destination. Trade reward significance increased.
Daichi Yamato wrote:i'd expect the effects on markets to be more trivial than u'd expect.
as for escortng freighters through low sec, u'd need friends that would do it for a very small payment. most of the time it will be either more worthwhile for them to do something else, ur u'd have to pay them so much it wouldn't be worth ur while running the gauntlet.
and when ppl say it promotes PvP and such and such a survey says most ppl like PvP, so would making NPC corps deccable and forcing ppl to stay in corp during the duration of a dec. in fact, i'd bet a great many of those involved in the survey would not consider waiting around in low sec for a freighter 'real' PvP. First of all, I'm really curious to know where the reasoning for your prediction of the market comes from. Even if the availability of everything remains the same in each empire there will still be trends where people end up over saturating a market somewhere and someone can buy that up cheap and move it to another market for massive profits because there will be a built in threshold of when the hauling of the item becomes worth the risk. Currently any amount of difference can reap profits, but if you don't jump on it immediately someone else will do it, so there is no lag time between trade hubs currently and very little profitability.
Second, dec'ing NPC corps and forcing people to stay in wars is not in the spirit of this idea. With this idea high sec will still be safe. We're not proposing to eliminate high sec space to promote PvP. But this would create places for it to happen and you can choose to go there, or avoid it. Dec'ing NPC corps and keeping wars takes that choice away. I'm totally against that. If we could generate enough pvp content in low sec, then people might not even need wars anymore. You won't have to worry about Dec'ers camping Jita for easy undocking kills. They could be in a lowsec trade route killing trade the way it seems logical.
Sorana Bonzari wrote:Jacid wrote: Prices aren't high actually.. if you look at the price on trit, drakes, and talos over the last year the prices are pretty much the same thing last year they are this year..
Its a novel idea to put lowsec inbetween the 4 empires
I was quoting CCP about the prices its not my option so in regards about how CCP feels about the prices its not up for debate, thus this change will not happen untill prices are within CCP's standards. Please provide a link to this quote. I'd be curious to see what it says/implies. And also to verify your legitimacy of course.
Iudicium Vastus wrote: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. This is not an issue... You could just have to go through low sec and risk your ship to finish this arc. Or they could use Smuggler gates or something similar to progress the arc through high sec if they really care to make it perfectly safe. Whatever.... who cares? |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
22
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 05:19:00 -
[525] - Quote
Shade Alidiana wrote:Erutpar Ambient wrote:Shade Alidiana wrote:Did anyone ever consider someone's area of operation is the whole hisec at a time? Well if this alleged person does operate in all of highsec at once then hopefully they're using more than one account. They would then not be significantly affected by this change. And if this really was an arguement then it would be similar to a little sh*t of a kid hogging all of the toys because "he needs them all and he's going to play with that one next.". And if anyone is able to utilize all of high sec with one character then that needs nerfing. 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. I really have to question the amount of Mining in Amarr you do and the amount of Missions in Minmatar you run and the weight of the trading you do in Dodixie vs the rest. But regardless of that, do you really think you are entitled to all of that area with the pinnicle of safety in this game to carry you between then? There already is a safe way to commute between the 4 empires if they were separated... It's called Jump Clone. You'll just have to have more than 1 of each ship for your missions if you really want/need to do that.
How about this question then. Do you really need that to utilize every empire ""at the same time""? Would limiting you to one empire really wreck your game play/play style? Maybe someone's playstyle involves safe travel to all of eve space. Why don't we give that person special treatment and not let them be attackable by anyone in any space so they can play their sandbox style of play? Yeah it's a pretty silly idea just to make a point about the way you're coming off. I don't usually like to throw this term out that often, but your argument has a strong undertone and overtone of snowflake.
You are that bratty kid in the example i gave in the post you quoted arn't you? |
seth Hendar
I love you miners
62
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 08:44:00 -
[526] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:i'd expect the effects on markets to be more trivial than u'd expect.
as for escortng freighters through low sec, u'd need friends that would do it for a very small payment. most of the time it will be either more worthwhile for them to do something else, ur u'd have to pay them so much it wouldn't be worth ur while running the gauntlet.
and when ppl say it promotes PvP and such and such a survey says most ppl like PvP, so would making NPC corps deccable and forcing ppl to stay in corp during the duration of a dec. in fact, i'd bet a great many of those involved in the survey would not consider waiting around in low sec for a freighter 'real' PvP. yes, and that's why it would be more difficult to acquire some goods in some places, hence the market switch
about the dec / pvp thing, i don't really know, sall one be forced to pvp? i don't think so, i like it, but i also agree some don't.
what is bad imao about dec, is what is happening from time to time.
you are dec' by another corp, you show up, and they stay in station, i would so much love to kick them outta station
i mean, a 20-30 man corp, dec a 400 ppl aliance, what were they expecting, that we would come with 10 ppl? and yet THEY dec us, and don't do anything but spin ship in station |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
148
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 12:33:00 -
[527] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:
How hard is it to own two ravens in each empire if you seriously need to run multiple mission types? (Which you don't) Not to mention if you just have a friend scout you in a frigate you can just move the one ship! Also retrievers aren't very expensive. Also I have outlined safe methods of crossing low sec so you can still trade, but make higher profits. Use a cloaked ship and move small things, buy a JF, scan a empire to empire or c1 wormhole. It isn't hard.
Also wtf are you talking about neutral routes in war? That is utter nonsense. In WWI do you think crossing into Germany was just trivial for the swiss? If that was the case why did the Germans starve? In the Korean War how easy was it for neutral countries to dock freighters in korea? Maybe you could get in if your some kind of diplomat but otherwise what your talking about is pure BS. Also the long route version is the current status quo, and nobody uses the short route because they can't do it afk.
It does not matter. It's their playstyle, they should not be forced through lowsec if they aren't interested in that kind of gameplay. Sandbox, its not just for PvP ambush predators anymore...
Your analogy about borders breaks down when you take into consideration no one uses pirates to enact blockades. Historically the only time piracy was used remotely this way was in the days of sailing ships where each country gave letters of marque to privateers to 'legalize' their preying on their enemies.
Now if your idea to extend lowsec included heavy navy patrols that openly hunted any act of piracy not involved in faction war, we would have a new idea worth discussing. No Concord, but no gate camping--- the one thing an empire sized military should be good at is escalating force to deal with problems within their own borders, so while you could fight off the Navy for a little while, it would not take them long to get the job done. Any Piracy would have to be done away from gates and patrolled areas. Of course this would require something out in space worth doing, valuable enough to put up with the hassle of pirates. |
Shade Alidiana
PROSPERO Corporation MinTek Conglomerate
46
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 23:31:00 -
[528] - Quote
Replying to everyone. First. I'm not that rich to have my full collection of ships copied, not to mention some of them are quite hard to get. Same with JF, although it can be a reasonable investment. Second. There's only 6 possible jump clones(including one active) which disallow copying all my implant sets, not even mentioning the money again. Third. I rarely think of profit and usually work for the goal itself, and increased price difference doesn't help it in any way. I'm not going to move to caldari state/Jita just because someone wants to separate it from me completely. Fourth. Current shorter route from me to jita is only 1 jump shorter than "safe" one (Uedama isn't completely safe). It's just a joke, there's no reason I would go there. 5 jumps vs 20-30 jumps? Yes, I consider it a reasonable difference. Shorter route to Rens is 3-4 jumps shorter, and I use it when no serious volumes are to be moved (yes, even a JF won't deal conveniently with billions of trit units).
You want me not to mine in Amarr space? Then give me Nocxium containing ores in gallente. Massively, grav sites are rare and tiny and can't supply my needs.
You mentioned special treatment. I am completely aware of ganking and okay with it - in a form it is in hisec. If I am worth ganking, try it out - and I'll do my best for you to fail, although would congratulate you upon success. I was upset when heared of tornado nerf and boomerang becoming illegal (and impossible?), coz it made things more interesting. But when I can be ganked just for the sake of ganking, I either give it up or go to gank or be ganked.
Someone mentioned military patrols, that also could be acceptible, although not makes too much sence as it is.
Every thing around have reasonable limits, and stepping beyond them.. I won't say it's silly, mad or anything. Just not the best thing you could have done. I remember I liked the general concept some time ago, but it seems to have changed
|
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
23
|
Posted - 2013.05.27 04:44:00 -
[529] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote: It does not matter. It's their playstyle, they should not be forced through lowsec if they aren't interested in that kind of gameplay. Sandbox, its not just for PvP ambush predators anymore...
Your analogy about borders breaks down when you take into consideration no one uses pirates to enact blockades. Historically the only time piracy was used remotely this way was in the days of sailing ships where each country gave letters of marque to privateers to 'legalize' their preying on their enemies.
Now if your idea to extend lowsec included heavy navy patrols that openly hunted any act of piracy not involved in faction war, we would have a new idea worth discussing. No Concord, but no gate camping--- the one thing an empire sized military should be good at is escalating force to deal with problems within their own borders, so while you could fight off the Navy for a little while, it would not take them long to get the job done. Any Piracy would have to be done away from gates and patrolled areas. Of course this would require something out in space worth doing, valuable enough to put up with the hassle of pirates.
Ok, again, this idea does not Force anyone into low sec. Every profession is available in every empire already. The only thing you'd lose is diversity. All it does is give an incentive for someone to go through lowsec to increase diversity. If "their" playstyle is to be risk advert, then they may continue to be risk advert. Nobody is taking away their playstyle.
As for the analogy of old world pirates to eve. One thing you have to remember is that in eve we have to use stargates to get around. You could compare them to the mouth of a trade river, you can bet your sweet ass pirates would camp those. So gate camps are pretty much a real world practice back then.
Not sure about that last thing, seems like the pre-buffed concord. But in anycase i don't think it's necessary at all for anything.
Shade Alidiana wrote:Replying to everyone. First. I'm not that rich to have my full collection of ships copied, not to mention some of them are quite hard to get. Same with JF, although it can be a reasonable investment. Second. There's only 6 possible jump clones(including one active) which disallow copying all my implant sets, not even mentioning the money again. Third. I rarely think of profit and usually work for the goal itself, and increased price difference doesn't help it in any way. I'm not going to move to caldari state/Jita just because someone wants to separate it from me completely. Fourth. Current shorter route from me to jita is only 1 jump shorter than "safe" one (Uedama isn't completely safe). It's just a joke, there's no reason I would go there. 5 jumps vs 20-30 jumps? Yes, I consider it a reasonable difference. Shorter route to Rens is 3-4 jumps shorter, and I use it when no serious volumes are to be moved (yes, even a JF won't deal conveniently with billions of trit units).
You want me not to mine in Amarr space? Then give me Nocxium containing ores in gallente. Massively, grav sites are rare and tiny and can't supply my needs.
You mentioned special treatment. I am completely aware of ganking and okay with it - in a form it is in hisec. If I am worth ganking, try it out - and I'll do my best for you to fail, although would congratulate you upon success. I was upset when heared of tornado nerf and boomerang becoming illegal (and impossible?), coz it made things more interesting. But when I can be ganked just for the sake of ganking, I either give it up or go to gank or be ganked.
Someone mentioned military patrols, that also could be acceptible, although not makes too much sence as it is.
Every thing around have reasonable limits, and stepping beyond them.. I won't say it's silly, mad or anything. Just not the best thing you could have done. I remember I liked the general concept some time ago, but it seems to have changed What i'm getting out of your post is that you "can't be bothered" with the inconvenience, and for some reason you need to move things across empires. Please explain why.
Also i believe that there should be some high sec minerals that are only found in a specific empire's space. maybe mex and nocx be in cal/gal vs min/amarr. That would encourage trade and cause those minerals to have value from trans-empire shipping.
I really don't get why so many people feel that they will be required to move between empires. Just because you do it now doesn't mean you really have to. |
Shade Alidiana
PROSPERO Corporation MinTek Conglomerate
46
|
Posted - 2013.05.27 05:51:00 -
[530] - Quote
You want me to trade in dodixie? It's a joke.
And yes, empire specific ores is what I was talking about.
Then. Fueling caldari towers in gallente space?
Working in specific areas for very special agents? (Osmon is unique, for example. As well as caldari epic arc, COSMOS agents, etc)
And don't tell me about ravens, those are neither for fun nor for making money. Maybe in Odyssey this will change, but navy scorp holds its positions as the only caldari BS in my most wanted list. |
|
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
155
|
Posted - 2013.05.27 13:49:00 -
[531] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:As for the analogy of old world pirates to eve. One thing you have to remember is that in eve we have to use stargates to get around. You could compare them to the mouth of a trade river, you can bet your sweet ass pirates would camp those. So gate camps are pretty much a real world practice back then.
This resulted in one of 2 outcomes everywhere it happened:
1. The governing empire deemed the route important, and naval ships were dispatched to the area to keep it clear of pirates. If necessary new ports and military forts were built to watch over the area. Piracy happened, as it still does today, but not anywhere a major military naval power decided was important.
2. The governing empire ignored the problem, and the area was eventually lost to the government. This usually resolved in a few ways depending on local conditions. Sometimes the pirates themselves began policing the area as it was a safe harbor for repairs and supplies otherwise unavailable to them- most often in areas that already saw so little traffic that it wasn't worth hunting. Sometimes the community simply stopped any significant trade overseas, instead relying on local landbased resources trade routes--targets dried up, pirates eventually went away. Sometimes the community just died--No more pirates here either.
Piracy, and it's land based equivalent of banditry, has never been a problem tolerated by any significant major power. You simply cannot allow it... it either gets dealt with or the would-be governors lose control of the area. You will always have crime and criminals, but the sort of lawless anarchy represented by the way pirates operate in Lowsec are only possible in undeveloped, rarely traveled areas of the world. The piracy itself prevents the development of the area, and the longer and more pronounced the problem, the fewer targets will show up. This is exactly the heart of this very idea---there are too few targets in lowsec, because despite the higher rewards in lowsec the pirates have created such a reputation for the area that only other likeminded folks care to go there.
This idea seeks to create an artificial set of conditions where any sort of reliable trade is forced through the area yet for some reason the governments owning the areas will not put resources into securing the route. This very simply does not happen for any length of time. This will either result in resource homogenization so that each empire can exist completely independent from each other and trade across empires will cease, NPC seeding of goods in station so new players can afford something better than the newbie frigate and the civilian gear that's on it, or lost subscriptions.
So long as actual PvP combat mechanics (not just running away) remain completely and overwhelmingly in favor of ambush predator tactics, and pretty much not fun for anyone not looking to engage purely in PvP combat with no other realistic goal for their evening of gameplay, this idea will remain unworkable. |
Ewersmen
Radiant core construction
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.27 14:04:00 -
[532] - Quote
Leave highsec alone ...theres plenty of low and null to play in ...go have a pirate war :P |
Douglas Whyte
WhyteKream
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 23:01:00 -
[533] - Quote
I actually do like this, With how the empire space is mapped it's like putting an X in the center of Hi-SEC, effectively a moat around each empire. Everybody know's every awesome castle has a moat :P
However, I think this could go a step further by taking elements of FW and implementing it into these systems.
Instead of Faction versus Faction, Concord versus Pirates versus Pirates.
The fight? secure trade routes.
Hi-sec roamer's can now align with Concord to assist in the strengthening a system's security. Low-sec roamer's can now ALIGN with a pirate faction to weaken system's security.
The security status of a system will never go higher then .5, however can be brought down as low as 0.
Combine this with the already present lore of incursions, and you can create a plot in which pirates are now aggressively seeking to weaken the unity of Empire space and ultimately Concord power.
This will allow players to create safe trade routes at the expense of having to actively maintain the systems security.
Kick it up a notch?
With there now space divided between all empire's, Each faction as seen an opportunity to exploit the pirates effort's for their benefit. Faction WF pilot's can actively bridge a FACTION FORTIFIED trade route between their allies. These bridge systems allowed to gain a security status of 1.0 FACTION GUARDED. No concord presence. Meaning Neutral (faction standing) pirates will be allowed passage to engage the "common" enemy, so long as they don't attack the controlling faction.
|
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
102
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 00:07:00 -
[534] - Quote
Douglas Whyte wrote:I actually do like this, With how the empire space is mapped it's like putting an X in the center of Hi-SEC, effectively a moat around each empire. Everybody know's every awesome castle has a moat :P
However, I think this could go a step further by taking elements of FW and implementing it into these systems.
Instead of Faction versus Faction, Concord versus Pirates versus Pirates.
The fight? secure trade routes.
Hi-sec roamer's can now align with Concord to assist in the strengthening a system's security. Low-sec roamer's can now ALIGN with a pirate faction to weaken system's security.
The security status of a system will never go higher then .5, however can be brought down as low as 0.
Combine this with the already present lore of incursions, and you can create a plot in which pirates are now aggressively seeking to weaken the unity of Empire space and ultimately Concord power.
This will allow players to create safe trade routes at the expense of having to actively maintain the systems security.
Kick it up a notch?
With there now space divided between all empire's, Each faction as seen an opportunity to exploit the pirates effort's for their benefit. Faction WF pilot's can actively bridge a FACTION FORTIFIED trade route between their allies. These bridge systems allowed to gain a security status of 1.0 FACTION GUARDED. No concord presence. Meaning Neutral (faction standing) pirates will be allowed passage to engage the "common" enemy, so long as they don't attack the controlling faction.
I'll pretty much support any idea that brings the pirate factions into faction warfare or allows players to work with them more, so you've got my vote. |
Douglas Whyte
WhyteKream
2
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 00:38:00 -
[535] - Quote
Xavier Thorm wrote:
I'll pretty much support any idea that brings the pirate factions into faction warfare or allows players to work with them more, so you've got my vote.
TBH... with how the pirate faction themselves are set up to mirror the major factions, I don't understand why FW takes place in Low SEC.
Honestly LowSec should of been a contested between each of the pirate faction's, And take this idea but never low sec, instead make it Faction Hi-sec, where militia members are allowed to engage in combat with ANY player of the opposing faction when in their space. Then make these system's contested. Allowing for Empires to expand and shift. |
Andy Landen
Air Initiative Mercenaries
125
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 01:26:00 -
[536] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: Post in the thread if you like this idea help! A simple "I like this idea!" would be nice! Also a dev response would be cool, maybe, after 10,000 views it would be pretty sweet.
So moving stuff from place to place in eve isn't really all that dangerous, difficult, interesting, or that profitable most of the time. Piracy isn't all that profitable either. So why not add more lowsec between the 4 empires. By more I mean, it would be utterly impossible to get from gallente space to caldari space without crossing lowsec at some point.
When doing this I wouldn't want the routes to be setup where there are only 1-2 chokepoints you have to cross, I would also prescribe the addition of new regions.
...
Says the pirate as he drools at all the expensive ships and modules moving around high sec. Then jump freighters hop stuff through the low sec border by jumping it to the low sec station and the pirate whines even more about getting rid of all low sec stations.
Then faction warfare claims another system for a different faction and the low sec system border moves. Soon all stations are removed from high sec and low sec and all trading and commerce stops. The Eve economy collapses and the pirate says, What? It's better this way. :)
Sounding too ridiculous yet? I'll stop here to save the OP a shred of dignity. "We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein-á |
Douglas Whyte
WhyteKream
2
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 01:34:00 -
[537] - Quote
Andy Landen wrote: Says the pirate as he drools at all the expensive ships and modules moving around high sec. Then jump freighters hop stuff through the low sec border by jumping it to the low sec station and the pirate whines even more about getting rid of all low sec stations.
Then faction warfare claims another system for a different faction and the low sec system border moves. Soon all stations are removed from high sec and low sec and all trading and commerce stops. The Eve economy collapses and the pirate says, What? It's better this way. :)
Sounding too ridiculous yet? I'll stop here to save the OP a shred of dignity.
His suggestion had nothing to do with converting Hi-sec to Low-sec. It was focused on having a low sec moat between empire's. Which would be interesting. However I think would be better if the hi-sec runner could at least have the option to flip a few into secure systems and build a bridge they can maintain.
There's so much isk out there in low sec and null sec compared to hi-sec. If that's not enough to get players to take a risk, forcing them to do it, or cornering them isn't going to do any good for the game. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
23
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 04:09:00 -
[538] - Quote
Shade Alidiana wrote:You want me to trade in dodixie? It's a joke.
And yes, empire specific ores is what I was talking about.
Then. Fueling caldari towers in gallente space?
Working in specific areas for very special agents? (Osmon is unique, for example. As well as caldari epic arc, COSMOS agents, etc)
And don't tell me about ravens, those are neither for fun nor for making money. Maybe in Odyssey this will change, but navy scorp holds its positions as the only caldari BS in my most wanted list.
Yes judging by your post, apparently high sec is too comfortable. Seems a lot like welfare in America. We have generations of welfare families because it's too comfortable and there are no incentives to get a job. Unlike America, we can make eve a better place to play. We can get rid of our Highsec/Welfare comfortability. If you want bigger and better rewards like a navy scorp or very special agents, then you should have to put up the risk for them like every other reward in eve.
Mike Voidstar wrote: Too Long Didn't Quote
I think this will actually make things more interesting if it happened. First off, it seems you envision 1 pipe between each empire. If they did make it like that then yeah, things wouldn't move well at all. With enough systems and enough scoutting it shouldn't be hard to make it from empire to empire without losing your load. That being said, as more people start to take your route then the stuff you said happens, pirates camp there then people stop and move and pirates move again etc etc.
Douglas Whyte wrote: Pirate FW etc
I believe if they change the Personal Security Rating system just a bit then things like this wouldn't be necessary. If positive sec players could shoot negative sec players without lose sec rating then there would be an inherent version of good (+sec) vs bad(-sec). And +sec people would generally ignore +sec people so if you see +sec people in a low sec system and you are +sec, then you'd be pretty well safe there.
It just needs a few tweaks. First of all, + attacking a + should get a higher rating hit. And anyone attacking a - sec rating wouldn't lose any sec rating so -'s can shoot -'s all day. Also no more security status boost from null sec. If security doesn't exist in null, then why should you get a security boost there? This system would work very well with the new Tags 4 Sec system and also give a boost to the demand of the -5 to 0 sec tags. This would make low sec more useable and profitable in it's own ways.
Andy Landen wrote: Sounding too ridiculous yet?
Yes, your ideas are too ridiculous. Evestinction Level Events do not exist.
Ewersmen wrote:Leave highsec alone ...theres plenty of low and null to play in ...go have a pirate war :P Currently the problem is that low doesnt really have the population to have a war in. And really Low isn't supposed to be the place to war, it's supposed to be the place to roam and be a pirate or shoot pirates. But currently you can't shoot pirates without being/becoming a pirate. With the OP's idea and my sec status idea it would be a place with much fun and satisfaction to be had.
Nobody is being forced into lowsec but this does give more opportunity for people to do stuff/profit from it. Currently there are no real rewards in lowsec except for FW atm. Everything else and including many activities in null sec are just slightly more rewarding than highsec. This will be the start of making a difference and also giving more identity to the 4 races! |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
23
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 05:04:00 -
[539] - Quote
Douglas Whyte wrote: There's so much isk out there in low sec and null sec compared to hi-sec.
You must be thinking of WH space.... Or maybe alliance money from moon faucets? That's hardly the point of this little thread.
Please inform me of these great mountains of isk waiting to be made in low/null.
The difference between mining in highsec vs nullsec. Nullsec mining has this great problem with consistency, where you will find yourself unable to go mine because of campers/ctas and stuff. And when you do mine, cherry pickers eat up all the high end ore so you're stuck shooting high sec rocks anyway. In low it would probably be worse without having the sov indy infrastructure. Regardless, scordite is fairly competitive across the board. Mining scordite is not a huge loss vs the other high end ores.
I guess null sec ratting is pretty good, but you don't end up with the LP you get from high sec missions. And those too are affected by the things mentioned above. Though not to such a great extent as mining. Low sec doesn't have sov military infrastructure either.
As for level 5 missions. Well i guess that locking down systems in low sec is roughly the same except for no bubbling and any time you engage someone above sec -5, you lose sec status. So i guess this case is where you can make some money in low, cons aside. |
Douglas Whyte
WhyteKream
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 18:58:00 -
[540] - Quote
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. |
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
712
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 19:11:00 -
[541] - Quote
Douglas Whyte wrote: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. Not true, the only difference is you can't do it afk (which is often times untrue in null sec), You don't need friends, in fact just yesterday I saw 2 mackinaws and a dominix mining in a dead end low sec system, I warped in on them to see about some cheap kills and they all had warp core stabs and starting warping away all at the exact same time. Guy is still there mining, he doesn't have a scout alt or anything, he just mines.
I made more isk doing exploration in low sec than in hisec.
I know people in FW who do level 4 missions constantly in low sec without any trouble.
Hell people even do level 5's without that much of a problem.
So obviously isk/hr isn't the issue here. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
1076
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 19:23:00 -
[542] - Quote
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. Ideas For Drone Improvement Repourpose Deep Space Scanner Probes |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
712
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 19:48:00 -
[543] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote: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. I don't think it matters if you do it all at once or not, announce it at the start of when the devs start announcing features and promise that no systems will have their sec status changed, only new ones will be added.
Also that doesn't make any sense, why would a system that was secure, now not be secure? If it were new territory that would make sense, the new regions should be added first, and the stargates crossing those regions to be separated would see a slow destabilization, something the players can watch, like a wormhole effect inside the stargate.
So players are aware time is running out and can get a feel for and understand the new zones. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
1077
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 20:43:00 -
[544] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote: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.
Ideas For Drone Improvement Repourpose Deep Space Scanner Probes |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
712
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 21:31:00 -
[545] - Quote
The shock to the system thing confuses me. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Romvex
481
|
Posted - 2013.06.09 20:41:00 -
[546] - Quote
signed (aĶá_aĶá) ~ Post With Your Main-á ~ (aĶá_aĶá) |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
2576
|
Posted - 2013.06.09 21:06:00 -
[547] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:The shock to the system thing confuses me. My take on it is that they don't want all but one or two high-sec islands to end up like Solitude region. The sad fact is, most people will congregate where the most people and business is done just because it's easier.
Again... I like the idea. However, given the reservations presented by the DEVs I can see that many of them see such a change as unnecessarily painful and/or bad for overall, long term, in-game market stability. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. |
Commander Ted
Bad Security.
713
|
Posted - 2013.06.10 03:09:00 -
[548] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote: My take on it is that they don't want all but one or two high-sec islands to end up like Solitude region. The sad fact is, most people will congregate where the most people and business is done just because it's easier.
Again... I like the idea. However, given the reservations presented by the DEVs I can see that many of them see such a change as unnecessarily painful and/or bad for overall, long term, in-game market stability.
People do congregate in one spot but that is only possible for a number of reasons CCP's economist said himself that the empires were starting homgenize in population due to lack of space but Jita was still the center of everything, and what happened to Solitude couldn't happen to the empires because the empires actually have reasons that make them worth going to over the others.
I would say the problems with this idea are mostly short term adaptation and in the long term people will find that it is better. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
2576
|
Posted - 2013.06.10 04:10:00 -
[549] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:I would say the problems with this idea are mostly short term adaptation and in the long term people will find that it is better. Oh... I agree completely. But how painful that adaptation and for how long it would last is something to be a little concerned about. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. |
Commander Ted
Bad Security.
713
|
Posted - 2013.06.10 04:46:00 -
[550] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:Commander Ted wrote:I would say the problems with this idea are mostly short term adaptation and in the long term people will find that it is better. Oh... I agree completely. But how painful that adaptation and for how long it would last is something to be a little concerned about.
Well I am sure there could be a way to make this less painful, like a few free interbus shipments maybe? Everyone in new eden will get 3 vouchers to move say, 900km3 of materials from any high security space system to another hi-sec that last one month. Also they could get 5 vouchers to move any completely assembled/fitted ship regardless of cargo.
Also the number of Hisec-hisec wormhole connections could be increased by maybe 300% and slowly ratcheted down as time went on to help easy people into the transition. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Tribal Band
540
|
Posted - 2013.06.10 05:17:00 -
[551] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Commander Ted wrote:The dangers will be just as great 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. They already do with my faction warfare case, even then it was one dude camping an entire station. The answer is bring more logi still and you can tank them. If every logi has stuff shooting them the logi will be repped by the other logi. Not to mention you can pop faction ships like their nothing. Nothing you can do to make the faction navy effective security short of making them only slightly weaker than concord. So in effect the noobs will still get popped when they jump in, anyone who runs missions and thinks their safe can still get ganked by tier 3's or a couple of bombers, and its really just neutered low sec pvp. No pirates would be ever willing to fight back against a real fleet because as the aggressors they have a crazy disadvantage, so the pirates with their logistics will see the fleet ahead of time and just dock up creating blue balls for all. I never said anything about the HP of the faction ships. I'm not suggesting that the standard factions spawns are what you get, I'm suggesting that what you get would be balanced for middle-sec and classified as faction spawns.
My current idea is to have every attacker cause three navy ships to spawn (similar to CONCORD): a tackle frigate, an EWAR cruiser, and a high-DPS battleship. Their power and toughness would scale with sec status, being nearly impossible to beat solo in 0.6. This would prevent people from using the "bring more ships" strategy, especially if all of the NPCs who spawn could focus-fire on one of the attackers at a time.
To prevent lag, larger groups of attackers could have a scaled NPC response, with the same net power and toughness but with fewer total ships.
This idea would give a solo player room to defend themself--even if the ganker could beat the NPCs OR the solo player, it wouold be more difficult to beat both at the same time. Anyone who goes out in a reasonably combat-fit ship should be pretty much completely safe in 0.6, and fairly safe even in 0.5. Some highly skilled players could even roam around 0.4 alone and defend themselves. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
1139
|
Posted - 2013.06.10 06:10:00 -
[552] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:ShahFluffers wrote:Commander Ted wrote:I would say the problems with this idea are mostly short term adaptation and in the long term people will find that it is better. Oh... I agree completely. But how painful that adaptation and for how long it would last is something to be a little concerned about. Well I am sure there could be a way to make this less painful. That's why I said slowly change the sec status of the effected systems over the course of several patches. Ideas for Drone ImprovementTwitter Account-á @Omnathious |
Commander Ted
Bad Security.
714
|
Posted - 2013.06.10 07:03:00 -
[553] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote: That's why I said slowly change the sec status of the effected systems over the course of several patches.
Which would be useless, especially considering that only new systems would be added.
As long as there is one single link between the empires that is safe nothing would change.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
1139
|
Posted - 2013.06.10 07:13:00 -
[554] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote: That's why I said slowly change the sec status of the effected systems over the course of several patches.
Which would be useless, especially considering that only new systems would be added and none would be changed. As long as there is one single link between the empires that is safe nothing would change. Only when the final link is cut then all hell breaks loose. You want to add more systems? I was looking at this from the point of changing existing systems. If the system connects 2 (or more) empires it (and probaly a few surrounding systems) is low sec. Ideas for Drone ImprovementTwitter Account-á @Omnathious |
Commander Ted
Bad Security.
714
|
Posted - 2013.06.10 07:16:00 -
[555] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote: You want to add more systems? I was looking at this from the point of changing existing systems. If the system connects 2 (or more) empires it (and probaly a few surrounding systems) is low sec.
The current map is inadequate, to many choke points. Whole new regions are needed. Not to mention changing sec status is a TERRIBLE idea. It would screw over lots of people. How would you feel if your orca/mining fleet is suddenly 3 jumps into low sec after taking a month off? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
1139
|
Posted - 2013.06.10 07:19:00 -
[556] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote: You want to add more systems? I was looking at this from the point of changing existing systems. If the system connects 2 (or more) empires it (and probaly a few surrounding systems) is low sec.
The current map is inadequate, to many choke points. Whole new regions are needed. Not to mention changing sec status is a TERRIBLE idea. It would screw over lots of people. How would you feel if your orca/mining fleet is suddenly 3 jumps into low sec after taking a month off? Ok now we are on the same page on things, I thought you wanted to use the existing map. It would suck, but like all things I would get over it. Ideas for Drone ImprovementTwitter Account-á @Omnathious |
Commander Ted
Bad Security.
714
|
Posted - 2013.06.10 07:22:00 -
[557] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote: Ok now we are on the same page on things, I thought you wanted to use the existing map. It would suck, but like all things I would get over it.
It would cause more harm than good and solve nothing.
Also in the main post I actually proposed lore explanations and an idea of how they could do the new regions. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
1139
|
Posted - 2013.06.10 07:26:00 -
[558] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote: Ok now we are on the same page on things, I thought you wanted to use the existing map. It would suck, but like all things I would get over it.
It would cause more harm than good and solve nothing. Also in the main post I actually proposed lore explanations and an idea of how they could do the new regions. I have not read the OP since you started this thread. Time to go back and re-read it. Ideas for Drone ImprovementTwitter Account-á @Omnathious |
Commander Ted
Bad Security.
714
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 19:05:00 -
[559] - Quote
Stickies are gone! Ill just bump this here. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Ordellus
ORI Ground Forces
15
|
Posted - 2013.06.12 01:42:00 -
[560] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: Sounds like extremely boring emergent gameplay.
Actually LOL'd there. By "emergent gameplay" do you mean a bunch of prepared war vessels trapping and killing a respectively helpless ship?
I'd rather keep the high sec where it is. |
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
714
|
Posted - 2013.06.12 06:58:00 -
[561] - Quote
Ordellus wrote:Commander Ted wrote: Sounds like extremely boring emergent gameplay. Actually LOL'd there. By "emergent gameplay" do you mean a bunch of prepared war vessels trapping and killing a respectively helpless ship? I'd rather keep the high sec where it is.
Yea, it is emergent gameplay. Do you know what that even means?
Also I have yet to see any good reasons why Hi-sec needs to be kept the way it is. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Samuel Wess
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
13
|
Posted - 2013.06.12 07:18:00 -
[562] - Quote
+1 |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
717
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 19:18:00 -
[563] - Quote
I keep seeing Fozzie respond to new posts all the time so I know he has read this. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
6452
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 19:27:00 -
[564] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:I keep seeing Fozzie respond to new posts all the time so I know he has read this.
That is correct. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
717
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 19:29:00 -
[565] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Commander Ted wrote:I keep seeing Fozzie respond to new posts all the time so I know he has read this. That is correct. Well at least it now says dev next to the thread https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Klymer
Hedion University Amarr Empire
273
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 20:06:00 -
[566] - Quote
Breaking up hisec into several small pockets would not encourage/force more people into losec or to hop in a combat ship and go pewpew. At best they would just stick to their little pond and at worse they would quit. And before someone says those people should quit, no we need every real person we can get lest this game becomes Alts Online.
Sorry I didn't read this threadnaught, so if that opinion has been expressed before then count this post as a no towards your idea.
|
Drake Doe
SVER True Blood Public Disorder.
228
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 20:15:00 -
[567] - Quote
I don't exactly see what would be wrong with people staying in their ponds by choice, hasn't there always been an element of risk vs reward in mist mmos? Also, the risk udverse are more likely to get alts for anything from orca boosts to lvl 4 mission salvaging. "The homogenization of EVE began when Gallente and Caldari started sharing a weapon system."---Vermaak Doe-- "Ohh squabbles ohh I love my dust trolls like watching an episode of Maury with less " Is he my Dad " but more of " My Neighbor took a dump on my lawn " good episode! *pops more corn*" ---Evernub-- |
Bibosikus
Caldari Deep Space Ventures Tribal Band
150
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 21:08:00 -
[568] - Quote
Haven't read more than the first page: Nice idea *if* it had been implemented from 2003. As it is, this would be too disruptive to the present economy.
Any suggestion which would seriously affect Eve's monetary turnover in an impossible-to-foresee manner is simply a no-no.
The box said "Requires Windows-á2000 or better", so I installed Linux. |
Drake Doe
SVER True Blood Public Disorder.
228
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 21:14:00 -
[569] - Quote
So you're saying adding incursions and sleepers was a bad. Idea because of how they could have affected the market? "The homogenization of EVE began when Gallente and Caldari started sharing a weapon system."---Vermaak Doe-- "Ohh squabbles ohh I love my dust trolls like watching an episode of Maury with less " Is he my Dad " but more of " My Neighbor took a dump on my lawn " good episode! *pops more corn*" ---Evernub-- |
Bakuhz
The Nightingales of Hades Holdings The Nightingales of Hades
39
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 22:01:00 -
[570] - Quote
Interesting to see the haulerbears adapt to this situation. although as a pirate i rarely gate camp it is so damn boring but it would juice up the camps for sure. i see a bear market for cloaky trucks.
it is going to be the big cargo's that would get reall risky needing a escort team for that one jump or protect the cyno and gates. i like the post but i dont know if this really would be good for eve as i am not sure how far the high sec dwellers wil lbe scared off by this it could ruin the full eveconomy aswell.
http://tnoh.eve-kill.net/?a=pilot_detail&plt_id=576554
We are stil looking for Manticore Pilot's can you fly one and are interested to do more with covert operations Contact me for more info |
|
Arkenai Wyrnspire
Turalyon Plus
1774
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 22:17:00 -
[571] - Quote
+1. Sig'd.-áGallente FW best FW. |
Lacun Motabilum
Peoples Capitalist Liberation Front Virtue of Selfishness
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 22:31:00 -
[572] - Quote
I think with some tweaks this idea has real merit. If you have a need to get goods through low sec there is a way, and this idea wouldn't change that.
That said, in keeping with ccp's praise worthy "decisions have consequences" mantra, I think the consequences for being a pirate would need to be increased. I believe an interesting way to do that would be to regionalize sec status, then tie sec status to docking rights.
What this would mean in practice is if you actively pirate on the gallente side of the gallente/caldari low sec border you would not be able to dock in any stations in gallente space once your gallente security status got low enough. You would have to travel a few jumps to caldari space for a safe haven station to dock in, giving any law abiding people in the area a slight home field advantage.
I also think it would be interesting to tie security status into all forms of trade and commerce. If you supply pirates that operate in gallente space buy filling market orders or contracts or even trading, it would only be natural for the gallente to resent you for that. But if you supply said pirates in caldari space what could the gallente do but lower your sec status with them and wait for you to enter their borders.
I realize lore wise this might be hard to justify and that it might make faction standing indistinguishable from sec status, but I was just trying to think of ways to create an environment similar to the one in which historical pirates operated. In which they essentially sided with one empire or another for access to supplies, markets for their stolen goods and friendly, or at least non-hostile ports. Overall I like the idea of low sec between empires.
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
720
|
Posted - 2013.06.17 01:14:00 -
[573] - Quote
Bibosikus wrote:Haven't read more than the first page: Nice idea *if* it had been implemented from 2003. As it is, this would be too disruptive to the present economy.
Any suggestion which would seriously affect Eve's monetary turnover in an impossible-to-foresee manner is simply a no-no.
Like removing ice belts, changing moons, Dominion Sov system, the changes to barges, adding plex, removing drone minerals, removing the super gates, jump freighters, and faction warfare e-z money printing?
I really don't see how it is that massive and game breaking a change to not have everything be connected to a central hub, we already have 4 established trade hubs of decent quality that could quickly pick up the slack from jita. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Klymer
Hedion University Amarr Empire
273
|
Posted - 2013.06.17 01:32:00 -
[574] - Quote
Drake Doe wrote:I don't exactly see what would be wrong with people staying in their ponds by choice, hasn't there always been an element of risk vs reward in mist mmos? Also, the risk udverse are more likely to get alts for anything from orca boosts to lvl 4 mission salvaging.
People making the choice where they want to be isn't wrong. Sorry if I came across as implying that it was a bad thing in my previous post.
Fracturing hisec would just exacerbate the problem of one region being more populated than the rest, something we already see with Jita and The Forge to a certain extent, and more of the trouble we see with that situation. Now one might say that people being forced out of that region due to overpopulation would be good for the rest, but then you just removed the players choice of where they want to be by imposing an artificial restriction, namely the region being a small pond. It could also be argued that we could see a return to a time when one race is chosen based on it's location rather than the players choice, similar to the situation that came about when bloodlines had different attributes. You actually remove risk in these cases as people avoid it by creating their account to start off in one of the small, shallow ponds rather than being dumped into a large, deep one.
As for alt's, the game needs more people, not more alts. People bring new ideas and fresh perspectives whereas alt's just bring more of what we already have, a stagnant player base that simply maintains the status quo.
Suppose I should mention I have 8 accounts, Mr Stagnation checking in
|
Douglas Whyte
WhyteKream
12
|
Posted - 2013.06.17 05:10:00 -
[575] - Quote
The problem isn't with the idea, but the perspective of low-sec.
I'll admit myself I get worried when entering low-sec. However most time's i'm not discouraged. I go in knowing that nothing can distract me, and that I must be hyper-vigilant. I've lost ships in low-sec for sure, however each time it wasn't a depressing experience. I went in knowing that there was the chance, and instead of over-panicking, i was still worried, i aligned and timed an ejection just in time for the last volley and got out with my pod everytime.
Low-sec is fun every time i go through it. I wouldn't ever do something complacently within. I would imagine that forcing players to have to go through in their travel's would be good for their over-all experience.
The real only ships, and gameplay, that would be greatly affected would be freighter's and hauler's. Other then that most other ships could navigate through much easier with enough experience. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
720
|
Posted - 2013.06.17 05:57:00 -
[576] - Quote
Klymer wrote: Fracturing hisec would just exacerbate the problem of one region being more populated than the rest, something we already see with Jita and The Forge to a certain extent, and more of the trouble we see with that situation. Now one might say that people being forced out of that region due to overpopulation would be good for the rest, but then you just removed the players choice of where they want to be by imposing an artificial restriction, namely the region being a small pond. It could also be argued that we could see a return to a time when one race is chosen based on it's location rather than the players choice, similar to the situation that came about when bloodlines had different attributes. You actually remove risk in these cases as people avoid it by creating their account to start off in one of the small, shallow ponds rather than being dumped into a large, deep one.
We already had this discussion, Hi-Sec is already running out of space and homogenizing on its own. CCP's in house economist said so himself at 2012's fanfest. Crowding in one region would not work because all the ore, ices, exploration loot, LP Rewards, and station slots would tank in value, making the other regions more attractive and making them all homogenous.
The only reason Jita is more populated is because its more populated. The fact that it is so trivial to move goods to Jita means that it doesn't matter where you put your industrial setup in hisec, as long as you have a freighter and an autopilot button you can sell your items in Jita just as competitively as someone nearby. This means lower prices which means more people come to jita to buy things which means that is has more demand which means your stuff sells faster which means moar isk.
By cutting off players from other empires from Jita, it will quickly shrivel and die leaving Caldari space without any advantage over any of the other empires, encouraging homgenization.
Being kept out of your preferred space might be a problem if we were dealing with a young player base, but we have a mature player base capable and willing to homogenize. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mildew Wolf
82
|
Posted - 2013.06.17 07:17:00 -
[577] - Quote
i like this idea in general. i would also prefer to put some more limits on things like jump freighters, jump bridges, titan bridge etc. its become too easy to move things around and force project imo |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
722
|
Posted - 2013.06.17 07:21:00 -
[578] - Quote
Mildew Wolf wrote:i like this idea in general. i would also prefer to put some more limits on things like jump freighters, jump bridges, titan bridge etc. its become too easy to move things around and force project imo
Tbh I always thought jump drives were a dumb idea in the first place. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mildew Wolf
82
|
Posted - 2013.06.17 09:07:00 -
[579] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Mildew Wolf wrote:i like this idea in general. i would also prefer to put some more limits on things like jump freighters, jump bridges, titan bridge etc. its become too easy to move things around and force project imo Tbh I always thought jump drives were a dumb idea in the first place.
i assume since theyve gone to the trouble of adding these things over time (and because of the potential outcry from some players) they probably wont ever be completely removed but i hope they are lessened somewhat. its makes the game effectively much smaller. being able to move large groups across the entire known universe in a matter of minutes with a handful of mids seems wrong to me but ofc thats just my opinion. i dont expect changes any time soonGäó |
Trajan Al'Thor
Trajan Al'Thor Corporation
2
|
Posted - 2013.06.18 19:28:00 -
[580] - Quote
I want this. |
|
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
125
|
Posted - 2013.06.18 20:13:00 -
[581] - Quote
tldr:
they want more opportunities for easy kills at their gate camps. |
Liam Inkuras
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
308
|
Posted - 2013.06.18 20:30:00 -
[582] - Quote
Can't remember if I've signed this already, but here, have another +1 I wear my goggles at night.
Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone |
Quazal Atreides
StarTrucks
3
|
Posted - 2013.06.18 20:58:00 -
[583] - Quote
This is something i have been an advocate of before.
Whilst your idea i would support, I would prefer a non permanent version of yours.
My version involved the low sec between factions not being static, so it moved.
The movement of said system would be based indirectly on FW - Something along lines of Faction Warfare can capture certain 0.5 systems between the areas
So
Caldari space > *Neutral zone* > Minmatar space
When minnie take System X it would go from 0.5 to a 0.4 for a period of not less than 1month, then would convert to a minmatar 0.5 this would then mean Caldari have to take it.
This would then make the universe fluid, not static, of course the bridge between caldari and minnie would only be low for 1month, before it went back 0.5 thus allowing opening traffic but giving that month where it can be camped, the prices of goods would be more fluid based on traffic restrictions
In terms of the 'friendly factions' there is a permanent route of highsec, because in war the allies would keep open the route for supplies etc.
Merely between Caldari > Minnie / Caldari > Gallente / Amarr > Minnie & Amarr > Galente
Whilst your idea i would support, I would prefer a non permanent version of yours. Still the only person to offer corp creation free of charge. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=35634#post35634 Created over 200 was 3rd on the all time corporation job history on eve-board. This service is in stasis due to personal game time... |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
727
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 02:46:00 -
[584] - Quote
100 likes https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
33
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 03:01:00 -
[585] - Quote
Onomerous wrote:tldr:
they want more opportunities for easy kills at their gate camps.
It's really frustrating that people don't understand the implications. Sure there will be more targets for pirates, but there will also be a lot more stuff for people to do in general. There also adds a bit of risk in trade, and with risk comes reward. It would be a very fun place but of course the personal security rating mechanics would have to change in my oppinion. |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
3751
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 03:35:00 -
[586] - Quote
What incentive would there be for players to risk lugging bulky freight through the Caldari/Gallente border zone?
What will stop everyone simply crowding into the Caldari State hisec and leaving the other three empires to be empty ghost towns?
Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
3751
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 03:43:00 -
[587] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:GizzyBoy wrote:join test concord's not getting in the way of them hitting freighters 300 + so far? Sounds like extremely boring emergent gameplay. Wouldn't you rather be a pirate in a armada of warships trying to take down the caravan of cargo haulers? Or maybe you and a small band of frigates are cruising the space lanes looking for a lone trader who has stuffed his cargo hold with the federation navy stasis webs that are in short supply in jita. Instead of filling the freighter, setting destination, clicking autopilot, then halfway their you get your massive ship bumped like a tennis ball underwater while a group of ships 1 shot you which interrupts you watching tv. I wanna be a pirate, not some guy who runs around looking for asshats running missions to gank or to play grabass with other so called "pirates". I wanna be a adventurous trader looking to make my fortune using my wits to navigate dangerous deep space without pouring over data tables and spread sheets trying to manipulate prices by moving **** from homogenous trade hub to trade hub.
Why would there be a caravan of haulers? Why would they hang around when there is even the faintest whiff of pirates nearby?
Why can't you be the guy patrolling lowsec looking for the freighter pilot who thinks it is safe to haul a load of faction loot unescorted through lowsec? If it is not happening now, why would it happen with lowsec border zones?
If you want to be a pirate, what is stopping you being a pirate today? Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
727
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 04:03:00 -
[588] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:What incentive would there be for players to risk lugging bulky freight through the Caldari/Gallente border zone?
What will stop everyone simply crowding into the Caldari State hisec and leaving the other three empires to be empty ghost towns?
It is extremely obvious why people won't crowd caldari space. Caldari LP rewards will flood the market making them less valuable. Caldari Ores will be less valuable. Caldari Ices will be the only ones mined. Caldari Station slots will never ever open up.
Now with the supplies for things you can only get in the other empires people will obviously want to mine those, those people need modules, those people will be war deced.
Already Caldari Space is running out of room and people are starting to homogenize through hisec, but Jita remains the biggest hub. CCP's economist said so himself in the 2012 fanfest. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
727
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 04:04:00 -
[589] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:
If you want to be a pirate, what is stopping you being a pirate today?
There is nothing to shoot but other pirates. You don't make isk pirating, you make isk doing merc contracts or something completely unrelated to pvp.
The reason that nobody cross low sec in freighters except for the very rare extra stupid idiot is that you can do it afk with 0 risk through hi-sec. It isn't even a question worth asking really it is so obvious. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Trajan Al'Thor
Trajan Al'Thor Corporation
3
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 15:54:00 -
[590] - Quote
I believe shifting space would be even more interesting. It might make some carebears rage when their pos end up in lowsec, but I think it would be more interesting. |
|
Quazal Atreides
StarTrucks
4
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 16:09:00 -
[591] - Quote
Trajan Al'Thor wrote:I believe shifting space would be even more interesting. It might make some carebears rage when their pos end up in lowsec, but I think it would be more interesting.
As a carebear who used to go to them naughty placesin lowsec, would be interesting to see hwo them players adapt, but as the 'mobile' space high/low would be a predefined group of system (only the 0.5s) between the factions then unless you some cahoones you wouldn't put a pos up in case your system got flipped...
But meh, would be fun also for AFK pirates to log in one day to find themselves in a 0.5 with only big shinny ships :) Still the only person to offer corp creation free of charge. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=35634#post35634 Created over 200 was 3rd on the all time corporation job history on eve-board. This service is in stasis due to personal game time... |
Johnson 1044
Johnson Organic Produce
18
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 16:18:00 -
[592] - Quote
I like the idea. I spend very little time in Caldari space/Jita now so why would new borders change that? |
Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1214
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 16:34:00 -
[593] - Quote
i support the idea in general, but your answer to the jump freighter issue is a little flaky. with the current game mechanics, there is virtually no way to kill a JF unless the pilot screws up. this does not mean that this would not change anything though. not everyone is willing to risk a JF for hauling ore and other high volume commodities, thus the markets would probably diverge in some ways.
"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings" -MXZF |
Vincent Gaines
Cold Moon Destruction. Transmission Lost
550
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 17:14:00 -
[594] - Quote
Onomerous wrote:tldr:
they want more opportunities for easy kills at their gate camps.
1) With 50 or so connections, not every gate will be camped. Far from it, actually.
2) Wormholes are awesome. Not a diplo.-á
The above post was edited for spelling. |
Evei Shard
186
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 17:54:00 -
[595] - Quote
How about this as an alternative:
Leave the system security as is, but CONCORD no longer considers web/scram/disruption to be an attack in 0.5 systems, and loot drop from industrial cargo-holds is decreased substantially, making it more profitable to do something like pin them down, and demand they jettison their cargo. This also gives an edge to campers because it allows them to pin someone down and get their alpha ships in range.
Personally I don't mind the idea of low-sec separating the empires. Make Niarja 0.3, and make Kaaputenen and Madilmilire 0.4. I think it would encourage some independence among the empires, and create business opportunities for various corps/alliances within those empires as there will be higher demand for.. everything.. in each empire. Live in Amarr? Only seeing BPC's for Drakes in Jita? Buy a BPO, set up a POS, and start making copies to sell in your region and make some isk.
The idea of changing CONCORDS responses in 0.5 is simply a compromise. Profit favors the prepared |
Corine Noas
Russian Thunder Squad Darkness of Despair
19
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 19:17:00 -
[596] - Quote
Quote:Separate the four empires with low security space
No, make it nullsec And also make it so different type of resources (ore, moon materials, salvage, gas etc) can only be extracted in certain places of the universe. So in order to build any ship or mod - you're gonna need materials from different regions separated by outlaw space :)
But I know that's too hardcore for our "90% of players are highsec carebears" sandbox |
Johnson 1044
Johnson Organic Produce
18
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 19:41:00 -
[597] - Quote
Bold moves like this are what will keep this game interesting for years to come. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
733
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 19:43:00 -
[598] - Quote
Corine Noas wrote:No, make it nullsec Maybe, actually nah. unavoidable bubble hell camps where 1 cruiser can cover an entire regional gate and catch cloakies. Jump bridges to easily flank you. Titans with DDDs.
Maybe if they took hisec and put each empire at the furthest corners of the map leaving the middle null.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
733
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 19:45:00 -
[599] - Quote
Evei Shard wrote:How about this as an alternative:
Leave the system security as is, but CONCORD no longer considers web/scram/disruption to be an attack in 0.5 systems.
Oh god no. You would never ever leave a .5 system again. Heavy dictors with lots of logi just sitting there for ***** and giggles all day. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Tikktokk Tokkzikk
Blackjack and Exotic Dancers
146
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 19:56:00 -
[600] - Quote
I've always wanted this but been too lazy to actually suggest it (because CCP never read this subforum, right?). +1
I'd also suggest having very few stations to discourage jump freighters (and because enemies of the station owner will surely blow it up). |
|
Xolve
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
1505
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 19:59:00 -
[601] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Corine Noas wrote:No, make it nullsec Maybe, actually nah. unavoidable bubble hell camps where 1 cruiser can cover an entire regional gate and catch cloakies. Jump bridges to easily flank you. Titans with DDDs.
Apparently you have never camped a regional gate before, given that it's possible for pilots to land literally 70km away from you, camping it, even with T2 larges scattered all over the gate with a few cruisers won't guarantee a 100% kill rate, not even 75 in most cases.
Given that you are looking at a few dozen entrances from low-sec to high-sec chances are more of them will NOT be camped than they are today. Adding low-sec between the empires does much in the way of creating things for pilots to do, it would make space-trucking a viable profession, it would give mercenary corps something to do besides sit on the 4-4 Undock (escort runs, etc), it would even allow for relative new pilots to be paid scouts. Anything giving new AND old players a way to make isk, screw over their players, and want to group up to do things is a good thing.
Commander Ted wrote:Maybe if they took hisec and put each empire at the furthest corners of the map leaving the middle null.
This would make absolutely 0 sense, while I support the original idea; make it so that maybe a small sphere of CONCORD space touch a corner of each of the 4 empires space, with lowsec in between then. The amount of lowsec doesn't need to be vast swathes of space, just something to make Caldari-Space feel Caldari, and not the black and silver cloud place a few jumps from Dodi, the green and brown swirly place. Inappropriate signature removed. Navigator. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
734
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 20:04:00 -
[602] - Quote
Xolve wrote:
This would make absolutely 0 sense, while I support the original idea; make it so that maybe a small sphere of CONCORD space touch a corner of each of the 4 empires space, with lowsec in between then. The amount of lowsec doesn't need to be vast swathes of space, just something to make Caldari-Space feel Caldari, and not the black and silver cloud place a few jumps from Dodi, the green and brown swirly place.
I was mostly kidding about the super separation idea, also I have evaded null camps and been in them before and they can get pretty nutty. Gate guns and no bubbles just prevents frigates from catching every badger that goes into low sec (because it will be more populated due to its proximity to empire and traffic), and just make it a lot more feasible to make it through.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Bl00dyAngel
KuhSchubsKlan
4
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 20:32:00 -
[603] - Quote
I like this idea! It would also line out the FW between the Factions. |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
3778
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 21:57:00 -
[604] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Mara Rinn wrote:What incentive would there be for players to risk lugging bulky freight through the Caldari/Gallente border zone?
What will stop everyone simply crowding into the Caldari State hisec and leaving the other three empires to be empty ghost towns?
It is extremely obvious why people won't crowd caldari space. Caldari LP rewards will flood the market making them less valuable. Caldari Ores will be less valuable. Caldari Ices will be the only ones mined or the miners will be forced out. Caldari Station slots will never ever open up. Caldari exploration loot will be the only loot found and people will be crowded out. Non Caldari/Amarr militia members will be cut off from loot. Now with the supplies for things you can only get in the other empires running low people will obviously want to mine those, those people need modules, those people will be war deced, industrialists and traders will follow.
Now ask yourself what will be required to get people to live in the other empires and ship stuff to the major market hub. People aren't going to leave Caldari space because it's too poor. They'll head to other empires because they're very rich. This will only happen when the things from the other empires are expensive enough to be worth gathering.
Now ask yourself whether you would take the risk of running a freighter through lowsec for the purpose of shipping 100M ISK ruptures to Caldari space, or will people adjust their skills to fly 4M ISK Moas? Would people pay 200k per fuel block for non-caldari fuel, or stick with 16k fuel blocks for Caldari towers?
And who will benefit most from the higher prices: people travelling to other hisec empires and shipping stuff across the lowsec barriers, or the people who already live in nullsec and have established trade routes?
Commander Ted wrote:CCP's economist said so himself in the 2012 fanfest that the empires populations are mostly proportional based on size. This is a recent development because previously everyone did live in caldari space, but now people are moving out.
What if people are spreading out because there are now enough people to make Amarr and Dodixie worth visiting? What if you only need to turn the thumbscrews on Jita up a teensy bit harder to convince people that it's better to stop at Amarr or Dodixie for items that are within 1% of Jita prices, and several jumps closer to home?
As the population grows, the supply at the other market hubs will grow.
Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
735
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 22:16:00 -
[605] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:
Now ask yourself what will be required to get people to live in the other empires and ship stuff to the major market hub. People aren't going to leave Caldari space because it's too poor. They'll head to other empires because they're very rich. This will only happen when the things from the other empires are expensive enough to be worth gathering.
If it is 5% more valuable it is worth gathering. Of course if nobody is collecting Minmatar ice in hisec then the price is probably going to be twice as high. FFS moving things through low sec isn't impossible, you don't even have to go into low sec, use a wormhole. Direct empire to empire connections are common. The logic of only the rich being capable of doing this is ******* ridiculous because that means that low sec logistics is expensive. Steps to moving a mining ship through low sec. 1. Buy a viator. 2. Put mackinaw in viator. 3.??? 4. Profit Also if you want to move an entire mission ship, scan a wormhole down or scout through a battleship 5 jumps, its not ******* rocket science. Now you have a population in the smaller empire.
Mara Rinn wrote: What if people are spreading out because there are now enough people to make Amarr and Dodixie worth visiting? What if you only need to turn the thumbscrews on Jita up a teensy bit harder to convince people that it's better to stop at Amarr or Dodixie for items that are within 1% of Jita prices, and several jumps closer to home?
As the population grows, the supply at the other market hubs will grow.
That logic makes no sense. Jita has x4 the market share of the next biggest hub amarr http://users.telenet.be/mmodata/EVE/EveTradeHubs.htm However excluding Jita, Amarrian space has a only 10% smaller population than Caldari space. Not to mention the original reason Caldari is so big is that 60% of all characters are Caldari. Obviously the trade hub isn't the deciding factor here. People who make items in the other 3 empires mostly move their things to Jita. If your a carebear with half a brain you sell everything in Jita no matter where you get it. If you are a price savey player, you always buy your stuff in Jita. If you are a null sec alliance, you buy your stuff in Jita. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
GizzyBoy
Aperture Harmonics K162
63
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 15:45:00 -
[606] - Quote
jeez your still trolling this one.
why isn't this thread locked yet. |
GizzyBoy
Aperture Harmonics K162
63
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 15:55:00 -
[607] - Quote
Fine i'll bite again,
in game corporate take over in jita 4-4 and other stations, these change to npc corps that have no mission running agents or way to gain standings with,
instant + 1% sales tax or so because you cant have standings with said npc corp.
Double number of corporate office spots in amarr dodixie rens stations.
increase in sinks,
Jita 4-4 unlimited offices but 2 bill month rent.
|
Xeraphi
The Gun Runners
52
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 16:22:00 -
[608] - Quote
It'd make hauling a real activity instead of a semi-afk alt activity. That's kinda cool.
Ambilvalent about the hauling changes that would happen from this. Hauling would be in more demand however you couldn't just do it on an alt while you're playing your main. Target death animation flicker problem #2 Target death animation flicker problem #1 Please fix before June 21 I'd like to keep playing EVE! |
Blastil
The Reblier Alliance
78
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 18:00:00 -
[609] - Quote
cmdr. Ted, I've said it before and say it again, all this would do, is raise the cost of goods, and shift ALL freighter traffic to jump freighters. For the first 2 months, idiots unaware of the changes will die horribly, but once natural selection runs its course, ALL highsec logistics will be handled by black frog, who will become INSANELY wealthy. Prices EVERYWHERE Will inflate, and we'll get no more revitalization to lowsec. What IS more needed, and more interesting:
1) Create multiple lowsec 'shortcuts' which enable rapid trade from the hubs through these lowsec back-doors. Make enough of them and blockade runners can have a role again. I'm ok with lowsec regions, and even lowsec additions in EVE, but making them a prerequisite for trade is stupid and ridiculous. I'm talking about 5-6 jump paths which require you to cut through 4 or so lowsec systems (which are very branchy and hard to camp every option) to make it to a market hub.
2) lowsec requires a rare, unique and valuable resource besides security tags (which were a great star, but not the whole fix). This resource also should be more interesting than shooting ships, and require industrial activity such as mining, hauling, trading and manufacturing.
That is all. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
736
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 18:21:00 -
[610] - Quote
Blastil wrote:cmdr. Ted, I've said it before and say it again, all this would do, is raise the cost of goods, and shift ALL freighter traffic to jump freighters. For the first 2 months, idiots unaware of the changes will die horribly, but once natural selection runs its course, ALL highsec logistics will be handled by black frog, who will become INSANELY wealthy. Prices EVERYWHERE Will inflate, and we'll get no more revitalization to lowsec. What IS more needed, and more interesting:
You say that it would increase the price of all goods but how exactly would that happen? You have to provide some justification, otherwise it is a completely baseless and irrelevant statement since this change would only increase the price of certain goods in certain areas.
The idiots will continue to die forever, when they learn they are just replaced by more idiots.
Black Frog will make a lot of money, but if you are a person who needs to frequently move between empires it would be fairly easy to move your own goods by wormhole and by cloaked hauler. People who are just doing a one time move can easily scout through ships one at a time, liquidate, or use any of the methods I just said. Your theory is completely baseless and asinine when you think about it.
A number of shortcuts already do exist, and nobody uses them because high sec will always be the preferred option because you can do it when your afk. Unless they made the trip between jita and dodixie 40 jumps I doubt most people would use these routes. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
736
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 20:33:00 -
[611] - Quote
GizzyBoy wrote:Fine i'll bite again,
in game corporate take over in jita 4-4 and other stations, these change to npc corps that have no mission running agents or way to gain standings with,
instant + 1% sales tax or so because you cant have standings with said npc corp.
Double number of corporate office spots in amarr dodixie rens stations.
increase in sinks,
Jita 4-4 unlimited offices but 2 bill month rent.
That is a far less interesting way to break up hubs with fewer positive implications for gameplay. Also how to hell do you figure after months of posting and 100 likes that I am a troll, it is just a weak way, immature, and troll-like to dismiss someone's opinion. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Blastil
The Reblier Alliance
78
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 21:41:00 -
[612] - Quote
bugged post |
Blastil
The Reblier Alliance
78
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 21:41:00 -
[613] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: You say that it would increase the price of all goods but how exactly would that happen? You have to provide some justification, otherwise it is a completely baseless and irrelevant statement since this change would only increase the price of certain goods in certain areas.
Ever lived in Solitude? its a single region of gallente space in a sea of lowsec, exactly the way you propose, except a microcosm. I suspect CCP intended this as a test bed to test EXACTLY what you're taking about. Out there you can buy anything gallente 1 manufacturables for about a 10% markup, but literally everything else costs anywhere between 50% -> 200% more, mainly dependent on the racial flavor, and how relevant it was to the market needs (for example, consumable goods like munitions were more towards the 50% side, while certain PVP mods were more like 200%.). But with such big margins available, why don't people fill the market out there, like good capitalists?!
Simple: Its all brought in "on the margin". Very few of the JF pilots who make trips out to solitude go out to trade, because of how prohibitively expensive it would be to stock the market there. There is a reasonable trade in market goods because quite a bit of EVE's manufacturing goes on there, but the vast majority of all transport in comes from corperate JF runs like those run by Black Thorne Corp, etc. JF pilots don't jump half full, and often will speculate with their remaining cargo hold. Since the cost of fuel is a sunk cost, most of the trading goes on in the margins of the cargo holds, between corp fuel, mineral, and ship assets.
While I enjoyed the solitude of solitude, now that i'm back in empire, i'm simply shocked by how much lower prices are everywhere.
Quote: Black Frog will make a lot of money, but if you are a person who needs to frequently move between empires it would be fairly easy to move your own goods by wormhole and by cloaked hauler. People who are just doing a one time move can easily scout through ships one at a time, liquidate, or use any of the methods I just said. Your theory is completely baseless and asinine when you think about it.
I did a one time move recently from solitude (read above) to reblier, and guess who I used? Black Frog, for a pile of ships worth significantly more than the 50 mil fee. I did a mixture of all the things you recommended, but mostly I just had to leave assets behind, because of the lowsec island effect. It does HORRIBLE things to an economy. It is NOT easy to move goods by wormhole, as you can go a good 2 weeks before finding one which does you ANY good. Not to mention that this will get WORSE with the changes you propose, because it wouldn't help you at all to find a K space -> K space hole from Caldari to Minmatar when you want to make a trip to amarr. It will now take 4X more time to find a wormhole that you can actually use. Congrats.
Quote: A number of shortcuts already do exist, and nobody uses them because high sec will always be the preferred option because you can do it when your afk. Unless they made the trip between jita and dodixie 40 jumps I doubt most people would use these routes.
[/quote]
No such shortcuts exist. Between the market hubs, the lowsec 'shortcuts' only shave a mere 5 jumps off on average. I mean a REAL shortcut, Like 5 jumps instead of the previous 25 or so which separates the 4 main market hubs.
Commander Ted, why don't you play the game instead of fantasizing about lowsec islands. Or if you really have that much of a hardon for them, GO LIVE IN SOLITUDE. Trust me, a few months there, and you'll be singing a different tune.
We don't need MORE lowsec, we need BETTER lowsec, and Your proposal doesn't make lowsec better, just makes highsec worse.
|
yugi272
Masters of Zen Circle-Of-Two
5
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 21:57:00 -
[614] - Quote
Since i didn't get a chance to go through all the posts il ask if anyone mentioned that there would be a whole new branch of work for mercenery pilots namely
wait for it...
a bit more...
almost there...
TADAAAAA!!!
ESCORT DUTY
:DDDD |
PinkKnife
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
358
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 22:12:00 -
[615] - Quote
I like the idea, but I would add 1-2 little highsec routes between each so that those who want their afk gameplay can still have it, albeit with massive delays/bottlenecking.
You can take the fast way and risky way, or the slow and safe way. It makes more of a space highway vibe, and you'd get your popular "rift jumpers" who would quickly try to close the chasm to get back to high sec.
Hell you could even have tolls on the highsec gates (hooray isk sinks) based on cargo volume/mass.
I like it as a halfway point as I doubt CCP is gonna border each space with only lowsec, though I do like the idea of increasing the value of regional trade hubs and not the "oh well better go to jita" mindset. |
Kirkwood Ross
Golden Profession
36
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 23:01:00 -
[616] - Quote
Caldari/Amarr are buddies just like Minimatar/Gallente are buddies. A moat of lowsec between those the Amarr/Caldari empires and Gallente/Minimater empires would make sense. |
Jelani Akinyemi Affonso
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
51
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 23:59:00 -
[617] - Quote
Wanna be Pirate, why don't you go to NPC Null.. Heard that was suppose to be the Pirate haven..
You know as there is no law there and only the strong & mentally tough people survive and the wanna be's & the weak goes to die..
lol
|
Jeanne-Luise Argenau
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
11
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 00:06:00 -
[618] - Quote
PinkKnife wrote:I like the idea, but I would add 1-2 little highsec routes between each so that those who want their afk gameplay can still have it, albeit with massive delays/bottlenecking.
You can take the fast way and risky way, or the slow and safe way. It makes more of a space highway vibe, and you'd get your popular "rift jumpers" who would quickly try to close the chasm to get back to high sec.
Hell you could even have tolls on the highsec gates (hooray isk sinks) based on cargo volume/mass.
I like it as a halfway point as I doubt CCP is gonna border each space with only lowsec, though I do like the idea of increasing the value of regional trade hubs and not the "oh well better go to jita" mindset.
if i remember my route planner correctly thats already done (didnt do those tracks in a long time).
-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 |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
738
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 02:31:00 -
[619] - Quote
Solitude sucks balls for a single simple reason, their is no reason for anyone to ever go there. Nobody makes things in solitude because nobody lives in solitude, nobody lives in solitude because it is exactly the same thing as Gallente space but shittier, so using that as an argument is not going to work. The markets in a broken hisec would all be mostly supplied locally because they are large and populated enough to support an actual manufacturing base.
If it takes you two weeks to find you a empire to empire wormhole then your bullshitting, even then empire-c1-empire connections are extremely safe and very easy to find. I can say first hand after doing a pvp run through syndicate with me and my prober alt I actually found a k-space-kspace hole in the first system I entered since the way back was camped. Not to mention that you can move anything up to battleships safely with a scout if you are smart. Professional traders could afford to be indiscriminate about their wormholes because they could make a profit making a trip anywhere, and you still have access to viators move smaller than battleship sized ships nearly 100% risk free.
A small handful of systems with no advantage over the populated space will never be populated, however large hisec empires already are filled with industrialists, items, and a demand for people. Solitude sucks balls and always will because nobody lives there because their is no reason to live there.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
42
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 06:46:00 -
[620] - Quote
Blastil wrote:cmdr. Ted, I've said it before and say it again, all this would do, is raise the cost of goods, and shift ALL freighter traffic to jump freighters. For the first 2 months, idiots unaware of the changes will die horribly, but once natural selection runs its course, ALL highsec logistics will be handled by black frog, who will become INSANELY wealthy. Prices EVERYWHERE Will inflate, and we'll get no more revitalization to lowsec. What IS more needed, and more interesting:
1) Create multiple lowsec 'shortcuts' which enable rapid trade from the hubs through these lowsec back-doors. Make enough of them and blockade runners can have a role again. I'm ok with lowsec regions, and even lowsec additions in EVE, but making them a prerequisite for trade is stupid and ridiculous. I'm talking about 5-6 jump paths which require you to cut through 4 or so lowsec systems (which are very branchy and hard to camp every option) to make it to a market hub.
2) lowsec requires a rare, unique and valuable resource besides security tags (which were a great star, but not the whole fix). This resource also should be more interesting than shooting ships, and require industrial activity such as mining, hauling, trading and manufacturing.
That is all. So let me get this straight. The problem is that ALL freighter traffic will shift to Jump Freighters and your solution is a LowSec Shortcut that is very "branchy"? First of all, prices won't "inflate" but they will trend higher. Now you have to understand this, Jump Freighters require fuel to jump. The more JF's jumping the more fuel they're going to use. The more fuel they use the more expensive the fuel becomes. The more expensive the fuel becomes the less profitable it is to move things with a JF. As JF Fuel becomes expensive enough that JF'ing isn't worth transporting things there will be profit to be made by hauling with Transport ships et all. So your economic disaster world will actually balance itself. And it will balance around JF Fuel no less which has recently become a much less abundant commodity....
The reason Solitude and the other high sec islands are unpopulated and without markets is because of "Mainland" high sec that has everything. The reason the markets in the Contiguous Highsec are at equilibrium is because everything is available without any adversity except for distance. And that adversity has been overcome by Autopilot Freighters. It's kind of like the difference between living in Alaska and the Contiguous United States. You give up a lot of convenience to live out there usually to get away from the crowds or for less competitive job opportunities.
If you want to have an analogy to what the OP is proposing then it would be intercontinental trade. Trade from the Americas to Europe to Asia and I guess Africa and Australia too. The reason there is so much trade between those entities is because there are people there to buy/sell things. If the Empires were split there would be inter-empire trade similar to inter-continental trade on Earth. That 10% markup would be what people would be looking for when moving things back and forth between empires.
Quote: We don't need MORE lowsec, we need BETTER lowsec, and Your proposal doesn't make lowsec better, just makes highsec worse.
Actually you're right and wrong here. By putting lowsec in the path of the trade routes it actually gives new purpose to lowsec. Though to do this you have to take away some of the ultra convenience of highsec. So it does make highsec "worse" but it does also make lowsec "better". |
|
Arya Regnar
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
8
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 07:16:00 -
[621] - Quote
This thing had to be brought back by the dark arts of necroposting a few times uh?
EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
|
Frank Pannon
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
64
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 10:42:00 -
[622] - Quote
I wish CCP would have thought of this when they generated the EVE universe. Now, while I think the idea is great, probably not much will be done to implement this, since it would be such a massive geographical change.
Hope I am wrong though :) |
Beckett Firesnake
Babylon Knights Renegades Council
9
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 11:09:00 -
[623] - Quote
It would be very interestening to place one or two low sec factional warfare systems between ennemy factions. We can also add some wormholes that would make the link in random Highsec systems between these ennemy factions. |
marVLs
200
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 11:23:00 -
[624] - Quote
It's just bad idea.
It would change nothing in it assumption, PVE players would just live in it's faction region not moving elsewhere, new hubs will appear. If PVE player want to move elsewhere he will just use t2 cloack, so no benefits for PVP players.
What this change does? - boost for campers (most lame thing in eve) - boost economy, production, transport etc. (solo activities so it's bad thing)
- less interaction between players - lot's of players stop playing
Not worth it.
BTW. It's space so nothing strange that two opposite factions have systems next to each other. It's huge distance, many light years not Berlin wall...
You better put that effort, and think about some ideas to boost and change LS for better |
Blastil
The Reblier Alliance
78
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 14:48:00 -
[625] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Solitude sucks balls for a single simple reason, their is no reason for anyone to ever go there. Nobody makes things in solitude because nobody lives in solitude, nobody lives in solitude because it is exactly the same thing as Gallente space but shittier, so using that as an argument is not going to work. The markets in a broken hisec would all be mostly supplied locally because they are large and populated enough to support an actual manufacturing base. If it takes you two weeks to find you a empire to empire wormhole then your bullshitting, even then empire-c1-empire connections are extremely safe and very easy to find. I can say first hand after doing a pvp run through syndicate with me and my prober alt I actually found a k-space-kspace hole in the first system I entered since the way back was camped. Not to mention that you can move anything up to battleships safely with a scout if you are smart. Professional traders could afford to be indiscriminate about their wormholes because they could make a profit making a trip anywhere, and you still have access to viators move smaller than battleship sized ships nearly 100% risk free. A small handful of systems with no advantage over the populated space will never be populated, however large hisec empires already are filled with industrialists, items, and a demand for people. Solitude sucks balls and always will because nobody lives there because their is no reason to live there.
Quite to the contrary, lots of people move there because its resource rich, with almost 0 competition, no lag, as well as other benifits (such as being separated from a lot of highsec drama, and generally fewer wardecs). Solitude isn't **** because there's "no reason to be there" its because the COST of living there is so high, and requires jump logisitcs to sustain it, kind of like how you're proposing to make ALL of empire space. Corps which maintain good jump logistics chains have no problem living in solitude. All I'm saying is that ALL OF HIGHSEC will become one giant solitude. And the cost of ALL goods will roughly double on average across the galaxy, and NEVER GO BACK DOWN.
"Viators hauling battleships" AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
GTFO. Play the game before commenting in EVE-O. You've got your head in the clouds, or up some other orifice, because you certainly don't have it planted in reality. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
740
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 15:56:00 -
[626] - Quote
Blastil wrote:
Quite to the contrary, lots of people move there because its resource rich, with almost 0 competition, no lag, as well as other benifits (such as being separated from a lot of highsec drama, and generally fewer wardecs). Solitude isn't **** because there's "no reason to be there" its because the COST of living there is so high, and requires jump logisitcs to sustain it, kind of like how you're proposing to make ALL of empire space. Corps which maintain good jump logistics chains have no problem living in solitude. All I'm saying is that ALL OF HIGHSEC will become one giant solitude. And the cost of ALL goods will roughly double on average across the galaxy, and NEVER GO BACK DOWN.
"Viators hauling battleships" AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
GTFO. Play the game before commenting in EVE-O. You've got your head in the clouds, or up some other orifice, because you certainly don't have it planted in reality.
If Solitude has so many people why don't they make there own **** there? Secondly, the goods would be made LOCALLY. Goods don't just magically materialize in Jita and go everywhere, they are built somewhere, most notably not in Solitude or Jita. Solitude doesn't have anyone making the **** people need so it is imported. Gallente space would have enough people to make most everything so it would not be imported.
commander ted wrote: viators move smaller than battleship sized ships nearly 100% risk free.
Learn to read. Actually I think you may have purposely misquoted me to back up your own arguments by attacking my charecter. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
740
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 16:03:00 -
[627] - Quote
marVLs wrote:It's just bad idea.
It would change nothing in it assumption, PVE players would just live in it's faction region not moving elsewhere, new hubs will appear. If PVE player want to move elsewhere he will just use t2 cloack, so no benefits for PVP players.
What this change does? - boost for campers (most lame thing in eve) - boost economy, production, transport etc. (solo activities so it's bad thing)
- less interaction between players - lot's of players stop playing
Not worth it.
BTW. It's space so nothing strange that two opposite factions have systems next to each other. It's huge distance, many light years not Berlin wall...
You better put that effort, and think about some ideas to boost and change LS for better
If there are more camps wouldn't there be people to blow up those camps? Wouldn't that mean more Pvp? Also since when is there something wrong with solo activities, it is my preferred play style to be solo. Not to mention moving things without a cloaked ship involves two people as you probably need a scout.
What is the justification of those second two bullet points? I am confused, how does removing the ability to move **** afk reduce player interaction?
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
741
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 16:06:00 -
[628] - Quote
Arya Regnar wrote:This thing had to be brought back by the dark arts of necroposting a few times uh? Not enough time between posts for necro. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Darth Kilth
Silver Guardians Fidelas Constans
124
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 17:00:00 -
[629] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: If there are more camps wouldn't there be people to blow up those camps? Wouldn't that mean more Pvp? Also since when is there something wrong with solo activities, it is my preferred play style to be solo. Not to mention moving things without a cloaked ship involves two people as you probably need a scout.
What is the justification of those second two bullet points? I am confused, how does removing the ability to move **** afk reduce player interaction?
No, people will not go and blow up camps, Haulers and other PVE traffic will either find the routes of the lowest resistance or not go at all, if there is not safe route they won't go at all. Carebears will not magically become PVP players and fight of campers, and already existing PVPers will rarely bother as most campers will get away all the time anyway.
PVE Players will not be forced to PVP, they will not go and work together even if they have to if they don't want to, they will find a way to avoid risk/PVP or will quit if they can't. So no, PVP will not increase.
low-sec between empires is a great idea on paper, but in the current game it would only lead to people refusing to play and between empire traffic would almost completly die out except for cloaky ships.
Personally, I'd want to see more low-sec buffer between high and 0.0, at some points it's 1 system thick or even non existend. there is a to high 0.0/high-sec to low-sec ratio. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
743
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 18:43:00 -
[630] - Quote
Darth Kilth wrote: No, people will not go and blow up camps, Haulers and other PVE traffic will either find the routes of the lowest resistance or not go at all, if there is not safe route they won't go at all.
If 5-15 ships are sitting on a low sec gate, why wouldn't anyone want to shoot them? You seem to be under the impression that all pirates are on the same side. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
196
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 19:28:00 -
[631] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Darth Kilth wrote: No, people will not go and blow up camps, Haulers and other PVE traffic will either find the routes of the lowest resistance or not go at all, if there is not safe route they won't go at all.
If 5-15 ships are sitting on a low sec gate, why wouldn't anyone want to shoot them? You seem to be under the impression that all pirates are on the same side.
Because they will shoot back and the Ambush Predators of EVE don't like it when that happens. That's why they cluster around the gates hoping to catch ships that can't mount guns. |
Darth Kilth
Silver Guardians Fidelas Constans
125
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 19:44:00 -
[632] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Darth Kilth wrote: No, people will not go and blow up camps, Haulers and other PVE traffic will either find the routes of the lowest resistance or not go at all, if there is not safe route they won't go at all.
If 5-15 ships are sitting on a low sec gate, why wouldn't anyone want to shoot them? You seem to be under the impression that all pirates are on the same side. The ammount of pirates prefering to camp gates organised is far larger then the group who's willing to break them up, mostly because the following:
Gate campers actually SHOOT BACK Gate campers usually got a huge advantage with multiple safes, offgrid and on grid bookmarks. In the end those beautiful pvp fights you're envisioning won't happen because the PVPers camping those gates are also avoiding risks and people actually willing to shoot them know they're not going to get a fight anyway.
I'd love to shoot those gate campers, but I know I'll at most get them to stop sitting on the gate as long as my gang is in system, there will be no pvp just more boring gate camping. |
Airto TLA
Puppeteers of Doom
47
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 19:44:00 -
[633] - Quote
This idea would work, if there were not at least 30 ways to screw over any decent sized hauler in low sec with very little chance of executing a proper defense.
All that would happen is the factions would become isolated and there would be price bubbles on certain items, since a "freighter to Jita" would not be the answer to any significant reginal variance anymore. IT would quickly **** off industrialist and they would quit and the game would get smaller. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
744
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 05:40:00 -
[634] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Because they will shoot back and the Ambush Predators of EVE don't like it when that happens. That's why they cluster around the gates hoping to catch ships that can't mount guns.
What do you know about the ambush predators of Eve Mike? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
744
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 05:46:00 -
[635] - Quote
Darth Kilth wrote: The ammount of pirates prefering to camp gates organised is far larger then the group who's willing to break them up, mostly because the following:
Gate campers actually SHOOT BACK Gate campers usually got a huge advantage with multiple safes, offgrid and on grid bookmarks. In the end those beautiful pvp fights you're envisioning won't happen because the PVPers camping those gates are also avoiding risks and people actually willing to shoot them know they're not going to get a fight anyway.
I'd love to shoot those gate campers, but I know I'll at most get them to stop sitting on the gate as long as my gang is in system, there will be no pvp just more boring gate camping.
If Gate campers shoot back then we will have a fight right?
Also whats preventing attackers from making their own safes and bringing there own booster? Safes don't take long to make and once you make them your entire corporation has them forever. Also just about everyone in my circle of friends has a booster alt, except me . Your impossible to counter advantages are something most low sec players are already very familiar with.
That alpha tornado sitting on a gate pounce can easily be caught with a small amount of effort. Any camp capable of catching anything with strength will certainly have more ships that are committed to the field. A t3 camp could be baited into combat with a little cleverness. Already in low sec you can find small groups of campers using standard tech1 ships to just orbit the gate and **** around occasionally, if low sec actually saw traffic you would see a lot more of these guys to fight. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
44
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 06:17:00 -
[636] - Quote
Blastil wrote:Blah Blah Blah
I actually replied to a post of yours. It's the last post on page 31 of this monstrosity. Not sure if you didn't notice it or if you couldn't rebuttal any of it. (my money is on the latter) ;)
Darth Kilth wrote: No, people will not go and blow up camps.
Personally, I'd want to see more low-sec buffer between high and 0.0, at some points it's 1 system thick or even non existend. there is a to high 0.0/high-sec to low-sec ratio.
If you camp a gate for too long eventually someone looking for fun will come find you.
Why would you want more empty space that you'll never go to? (it's pretty obvious that you haven't been outside of high sec)
Mike Voidstar wrote: Because they will shoot back and the Ambush Predators of EVE don't like it when that happens. That's why they cluster around the gates hoping to catch ships that can't mount guns.
They don't randomly form gate camps of pirates just hanging out in system and be like "hey buddy pirate, wanna come pirate with me?" that's how you get popped for being dumb. The gate campers are groups before they sit on the gate. This means that if someone else wants to sit on that gate there's going to be a fight. And when you have small gang activity you'll get some hit and run stuff and some stubborn fools that keep coming back loosing ship after ship for far to long of a duration. But i digressed. Pirates are not friends. There's no big pirate club for all pirates. Pirates will fight, if not for the plundered booty, then just for the sake of fighting.
Darth Kilth wrote: The ammount of pirates prefering to camp gates organised is far larger then the group who's willing to break them up, mostly because the following:
Gate campers actually SHOOT BACK Gate campers usually got a huge advantage with multiple safes, offgrid and on grid bookmarks. In the end those beautiful pvp fights you're envisioning won't happen because the PVPers camping those gates are also avoiding risks and people actually willing to shoot them know they're not going to get a fight anyway.
I'd love to shoot those gate campers, but I know I'll at most get them to stop sitting on the gate as long as my gang is in system, there will be no pvp just more boring gate camping. Ah this is an interesting point. But you have to understand something. The reason there are so few anti-pirate/gatecamp groups is because lowsec is wide open and empty. Finding a gatecamp to crash is near impossible, and getting there in time might be worse. With low sec being in the middle of the empires then those pvp groups are going to know where to get some action. In fact with so many fights so close to high sec there would be a chance for many more of those groups to exist. In turn new players would have a place to go experience some pvp without making a huge commitment.
Your concern about the fights not happening is arbitrary. If you've ever been fishing, you'll already have heard about the most basic concepts of the catch. That is your Bait and Tackle. ;)
Airto TLA wrote:This idea would work, if there were not at least 30 ways to screw over any decent sized hauler in low sec with very little chance of executing a proper defense.
All that would happen is the factions would become isolated and there would be price bubbles on certain items, since a "freighter to Jita" would not be the answer to any significant reginal variance anymore. IT would quickly **** off industrialist and they would quit and the game would get smaller. So you've left high sec one time, you were in your Itty mk 1 and landed next to a Gankathron. If those "price bubbles" got big enough, it would be worth while to have multiple people run either multiple industrials or security for 1 very large industrial to make bank on the profit margins. But in any case, right now to make any decent money with hauling you have to have a freighter because prices are so homogenized throughout empire that the margins are in fractions of an Isk so you need to move millions of cubic meters to see your work pay off. With a change like this haulers of all sizes will see at least some profit. Assuming they know how to scout or cloak or get away or really anything. It would be a great place to learn though. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
745
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 06:22:00 -
[637] - Quote
I must also ad that the gate camps on busy null sec entries are frequently broken up. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
helana Tsero
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 08:15:00 -
[638] - Quote
I think this is an excellent idea. Currently for me the empires mean nothing and every HS system feels exactly the same . ooh its a different shaped gate and station... different mission name but same stuff etc etc .... boring ... (thats why i moved to a WH)
Separating the empires up would enhance the exploration feeling for new players... Visiting another empire would actually require some planning and also a feeling of reward once you got there unscathed and if you had something valuable to trade then the isk reward would be very nice to.
My only concern is that every gate would be camped to the extent that anyone not in a cloaky or a organised/protected trade fleet would get smashed. Having lots of routes would help however It would be good to ensure there was always atleast one non camped route (even if only opened for 30 mins before being camped again).
One way to achieve this would be via random faction navy patrols that cant be tanked. Eg the navies appear in random choke points. with a random timer so you cant predict when they will appear or how long they will stay at a particular gate. The navy targets anyone who stays at the gate for longer than 30 sec (or the longest freighter align warp time) So gate camps will get broken up regularly and will need to shift to a new gate. Pirates would be forced to stay mobile and have good intel. Similar for traders.
anyway its not a perfect solution but more food for thought. "... ppl need to get out of caves and they will see something new... thats where is eve placed... not in cave..."-á| zoonr-Korsairs |-á QFT ! |
Kigyar
Safari club
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 09:37:00 -
[639] - Quote
+1 Completely support this idea it would open a lot of opportunities for almost everyone.
Also as said before there should be at least 5+routes betweend each border.and it should only be 4-5Jumps wide.
And for the post above rather than navies i'm pretty sure real merc corp securing lowsec and/or escorting throught those "borders" for a fee would emerge quickly. |
Daedra Blue
Atomic Biohazard
42
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 10:43:00 -
[640] - Quote
At first i thought this was a stupid idea but then i thought more and came up with these points.
EMPIRES MATTER
- Yes! It would make the lore driven war and empire separation a reality.
- It gives racial choice an even deeper meaning.
- Racial items now count for more then just art flavor.
ECONOMIC IMPACT
- As more people join the game Jita becomes more capped, as it is seen lately. This move will basically de-crown Jita as being the king hub and split Markets by Factions.
- Market split encourages REAL LIFE ECONOMICS.
- Jita population will spread by factions and home bases, removing this huge strain of a central trade hub.
- What you sell and were you sell now has a bigger impact, then just move it to Jita.
- New market Zones could emerge.
FACTIONAL WARFARE
- FW should be able to temporarily build connections to other empires over this low sec zone.
- Gives real meaning to FW, drives new emergent game-plays connecting two previously unrelated parties together.
- Gives reach market trades a reason to pump ISK into war to facilitate their business.
- Gives nullsec a true way to disrupt the markets and project power.
HAULING BECOMES A REAL PROFESSION
- With the coming hauler changes this could prove immensely beneficial.
- New hauler roles to fit into the new conditions.
- Special Blockade runners, specialized per faction specific trade goods transportation. Factions invest in order to export their own goods.
- transport contracts star to become actual game mechanics.
NEW THEMATIC FOR AN EXPANSION
- The Empires lose grip on the space they used to own?
- Empire presence recedes, bordering systems lose security status.
- FW capsuleers called to recreate security near bordering systems.
COUNTER ARGUMENTS
- It destabilize the market!. - Well i sure hope so, look at what moon good changes brought to null sec. The biggest war since ever.
|
|
Jalambo
Embasy of Federated Suns
6
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 13:16:00 -
[641] - Quote
If ops idea happens: Gate camping: wont change at all. As mentioned before there is no such thing as a big badass pirate coalition. Pirates fight each other for the camping privilage. It happens and it will continue to happen. And out of pirates there will be fw, escort, incursion fleets that would try to break through camps. (some of them happens with great efficiency already) Much more low sec entries : harder to camp all the gates.
But the main incentive is to make Empires distinct and that will happen if ops idea comes true.
There is no players scarcity in any of the empires. Not even remote regions like Khanid or Aridia.
Ppl wont leave their settled locations because of Jita. Jita overratted but only thing it has is reputation. There is no major daily product you cant find-buy in Rens,Ammar,Dodixie. Say if gallente lp store items, gallente ice, gallente minerals becomes hard to buy in other empires then it wont make the prices skyrocket in everyplace. Those items prices will be much affordable in its exqulusive regions but expensive others. And so what? This already happens. You can buy minerals in remote places cheaply and in major hubs raw materials comes with a markup. There is already markup price for transportation. Bring projectile ammo from minmatar to gallente and you can sell them for moreGĮŠ
Idea could create the feeling of being part of an empire, Would cause local products to be produced and consumed much more. And moving to other empires would become a little challenge as it should be. It would give a better sense for FW. And organizing of GĮĢtransportation,moving-relocating,attackingGĮĨ to other empire spaces should be much eaisier beacuse of common requirements.
For transportation issue: not everybody needs to be a hauler. If you want to move 100ks m3 of items and you cant do it on your own, well then hire somebody else. If you want to haul lower volumes, use blocaked runners; t1 haulers with wcs, nanos; t1 frigates fitted for hauling(my casual and cheap one can carry 1000m3) etcGĮŠ
I for myself would love to see more caldari ships then any other in caldari space (likewise in others). More organized FW fleets moving to break camps and fight in deep Lowsec. Organized trade fleets with escorts.
|
Ace Mooncat
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 13:53:00 -
[642] - Quote
This is a great idea +1 |
Sir Dragon
Einherjar Yggdrasils
24
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 16:12:00 -
[643] - Quote
NO!! I proclaim real life corporate warfare : [this is] An attempt to wreck Eve.
Not that my word over in CCP has some weight, as far as I know.... This is the worst idea that I have ever read: Not only should someone get slapped with a thawed fish, but also [sensored].
1) Fallacy: The post only asks for the comments of people that are already interested in the idea, thus there is no counter argument. The result is a statistic that is biased.
2) I consider P.V.P. as form of sport that is not advised for people over certain ages; thus, you are effectively taking a **** on all the old timers out there, whilst turning eve into some snot fest for encaffinated teenagers looking for their fix. Effectivelly placing CCP's Eve in the hands of people with no money and away from people that do. NO!? tell me that pvp does not raise the pulse beyond safe limits, FOOLS!!!!
3) I consider from my perception point pvp'ers as a bunch of people that sit in their eggs (homes) and get to feast upon the "fealings" of other players as they blast away their ships. this sport some how sustains them and is a bloody well known and documented phenomina known as phycological vampire-ism.
[content of letter is quite beyond the intellectual capability of normal people : do not expect me to respond unlest you show "minor control" over emotion / ego in response]. [Lt. Cmdr. Data]: "Perhaps. Perhaps not, sir." [Capt. Picard]: "That's hardly a scientific observation, Commander. "[Data]: "Captain, the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is, 'I do not know'. I do not know what that is, sir." |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
746
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 16:34:00 -
[644] - Quote
Sir Dragon wrote:NO!! I proclaim real life corporate warfare : [this is] An attempt to wreck Eve.
Not that my word over in CCP has some weight, as far as I know.... This is the worst idea that I have ever read: Not only should someone get slapped with a thawed fish, but also [sensored].
1) Fallacy: The post only asks for the comments of people that are already interested in the idea, thus there is no counter argument. The result is a statistic that is biased.
2) I consider P.V.P. as form of sport that is not advised for people over certain ages; thus, you are effectively taking a **** on all the old timers out there, whilst turning eve into some snot fest for encaffinated teenagers looking for their fix. Effectivelly placing CCP's Eve in the hands of people with no money and away from people that do. NO!? tell me that pvp does not raise the pulse beyond safe limits, FOOLS!!!!
3) I consider from my perception point pvp'ers as a bunch of people that sit in their eggs (homes) and get to feast upon the "fealings" of other players as they blast away their ships. this sport some how sustains them and is a bloody well known and documented phenomina known as phycological vampire-ism.
[content of letter is quite beyond the intellectual capability of normal people : do not expect me to respond unlest you show "minor control" over emotion / ego in response].
1. I ask for people who like the idea to say only "I like this idea" as a bump, since often I will get many likes for my post but the thread will fall into the abyss never to be seen again, those who feel vocally opposed will post anyway and I do not tell them to do otherwise.
2.Eve being a pvp centric game it should only be logical that the pvp has a direct impact on the economy of the game. Pvp isn't necessarily just a little side game people play like a battle in World of Tanks of League of Legends, it is a meaningful impaction part of the game.
3. Err what?
All those big words, you could try to spell them right. You would think a intellectual would know how to spell feelings, effectively, and censored (of course that isn't all you misspelled).
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Utremi Fasolasi
The Jagged Edge Rebel Alliance of New Eden
263
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 17:55:00 -
[645] - Quote
OP: why do you hate EVE so much? |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
44
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 19:23:00 -
[646] - Quote
helana Tsero wrote:My only concern is that every gate would be camped to the extent that anyone not in a cloaky or a organised/protected trade fleet would get smashed. Having lots of routes would help however It would be good to ensure there was always atleast one non camped route (even if only opened for 30 mins before being camped again).
This is actually not an issue. Even now there are countless routes from each empire through low sec. There are also already lowsec short cuts from one empire to another that will take you through a very few low sec jumps too. You have to look at the map in 3 dimensions too. Its not just a straight bridge between 4 slices of pie. Its more like a 4 slices of extra melty cheese pizza with the cheese stuck to the top of the box too. The slices of the pizza when pulled apart slightly are still all connected by the cheese even though the crust is no longer connected. And unless the moved high sec out to border null, then there will always be a back way too.
Also to get all the gates camped simultaneously wouldn't just be hard logistically but you'd also have competition to worry about. I promise you this, pirates won't play the "I was here first, find another gate" game. Pirates will passively keep gates from being camped. Especially when they figure out they can fly their own logistics or rent out a safe route for lots of moneys. Then they might become a type of protection corp.
No need for npcs as long as there's profit to be made. |
Blastil
The Reblier Alliance
79
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 19:45:00 -
[647] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: If Solitude has so many people why don't they make there own **** there? Secondly, the goods would be made LOCALLY. Goods don't just magically materialize in Jita and go everywhere, they are built somewhere, most notably not in Solitude or Jita. Solitude doesn't have anyone making the **** people need so it is imported. Gallente space would have enough people to make most everything so it would not be imported.
Because No matter what you do, racial flavoring in EVE would mandate that ALL goods from the other 3 empires flavors would have to be imported. This is precisely my point. Not all goods would double, like in solitude, all t1 gallente flavor items are roughly at jita costs. However, all goods which are NOT gallente now cost double what they did before, BECUASE THEY HAVE TO BE IMPORTED, EXACTLY LIKE YOU SAID.
Quote: Learn to read. Actually I think you may have purposely misquoted me to back up your own arguments by attacking my charecter.
Maybe you should try not attacking my character either. A viator can't even haul a battle-cruiser, by the way. It BARELY fits a cruiser if you gimp the hell out of it. I know this because I actually fly one. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
747
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 19:47:00 -
[648] - Quote
some thoughts about the idea of sec status being dynamic based on FW, i am not sure FW should be the entity in charge of this.
What incentive would a militia have for bridging two empires? Whatever they do will benefit the other side just as much and they can't enter the other empires side safely without alts.
Perhaps the idea for having pirate faction warfare could come into play. Every system will have a Concord beacon on the gates and just like an SBU in null sec you need more than half of them active for the system to be "claimed" by Concord. Pirates can shoot these beacons down to 0 health to reduce the sec status and anti pirates can come in and repair them. The beacons could have maybe 1.5 million ehp and the systems would have their sec status flip constantly. The current sec status of these systems would not be visible on the map so that pirates can have more traffic come through. Negative sec status players would not experience any of the normal consequences they would get from being pirates in true hisec but they would still get concordokken for shooting anyone.
Fixing the beacons would giving everyone in the fleet that did the most RR to the beacons a share of a fixed LP reward from concord and pirates would just have the option of destroying them so they could camp or get pirate faction lp (maybe?). https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
747
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 19:55:00 -
[649] - Quote
Blastil wrote:
Because No matter what you do, racial flavoring in EVE would mandate that ALL goods from the other 3 empires flavors would have to be imported. This is precisely my point. Not all goods would double, like in solitude, all t1 gallente flavor items are roughly at jita costs. However, all goods which are NOT gallente now cost double what they did before, BECUASE THEY HAVE TO BE IMPORTED, EXACTLY LIKE YOU SAID.
General items would still be the same cost, everything else being more expensive is the point of this. lp items other than fully built ships would be trivial to move, ores that are more common in other areas are still plentiful enough that other factions ships can be built for only a slightly higher markup ,and ice is only used by capital ships and poses so really the general consumer won't be affected and a pos operator could always just use another races pos.
So my warp disruptor II's won't be 200% more expensive and my drake in dodixie might be only 5-20% more expensive. If I want a caldari navy invuln i can get a buzzard and move it myself or it might only be slightly more expensive and not worth my time. If Ice is to expensive ill just start a gallente pos. If my chimera in sinq laison is to expensive to operate I am already importing fuel so what exactly changed?
Also my point still stands about it being trivial to move ships yourself. Black Frog won't be the only people capable of moving things. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
44
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 20:46:00 -
[650] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Sir Dragon wrote:NO!! I proclaim real life corporate warfare : [this is] An attempt to wreck Eve.
Not that my word over in CCP has some weight, as far as I know.... This is the worst idea that I have ever read: Not only should someone get slapped with a thawed fish, but also [sensored].
1) Fallacy: The post only asks for the comments of people that are already interested in the idea, thus there is no counter argument. The result is a statistic that is biased.
2) I consider P.V.P. as form of sport that is not advised for people over certain ages; thus, you are effectively taking a **** on all the old timers out there, whilst turning eve into some snot fest for encaffinated teenagers looking for their fix. Effectivelly placing CCP's Eve in the hands of people with no money and away from people that do. NO!? tell me that pvp does not raise the pulse beyond safe limits, FOOLS!!!!
3) I consider from my perception point pvp'ers as a bunch of people that sit in their eggs (homes) and get to feast upon the "fealings" of other players as they blast away their ships. this sport some how sustains them and is a bloody well known and documented phenomina known as phycological vampire-ism.
[content of letter is quite beyond the intellectual capability of normal people : do not expect me to respond unlest you show "minor control" over emotion / ego in response]. 1. I ask for people who like the idea to say only "I like this idea" as a bump, since often I will get many likes for my post but the thread will fall into the abyss never to be seen again, those who feel vocally opposed will post anyway and I do not tell them to do otherwise. 2.Eve being a pvp centric game it should only be logical that the pvp has a direct impact on the economy of the game. Pvp isn't necessarily just a little side game people play like a battle in World of Tanks of League of Legends, it is a meaningful part of the game. 3. Err what? Loosing me here. Sounds like whining about pirates not being honorable or something. All those big words, you could try to spell them right. You would think a intellectual would know how to spell feelings, effectively, and censored (of course that isn't all you misspelled). Ted this guy is obviously a troll. First of all he actually read nothing but the title. The "points" he's trying to make are all opinions based solely on his own limited perception (he said so himself). And his post if full of misspelling, emotion and ego, but claims all replies must show *minor control* over emotion/ego because of the intellectuallity of the "letter".
This leaves 2 options. Either he's not a very good troll or he's a 12 year old that thinks someone in their 40s doesn't want pvp because the exilleration will cause their blood pressure to raise beyond safe limits, ie a heart attack/stroke.
Wait till he finds out that the average age of eve is in the mid 30's. ! |
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
749
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 20:49:00 -
[651] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote: Ted this guy is obviously a troll. First of all he actually read nothing but the title. The "points" he's trying to make are all opinions based solely on his own limited perception (he said so himself). And his post if full of misspelling, emotion and ego, but claims all replies must show *minor control* over emotion/ego because of the intellectuallity of the "letter".
This leaves 2 options. Either he's not a very good troll or he's a 12 year old that thinks someone in their 40s doesn't want pvp because the exilleration will cause their blood pressure to raise beyond safe limits, ie a heart attack/stroke.
Wait till he finds out that the average age of eve is in the mid 30's. !
could be real, i have encountered many spergs in my time on the internet. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Blastil
The Reblier Alliance
79
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 21:42:00 -
[652] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Blastil wrote:
Because No matter what you do, racial flavoring in EVE would mandate that ALL goods from the other 3 empires flavors would have to be imported. This is precisely my point. Not all goods would double, like in solitude, all t1 gallente flavor items are roughly at jita costs. However, all goods which are NOT gallente now cost double what they did before, BECUASE THEY HAVE TO BE IMPORTED, EXACTLY LIKE YOU SAID.
General items would still be the same cost, everything else being more expensive is the point of this. lp items other than fully built ships would be trivial to move, ores that are more common in other areas are still plentiful enough that other factions ships can be built for only a slightly higher markup ,and ice is only used by capital ships and poses so really the general consumer won't be affected and a pos operator could always just use another races pos. So my warp disruptor II's won't be 200% more expensive and my drake in dodixie might be only 5-20% more expensive. If I want a caldari navy invuln i can get a buzzard and move it myself or it might only be slightly more expensive and not worth my time and buy it where I am. If Ice is to expensive ill just start a gallente pos. If my chimera in sinq laison is to expensive to operate I am already importing fuel so what exactly changed? Also my point still stands about it being trivial to move ships yourself. Black Frog won't be the only people capable of moving things. think about it like the difference between importing goods to hawaii and importing goods to australia. everything in hawaii is expensive because it is a tiny island that can't make it's own things and there isn't a big enough market to warrant transporting lots of goods there in mass, but Australia is huge and can make most of its own things, and things from outside the country are only somewhat more expensive because they will sell quickly when they get there.
So what you're saying is that prices WILL go up? Which means that I"m right. Which means that this is a BAD IDEA. Eve already has ENOUGH inflation, espeically in the cost of T2 goods, which will dramatically increase if this post were to be listened to.
Let me address a specific question you raised, about "what exactly changed".
I'm guessing about 75% of all EVE freight is handled by Freighters. This is because they have the best cost/benifit ratio of EVE ships, and actually a relatively low barrier of entry. Essentially shipping in EVE is required because certain goods are made on different sides of the universe. Most shipping happens with raw resources. Jita, Dodixie, Rens and Amarr are important for 2 reasons:
Quantity: When manufacturing large numbers of goods, quantity is needed. No one single region in EVE has sufficent quantity of production to support buy orders for a Titan, for example. Additionally, ABC ores have to be imported to highsec, then jumped to a central location to sell. Without a central market hub like Jita, it would actually become prohibitively expensive to undertake the more complex actions in the EVE economy that form the basis of 0.0 and lowsec PVP engines. Disrupting freighter traffic will put massive dents in the ability of EVE to manufacture ships and items in the economy. Doing this would create massive disruptions in freighter traffic, and therefore, reduce EVE's ability to manufacture, and the cost of manufacturing on the scale needed to create ships for PVP.
Concentration: Time is money, and is related to Quantity, except, that without market hubs (and freighters especially) being fueled by a constant stream of ALL kinds of items from ALL over the universe, Places like Jita are neccisary to fulfill the concentration needs of EVE. Concentration is a demand of market hubs, especially in games, because no one wants to waste 2 hours of their life, trying to fly 25 jumps just to find a module that they need for their Caracal. This means that the market hubs in EVE will continue just as they had, except prices will now be dramatically higher, since players who could be incursioning and running missions at isk/hour ratios of 100 million or better are now flying viators around lowsec, and they'll be damned if they're not going to make as much money.
conclusion: Ending freighter traffic by making eve impassable, will simply result in jump freighter traffic which will increase costs (especially for jump freighters! Making this game EVEN MORE NOOB UNFRIENDLY) or it will merely put an end to cheep commodities.
Either way, costs go up, as you said, and either way, its horrible for this game. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
44
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 21:54:00 -
[653] - Quote
Utremi Fasolasi wrote:OP: why do you hate EVE so much?
If he hated eve so much he wouldn't be here proposing awesome changes for everyone to enjoy. Just because you can't understand it doesn't mean its bad. Actually stagnation is the worst thing for eve. There is a trend you'll notice in daily population peaks. After a new expansion the daily population peaks. It slowly dwindles down over time until a new expansion. This is because of stagnation. People get bored of the new or revamped changes because they really don't change too much. The same old systems we have in game are the same for the most part, they just have a new paintjob. And they only generate content temporarily.
A change like this will cause space itself to be dynamic. Every time you cross to another empire you get that exilleration of potentially losing your ship/pod/cargo and that feeling of success by making it across safely. This change also gives people a reason to go through low sec, opportunity. Not just to see what's there. This is what would keep it from being just another boring change like new scanning system that is pretty but does the same thing, or a bounty system that got fixed though tthe majority of people don't even care anymore. This change would be an intricate part of the eve lives of most everyone. Which is why they might have a hard time pushing forward with it. They may have this catagorized as a "Jesus" level feature change.
If you think that idea gives off "I hate eve" sentiment, then you'll love the idea I would have to go along with that change.....
I propose that all empire stations can/will only allow production of their factions ships. It makes sense that a minmatar station would not want to build an amarr ship that would represent the idea of slavery to them or at least remind them of it. Also as a corp for a faction, you would think that faction would frown on such activity. Then you would have to import cross faction ships or set up a PoS for production (which would be limited of course). Also not sure how FW stations work, but I think those stations and null outposts should have no restrictions and if needed give corp/alliance ownership to the fw stations. Maybe with non-adjustable settings. (Flat tax rate/repair cost/standing based docking fees)
But yeah this would be a huge change with lots of implications with a redistribution of production from high count manufacturing stations to POSs. And would add addition cost to cross faction ships in each empire that would give built-in incentive to haul. And yeah its different than the crappy little islands we have now because there are actually consumers in the 4 split up empires. Not just 10 guys that move their own stuff. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
750
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 21:57:00 -
[654] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:TL;Dr if anyone fell for a troll it was you brah. Appreciate the support though. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
3820
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 22:39:00 -
[655] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:General items would still be the same cost, everything else being more expensive is the point of this.
Why would LP items be more expensive when you have LP stores for every faction in Caldari space already? Run missions at the best LP/hr Minmatar agents, redeem the LP in The Forge, ship the products to Jita. No need to cross the proposed lowsec barrier thanks to jump clones.
Commander Ted wrote:Also my point still stands about it being trivial to move ships yourself. Black Frog won't be the only people capable of moving things.
If it's going to be so trivial to move things back and forth, what's the point of the low sec separation of hisec empire space?
Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
1214
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 22:47:00 -
[656] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:Commander Ted wrote:General items would still be the same cost, everything else being more expensive is the point of this. Why would LP items be more expensive when you have LP stores for every faction in Caldari space already? Run missions at the best LP/hr Minmatar agents, redeem the LP in The Forge, ship the products to Jita. No need to cross the proposed lowsec barrier thanks to jump clones. Commander Ted wrote:Also my point still stands about it being trivial to move ships yourself. Black Frog won't be the only people capable of moving things. If it's going to be so trivial to move things back and forth, what's the point of the low sec separation of hisec empire space? I could only imagine that non-allied faction stations would be removed from "hostile" areas. I would also like to see racial separation on manufacturing, ex there is a extra 10% waste for manufacturing a gallente blueprint in amarr or caldari plant. Ideas for Drone ImprovementTwitter Account-á @Omnathious |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
44
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 23:30:00 -
[657] - Quote
Blastil wrote: So what you're saying is that prices WILL go up? Which means that I"m right. Which means that this is a BAD IDEA. Eve already has ENOUGH inflation, espeically in the cost of T2 goods, which will dramatically increase if this post were to be listened to.
Let me address a specific question you raised, about "what exactly changed".
I'm guessing about 75% of all EVE freight is handled by Freighters. This is because they have the best cost/benifit ratio of EVE ships, and actually a relatively low barrier of entry. Essentially shipping in EVE is required because certain goods are made on different sides of the universe. Most shipping happens with raw resources. Jita, Dodixie, Rens and Amarr are important for 2 reasons:
Quantity: When manufacturing large numbers of goods, quantity is needed. No one single region in EVE has sufficent quantity of production to support buy orders for a Titan, for example. Additionally, ABC ores have to be imported to highsec, then jumped to a central location to sell. Without a central market hub like Jita, it would actually become prohibitively expensive to undertake the more complex actions in the EVE economy that form the basis of 0.0 and lowsec PVP engines. Disrupting freighter traffic will put massive dents in the ability of EVE to manufacture ships and items in the economy. Doing this would create massive disruptions in freighter traffic, and therefore, reduce EVE's ability to manufacture, and the cost of manufacturing on the scale needed to create ships for PVP.
Concentration: Time is money, and is related to Quantity, except, that without market hubs (and freighters especially) being fueled by a constant stream of ALL kinds of items from ALL over the universe, Places like Jita are neccisary to fulfill the concentration needs of EVE. Concentration is a demand of market hubs, especially in games, because no one wants to waste 2 hours of their life, trying to fly 25 jumps just to find a module that they need for their Caracal. This means that the market hubs in EVE will continue just as they had, except prices will now be dramatically higher, since players who could be incursioning and running missions at isk/hour ratios of 100 million or better are now flying viators around lowsec, and they'll be damned if they're not going to make as much money.
conclusion: Ending freighter traffic by making eve impassable, will simply result in jump freighter traffic which will increase costs (especially for jump freighters! Making this game EVEN MORE NOOB UNFRIENDLY) or it will merely put an end to cheep commodities.
Either way, costs go up, as you said, and either way, its horrible for this game.
The first thing you need to understand (in this specific post) is what inflation is. Inflation is not the price goods increasing, inflation is the value of your currency decreasing. T2 goods are currently high priced mainly because the supply of T2 build components are limited by passive moon harvesting that was then recently revamped to require different build requirements which will keep prices high until there is enough supply. Also with the wars going on and moons flipflopping demand will rise while supply will dwindle.
About freighting stuff, I'm curious to know what you based that guess on, though that really doesn't matter anyways. I would say the vast majority of freighter hauling is to get stuff to your local trade hub for very small profit or to move things from one trade hub to another for also another very small profit margin. This is the reason hauling is a worthless profession. Because freighhters can make profit off of such minimal minimal margins without wasting their time. That causes other haulers to not be worth using. With this change freighters would still be used but mostly just for the first item I mentioned but also potentially from one trade hub to a probable new trade satilite on the bordes of the empire. Which brings up the next point.
Trade hubs. They were not put in the game as a designated tradehub system. They just happened to be the most convenient place for people to sell their stuff where the most possible consumers will be. The reason jita is the biggest is because of its location in the middle of some major crossroads. There will always be major trade hubs. Even if this change does disolve jita,dodixie,rens,amarr and hek there will be a new place where people will see a social trend and everyone will move their stuff there. In fact new trade hubs would be the reason the old ones would disolve.
Also no idea what you're talking about with buy orders for a titan. You can't put titans or super carriers on the market because u can't build them or dock them in station... That just shows how little you know about null sec manufacturing. I'm also against the incursion isk fountain and I have my own agenda against mission running in another thread. I do disagree with your viator perception but in any case, I'm very much for any nerf to someone in high sec making 100mil/hour.
Costs will only go up to the point where the reward will outweigh the risk. But of course that's mostly just going to affect things that can't be produced locally like meta and faction gear unless they limit production of certain items to certain empires.. Otherwise there's not going to be a very big change. This won't be the doomsday change you think it will. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
44
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 23:33:00 -
[658] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Erutpar Ambient wrote:TL;Dr if anyone fell for a troll it was you brah. Appreciate the support though. Actually I took that as an opportunity to post an idea I had about if this did get implemented.
I do hope u took the time to read it. Feed back from you would be interesting. |
stanislav romanoff
Masters of the Deck
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 23:55:00 -
[659] - Quote
viator with T2 rigs and cargo expandera can hold under 12k of cargo thus a BS isn't going to fit in it. |
Nolan David
Mandalorian Forge
3
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 00:11:00 -
[660] - Quote
This is a really great idea. I'm a bear who hates PvP, and I still support this fully. The rest of this post is a message to the general audience who are against this idea.
It seems most of the complaints are along the lines of, "You're allowing PvPers to prosper off us, when we don't even want to encounter them!".
Listen, you should encounter them. They should kill you. You should have to strategize around it. Have you guys complaining not seen a sci-fi show or movie? It doesn't matter where they are... 30 minutes can barely go by without a hostile attacking the good guys. It's unrealistic that in EVE, we can run around endlessly to opposite ends of the star cluster without any reasonable fear of being attacked.
On top of this, you still do have the option to avoid the pirates as much as you can now. Trade within your own faction's part of space. If you want to trade in other areas, take a shuttle there, and procure your goods locally.
If you insist on trading across borders, get clan mates / hire a merc fleet to protect you. Think about how much better this would make the game. You'd see massive fleets rolling across the universe, and occasionally a fleet of brave pirate willing to intercept. Most times however - as it is today too - if you're rolling around in a fleet of 12 Paladins, you're most likely going to be left alone by 99% of pirate corps, let's be honest. They aren't going to magically have a fleet that size in the system you're travelling in, and most gate camps could not withstand that amount of firepower. If the popularity of border systems were to attract larger gate camps, you'd see more pirates in general, meaning there is probably an upper limit to how large the camps will get, as any larger will entice pirate vs pirate warfare for claim of the camp.
It's a great idea, adds risk, variety.... +1 |
|
Daedra Blue
Atomic Biohazard
45
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 12:21:00 -
[661] - Quote
Sir Dragon wrote:NO!! I proclaim real life corporate warfare : [this is] An attempt to wreck Eve.
Not that my word over in CCP has some weight, as far as I know.... This is the worst idea that I have ever read: Not only should someone get slapped with a thawed fish, but also [sensored].
1) Fallacy: The post only asks for the comments of people that are already interested in the idea, thus there is no counter argument. The result is a statistic that is biased.
2) I consider P.V.P. as form of sport that is not advised for people over certain ages; thus, you are effectively taking a **** on all the old timers out there, whilst turning eve into some snot fest for encaffinated teenagers looking for their fix. Effectivelly placing CCP's Eve in the hands of people with no money and away from people that do. NO!? tell me that pvp does not raise the pulse beyond safe limits, FOOLS!!!!
3) I consider from my perception point pvp'ers as a bunch of people that sit in their eggs (homes) and get to feast upon the "fealings" of other players as they blast away their ships. this sport some how sustains them and is a bloody well known and documented phenomina known as phycological vampire-ism.
[content of letter is quite beyond the intellectual capability of normal people : do not expect me to respond unlest you show "minor control" over emotion / ego in response].
Your killboard! http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/combat_record.php?type=player&name=Sir+Dragon#losses Have you EVER?! killed a player? EVER!? Now go out shoot somebody come back then talk about PVP. Talking about stuff you don't know about does not count as an unbiased opinion of the opposing party.
Better yet join a PvP corp, RvB, EvE University, learn about EvE instead of just hating what you don't understand. |
Daedra Blue
Atomic Biohazard
45
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 12:28:00 -
[662] - Quote
Airto TLA wrote:This idea would work, if there were not at least 30 ways to screw over any decent sized hauler in low sec with very little chance of executing a proper defense.
All that would happen is the factions would become isolated and there would be price bubbles on certain items, since a "freighter to Jita" would not be the answer to any significant reginal variance anymore. IT would quickly **** off industrialist and they would quit and the game would get smaller.
Yes because industrial hate price baubles, they would make too much money and they will quit. Economics 101, i guess you didn't read that part. In fact the end user consumer would be most affected the industrial have the most to win. What do you even think industrial means? Do you think it means you train industrial ships and start hauling stuff from one part to another? |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
750
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 14:14:00 -
[663] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:Commander Ted wrote:General items would still be the same cost, everything else being more expensive is the point of this. Why would LP items be more expensive when you have LP stores for every faction in Caldari space already? Run missions at the best LP/hr Minmatar agents, redeem the LP in The Forge, ship the products to Jita. No need to cross the proposed lowsec barrier thanks to jump clones. Commander Ted wrote:Also my point still stands about it being trivial to move ships yourself. Black Frog won't be the only people capable of moving things. If it's going to be so trivial to move things back and forth, what's the point of the low sec separation of hisec empire space?
Ya got me.
I guess I should rephrase what I said in the second statement then. It would be easy enough to move your own **** that hiring black frog may not be worth while, but risky enough that pirate death might happen and accomplishing this frequently would not be worthwhile unless it is your profession. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
750
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 14:15:00 -
[664] - Quote
stanislav romanoff wrote:viator with T2 rigs and cargo expandera can hold under 12k of cargo thus a BS isn't going to fit in it. I didn't say that/ https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
750
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 14:30:00 -
[665] - Quote
Blastil wrote: So what you're saying is that prices WILL go up? Which means that I"m right. Which means that this is a BAD IDEA. Eve already has ENOUGH inflation, espeically in the cost of T2 goods, which will dramatically increase if this post were to be listened to.
Let me address a specific question you raised, about "what exactly changed".
I'm guessing about 75% of all EVE freight is handled by Freighters. This is because they have the best cost/benifit ratio of EVE ships, and actually a relatively low barrier of entry. Essentially shipping in EVE is required because certain goods are made on different sides of the universe. Most shipping happens with raw resources. Jita, Dodixie, Rens and Amarr are important for 2 reasons:
Quantity: When manufacturing large numbers of goods, quantity is needed. No one single region in EVE has sufficent quantity of production to support buy orders for a Titan, for example. Additionally, ABC ores have to be imported to highsec, then jumped to a central location to sell. Without a central market hub like Jita, it would actually become prohibitively expensive to undertake the more complex actions in the EVE economy that form the basis of 0.0 and lowsec PVP engines. Disrupting freighter traffic will put massive dents in the ability of EVE to manufacture ships and items in the economy. Doing this would create massive disruptions in freighter traffic, and therefore, reduce EVE's ability to manufacture, and the cost of manufacturing on the scale needed to create ships for PVP.
Concentration: Time is money, and is related to Quantity, except, that without market hubs (and freighters especially) being fueled by a constant stream of ALL kinds of items from ALL over the universe, Places like Jita are neccisary to fulfill the concentration needs of EVE. Concentration is a demand of market hubs, especially in games, because no one wants to waste 2 hours of their life, trying to fly 25 jumps just to find a module that they need for their Caracal. This means that the market hubs in EVE will continue just as they had, except prices will now be dramatically higher, since players who could be incursioning and running missions at isk/hour ratios of 100 million or better are now flying viators around lowsec, and they'll be damned if they're not going to make as much money.
conclusion: Ending freighter traffic by making eve impassable, will simply result in jump freighter traffic which will increase costs (especially for jump freighters! Making this game EVEN MORE NOOB UNFRIENDLY) or it will merely put an end to cheep commodities.
Either way, costs go up, as you said, and either way, its horrible for this game.
SOME prices differences are the entire point of this change through and through. Only ice and some specific ores would see a major price gap between areas. Your claiming that everything will go up, which it won't. Isolated markets encourage some price gaps in items but items in high demand would probably settle in the same price equilibrium. Items that have price gaps would be imported, making the importers money, thus one of the main objectives of this would be accomplished. A noob can use the badger they are using now and find a wormhole or have a friend scout them, on the other side of the trip they would make more isk than they had before. What noob has 1.5 billion isk and invested enough skill points for a freighter anyway.
T2 goods would not change in price because they are built locally.
0.0 alliances and low sec who currently bring in everything from Jita could under the new system buy things from each of the four hubs, or just the one closest to them. It really doesn't matter because all of the hubs will be getting null sec imports based on the alliances in proximity to them, so each of them would have 4 smaller industrial bases that add up to be equal to what was before. The freighter traffic would unhindered Intra-empire, bears would make items locally and sell them locally causing dodixie to be 1/4 of today's jita WITH EVERYTHING IN STOCK.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Blastil
The Reblier Alliance
79
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 15:27:00 -
[666] - Quote
[quote=Erutpar Ambient]
Addresing the issue of inflation: I'm not talking about current inflation, (Which is a totally different issue) Im talking about the inflation wich will result from Cmdr. Ted's HORRIBLE idea. I don't pretend to understand the current market issues, and I'm not commenting on them here, only about how much of a mistake this would be.
About freighting stuff, You have no idea what you're talking about. Hauling is quite a viable profession, margins aren't all that low, and if you can invest a few hundred million ISK into your cargo, you'll make a tidy profit. This applies to small-size hauling too. You just have to be smart about what you haul. Generally speaking though, hauling IS used to get goods to market, I'm not concerened about hauling as a profession. It is fine, it is well balanced, and money is to be made. Contract hauling doesn't exist in EVE for reasons completely unrelated to there not being a demand for it. Truthfully, there is a demand for it, but the game mechanics make it next to impossible to fill with complete strangers, so you rely on services like black and red frogs to ship things because you can trust them (usually) to get cargo to destination.
Having played this game 3x longer than thou hast certainly has enlightend me as to how Jita, Rens, Amarr, and Dodixie got their place as trade hubs. I understand why and how trade hubs form, and clearly stated in my previous post why they're important. I dont' care what systems they're based in, nor was I concerened about them disappearing, I'm concerened about what will happen to the prices AT those hubs, wherever they are. Galaxy wide prices would all go up as a result.
Please re-read my post carefuly. Nowhere in there did I talk about buy orders for titans. I understand nul-sec manufacturing fine, because I DID IT.
The problem with this proposal is that without minerals being hauled in to places like Jita regularly there wouldn't be sufficent quantity of material to do things LIKE build titans. You'd have to setup 4 logistic chains to 4 market hubs to gather resources which would greatly increase the cost of ALL types of ships to 0.0 alliances.
You can disagree with my preception of the VIator all you like, I fly it, regularly.
Prices will go up, you're right. They'll go up so high that you'll regret ever listening to commander ted, because suddenly HACS are going to cost 250 - 300 milion, and all your shiney ships are going to be dramatically more expensive too.
This isn't a hauling boost, its the death of a profession, and the end of casual fun in EVE forever. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
45
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 18:00:00 -
[667] - Quote
Blastil wrote:[quote=Erutpar Ambient] Addresing the issue of inflation: I'm not talking about current inflation, (Which is a totally different issue) Im talking about the inflation wich will result from Cmdr. Ted's HORRIBLE idea. I don't pretend to understand the current market issues, and I'm not commenting on them here, only about how much of a mistake this would be.
About freighting stuff, You have no idea what you're talking about. Hauling is quite a viable profession, margins aren't all that low, and if you can invest a few hundred million ISK into your cargo, you'll make a tidy profit. This applies to small-size hauling too. You just have to be smart about what you haul. Generally speaking though, hauling IS used to get goods to market, I'm not concerened about hauling as a profession. It is fine, it is well balanced, and money is to be made. Contract hauling doesn't exist in EVE for reasons completely unrelated to there not being a demand for it. Truthfully, there is a demand for it, but the game mechanics make it next to impossible to fill with complete strangers, so you rely on services like black and red frogs to ship things because you can trust them (usually) to get cargo to destination.
Having played this game 3x longer than thou hast certainly has enlightend me as to how Jita, Rens, Amarr, and Dodixie got their place as trade hubs. I understand why and how trade hubs form, and clearly stated in my previous post why they're important. I dont' care what systems they're based in, nor was I concerened about them disappearing, I'm concerened about what will happen to the prices AT those hubs, wherever they are. Galaxy wide prices would all go up as a result.
Please re-read my post carefuly. Nowhere in there did I talk about buy orders for titans. I understand nul-sec manufacturing fine, because I DID IT.
The problem with this proposal is that without minerals being hauled in to places like Jita regularly there wouldn't be sufficent quantity of material to do things LIKE build titans. You'd have to setup 4 logistic chains to 4 market hubs to gather resources which would greatly increase the cost of ALL types of ships to 0.0 alliances.
You can disagree with my preception of the VIator all you like, I fly it, regularly.
Prices will go up, you're right. They'll go up so high that you'll regret ever listening to commander ted, because suddenly HACS are going to cost 250 - 300 milion, and all your shiney ships are going to be dramatically more expensive too.
This isn't a hauling boost, its the death of a profession, and the end of casual fun in EVE forever.
Ok, I'm going to take a different approach this time. There are a few things that you said in your post that I have issue with. But I'm going to keep it simple here and ignore them.
If you live in amarr. How much extra do you think it will cost to build an omen? Where do you think that extra cost is coming from?
How much extra do you think a zealot will cost? Where do you think that cost will come from also?
And about the whole titan build thing, I must first disagree that there will be any affect on titan builds. But if it actually did end up hindering the production of supercaps then I'd be happy. I am for anything that diminishes cap production. |
Arya Regnar
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
10
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 21:01:00 -
[668] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Arya Regnar wrote:This thing had to be brought back by the dark arts of necroposting a few times uh? Not enough time between posts for necro. That's because you are forcing it by keeping it alive .
EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
752
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 21:03:00 -
[669] - Quote
Arya Regnar wrote:That's because you are forcing it by keeping it alive .
Not necroing and I am not the only person posting here. I always reply when someone is against the idea. I have it in my signature so people do click on it from the many posts I make outside this thread. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
46
|
Posted - 2013.06.29 01:57:00 -
[670] - Quote
[quote=Blastil]
Never going to get that response from you? |
|
Sotah Osodin
Aliastra Gallente Federation
12
|
Posted - 2013.07.01 20:53:00 -
[671] - Quote
Pretty please give us four empires instead of one big empire blob. |
Orac Tauros
Logistical Nightmare.
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 09:25:00 -
[672] - Quote
It's stuff like this that keeps EVE interesting +1 |
Liafcipe9000
Smeghead Empire
7297
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 12:04:00 -
[673] - Quote
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
NO. You may gain the knowledge, but you will lose your belief, with all its mystery and comfort. If there was proof, absolute and certain, there is an afterlife, why not quit this life, and be done with it? Ponder about these things all your life, and you're a philosopher. Compress these ponderings into a couple of pages, and you'll go mad. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
758
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 12:08:00 -
[674] - Quote
Liafcipe9000 wrote:HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA NO.
care to elaborate?
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Purps
Anatidae Rising
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 12:25:00 -
[675] - Quote
It might help to allow Concord to patrol both sides of the empire gates.
So as per high, in Empire Concord can react wherever they like.
However, in low-sec on empire gates, they can only operate on the grid the gate is sat in. That will actually prevent the empire gate camping and allow people in, if you still want to pirate then you'll have to do it properly without blobbing the hi-sec entrance.
Also changing the power of gate batteries (guns) as the sec gets lower would help, so if you want to camp a 0.4 you'd better bring Logi and BS/BC, if you want to camp a 0.1 or null you can have frigs in there reasonably safely. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
758
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 16:43:00 -
[676] - Quote
Purps wrote:It might help to allow Concord to patrol both sides of the empire gates.
So as per high, in Empire Concord can react wherever they like.
However, in low-sec on empire gates, they can only operate on the grid the gate is sat in. That will actually prevent the empire gate camping and allow people in, if you still want to pirate then you'll have to do it properly without blobbing the hi-sec entrance.
Also changing the power of gate batteries (guns) as the sec gets lower would help, so if you want to camp a 0.4 you'd better bring Logi and BS/BC, if you want to camp a 0.1 or null you can have frigs in there reasonably safely. or you just set up the camp 1 jump over.
It would make more sense just to have lots of entrances.
Though I like the diminishing power of gate guns. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
204
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 17:06:00 -
[677] - Quote
Do both. Lots of entrances *and* Concord protects both sides of a high sec gate.
Yes, you just move your camp one gate in, but if there are more systems and connections this becomes more viable for those who would try Lowsec but feel that just crossing into it is dangerously stupid. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
758
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 19:45:00 -
[678] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:Do both. Lots of entrances *and* Concord protects both sides of a high sec gate.
Yes, you just move your camp one gate in, but if there are more systems and connections this becomes more viable for those who would try Lowsec but feel that just crossing into it is dangerously stupid.
you should prefer that the entrance systems be the ones that are camped.
On a hisec gate you can mwd back to gate and be fairly certain youll make it back safe, what is the difference between running into a camp on the first jump and doing it half way through other than that? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
204
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 20:16:00 -
[679] - Quote
Perception.
You want people in Low Sec. The people you want won't go there because they die upon entering, giving them a bad impression of the entire experience. For the most part they expect to die as they go deeper in, but getting ganked as soon as they jump through is just ridiculous for the people you want to attract.
The current perception is that .4 is a wall of death. There is no 'popping in to check it out', acclimating to the new environment, etc... There is just warp in a ship more valuable than a shuttle and watch it explode, and then lose your pod with it.
This is not the reality. I've gone in low sec many times for many reasons and not been ganked. However, of the many times I have died to PvP action, all but 3 have been on the entrance gate to low sec. All but one of those got my pod too. Now I just don't bother going there for any reason unless I need something from where my stuff is stashed out in Providence.
Perception is a funny thing though. We tend to ignore pleasant things unless they are truly spectacular, and remember even mildly unpleasant things, magnifying them far out of proportion.
If low sec was set up so that the entrance gates could not be camped, then you would get more people willing to pop in and try some exploration or try out a shallow low sec mission agent. It's just perception. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
758
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 20:23:00 -
[680] - Quote
Making it seem safer while making it actually more dangerous is a bad idea imo. The real blame is on the tutorial that leaves players totally unprepared for low sec.
It has been many years since I have died to a low sec camp, and most of the time I went without a scout. The trick is to not use the really popular entrances, tama, ammamake, old man star, etc. New players need to understand how to use intel or be informed what the more busy routes are, then they would be very unlikely to die.
Really your more likely to run into a roaming gang than a camp in low sec currently.
If more newbs knew how to use map intel like kills per hour/jumps then less of them would die to first jump camps.
Also NEVER EVER run missions into low sec from a hisec agent, they are waiting for you. Your better off doing all your missions deep in low sec. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
49
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 21:50:00 -
[681] - Quote
I really like the idea of gate/station defense scaling with the security of the system. It would really add some much needed visible function to the Security Rating of a system. And I do think that there should be stronger defenses on gates to high sec. Maybe a type of escalation of defensive strenght. That way its possible to attack someone on the gate but not possible to perma camp it. Even with triage reps. They would only extend the stay. Also it would take quite a while for the defenses to de-escalate.
It really does make sense for gates to high sec to have stronger defenses. A castle gate defends from hostiles getting in, it doesn't let everyone in to be klobbered behind it.
As for the problem with the tutorials.... Actually I thought of an interesting solution. Something that everyone might have fun with. Have all the noobs start in a highsec island. Then you can either have them start some training missions here, or train them up later but, give them a mission at somepoint to fly into lowsec. Have them fly to a mission site in a lowsec system that either is at a beacon or have it broadcast like the Planet Districts do now when someone is there. Have the system be fairly deep into lowsec.
If they make it to the site unmolested then have an NPC ship come and kill them, including their pod. Then have them sent to a station of their starter corp in regular empire. This way the first time they get killed and podded is early on. And they don't have a lot to lose.
Also it let's people attack noobs in a fun and educational way.
What you guys think? |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
758
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 22:09:00 -
[682] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:I really like the idea of gate/station defense scaling with the security of the system. It would really add some much needed visible function to the Security Rating of a system. And I do think that there should be stronger defenses on gates to high sec. Maybe a type of escalation of defensive strenght. That way its possible to attack someone on the gate but not possible to perma camp it. Even with triage reps. They would only extend the stay. Also it would take quite a while for the defenses to de-escalate.
As for the problem with the tutorials.... Actually I thought of an interesting solution. Something that everyone might have fun with. Have all the noobs start in a highsec island. Then you can either have them start some training missions here, or train them up later but, give them a mission at somepoint to fly into lowsec. Have them fly to a mission site in a lowsec system that either is at a beacon or have it broadcast like the Planet Districts do now when someone is there. Have the system be fairly deep into lowsec.
If they make it to the site unmolested then have an NPC ship come and kill them, including their pod. Then have them sent to a station of their starter corp in regular empire. This way the first time they get killed and podded is early on. And they don't have a lot to lose.
Also it let's people attack noobs in a fun and educational way.
What you guys think?
alpha nados will be the only thing camping gates if there is an escalation system.
We would already have a hisec island, it is called hisec. if we had a small constellation sized newb zone people will just camp the exit to **** and score hundreds of ibis killmails, because people are dicks, even if you make it have lots of exits noobs will just take the fastest way out and die in a fire.
warp core stabbed battleship sitting on gate killing everyone.
After the npc ship kills to noob in what is the fruit of there running of many level 1 missions they will be very displeased. Being reset to ground 0 is not a good way to collect subscribers, however being capable of managing risk and dying in what you want to loose will slowly introduce nublets into pvp gameplay.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Minoc Cobretti
Cosmic Bolder Removal Inc.
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 04:21:00 -
[683] - Quote
sorry but this is one of the worst ideas i have ever heard. first of all i would like to point out the impact this would have on the already expensive market, everything would sky rocket in price as it already has regarding the tech moon changes, second of all what business do you have recommending such a stupid idea, are you really that dumb? do you not realize what is going on in high sec at the moment (suicide ganking) i think that alone is bad enough why in hell should ccp make it even harder to make traveling threw highsec in this crap that you suggested. what do you thinks going to happen EVERYONE will start camping the routes in between the hubs sure you could make it threw with cloaky haulers and other methods but for the new players it would be absolutely unfair. you obviously dont understand how eve works on top of that why should new players learn about low sec if they dont want to, let them learn the hard way as everyone did they could easily find a corp to train them to pvp or let them learn about the game. you sir are the definition of pure stupidness this is just as bad as that one guy who's complaining about suspects being able to dock. why dont you go crawl back in the hole u came from.
dumb ass |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
758
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 04:40:00 -
[684] - Quote
Minoc Cobretti wrote:sorry but this is one of the worst ideas i have ever heard. first of all i would like to point out the impact this would have on the already expensive market, everything would sky rocket in price as it already has regarding the tech moon changes, second of all what business do you have recommending such a stupid idea, are you really that dumb? do you not realize what is going on in high sec at the moment (suicide ganking) i think that alone is bad enough why in hell should ccp make it even harder to make traveling threw highsec in this crap that you suggested. what do you thinks going to happen EVERYONE will start camping the routes in between the hubs sure you could make it threw with cloaky haulers and other methods but for the new players it would be absolutely unfair. you obviously dont understand how eve works on top of that why should new players learn about low sec if they dont want to, let them learn the hard way as everyone did they could easily find a corp to train them to pvp or let them learn about the game. you sir are the definition of pure stupidness this is just as bad as that one guy who's complaining about suspects being able to dock. why dont you go crawl back in the hole u came from.
dumb ass
Whats the point of responding to someone so mad? >Talks about impact to the market, doesn't name aynthing. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
1233
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 05:46:00 -
[685] - Quote
Personal attack removed Ideas for Drone ImprovementTwitter Account-á @Omnathious |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
49
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 09:48:00 -
[686] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: alpha nados will be the only thing camping gates if there is an escalation system.
First i just wanted to address this with this....
Commander Ted wrote:Minoc Cobretti wrote: what do you thinks going to happen EVERYONE will start camping the routes in between the hubs Wait so if EVERYONE camps the routes won't that mean there are lots of pvp ships camping gates to shoot?
Commander Ted wrote: We would already have a hisec island, it is called hisec. if we had a small constellation sized newb zone people will just camp the exit to **** and score hundreds of ibis killmails, because people are dicks, even if you make it have lots of exits noobs will just take the fastest way out and die in a fire.
warp core stabbed battleship sitting on gate killing everyone.
After the npc ship kills to noob in what is the fruit of there running of many level 1 missions they will be very displeased. Being reset to ground 0 is not a good way to collect subscribers, however being capable of managing risk and dying in what you want to loose will slowly introduce nublets into pvp gameplay.
As for the Highsec island thing. I'm talking about similar to the ones we have now already. The separate part from the main piece of faction high sec. It would be very similar to what the Noob Tutorials already do. You start out in a random system (for me it was Cistuvaert) they have you learn to fly and junk by moving to another system (in my case Clellinon). With my idea you would instead start out in, for instance, Placid. There you'd get your ship and learn to fly by going to a beacon in low sec. Either you get killed before you get to the beacon or if you reach the beacon an NPC kills you (pod also) you end up in (for the sake of this example) Clellinon ready to start your beginner missions.
We can call this mission: "Welcome to EVE"
People will be encouraged to kill noobs out here in this area. And i guess that would also cause a bit of unrelated pvp in the area too.
But we want them to die. We want them to lose something. Maybe they should get some stuff to lose that they could get back with the next mission. That way they understand the implications. It would be better if they could gain a few modules for their ship before it gets blown up in the "Welcome to EVE" mission.
Also a warp core stabbed (assuming more than 1) isn't going to be killing any noob ships on a gate me thinks.... Just saying. |
Lara Dantreb
Reisende des Schwarzschild Grenze
21
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 10:33:00 -
[687] - Quote
I like this idea.
EVE universe is way too static, since the beginning, always the same pattern with empire space in the middle. I feel it uniform and isotropic.
Anything that changes this pattern would be great. (i.e. Faction warfare to affect system security) ----á-á Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005-á --- --- -á-á-á-á-á-á BUT NOT ATM :)-á-á-á --- |
Creepy Brutor
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 14:50:00 -
[688] - Quote
I like this idea |
Xolve
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
1551
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 17:41:00 -
[689] - Quote
marVLs wrote:It's just bad idea.
It would change nothing in it assumption, PVE players would just live in it's faction region not moving elsewhere, new hubs will appear. If PVE player want to move elsewhere he will just use t2 cloack, so no benefits for PVP players.
PvE Players already do this, the number of people with CovOps Cloaks that still get caught by 'skilled' or 'lucky' gate campers or smartbombers is probably much higher than you believe it is.
marVLs wrote:What this change does? - boost for campers (most lame thing in eve) - boost economy, production, transport etc. (solo activities so it's bad thing)
- less interaction between players - lot's of players stop playing
It's a pretty good idea actually, would create bigger market influxes importing racially specific items into the 3 other regions (which is already done); It would make the game world seem bigger for those that don't mind traversing low-sec, and it would make the game world feel like 4 seperate areas instead of being defined currently by the colors of stations/gates and local nebulae.
marVLs wrote:BTW. It's space so nothing strange that two opposite factions have systems next to each other. It's huge distance, many light years not Berlin wall...
Don't do much jump planning do you? The space between all the factions is typically within carrier range (i.e. >14ly).
Inappropriate signature removed. Navigator. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
759
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 00:05:00 -
[690] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote: First i just wanted to address this with this.... As for the Highsec island thing. I'm talking about similar to the ones we have now already. The separate part from the main piece of faction high sec. It would be very similar to what the Noob Tutorials already do. You start out in a random system (for me it was Cistuvaert) they have you learn to fly and junk by moving to another system (in my case Clellinon). With my idea you would instead start out in, for instance, Placid. There you'd get your ship and learn to fly by going to a beacon in low sec. Either you get killed before you get to the beacon or if you reach the beacon an NPC kills you (pod also) you end up in (for the sake of this example) Clellinon ready to start your beginner missions.
We can call this mission: "Welcome to EVE"
People will be encouraged to kill noobs out here in this area. And i guess that would also cause a bit of unrelated pvp in the area too.
But we want them to die. We want them to lose something. Maybe they should get some stuff to lose that they could get back with the next mission. That way they understand the implications. It would be better if they could gain a few modules for their ship before it gets blown up in the "Welcome to EVE" mission.
Also a warp core stabbed (assuming more than 1) isn't going to be killing any noob ships on a gate me thinks.... Just saying.
Smartbombs don't need a lock time, so your going to want to stack warp core stabs on a smart bomb fitted ship since they cause no real penalty.
Killing noobships and poorly fitted and flown tech 1 frigates is very easy, alpha tornadoes sebo ed and smartbomb battleships could do it with very minimal risk, unlike a gate camp made of more combat focused ships.
Killing a player when they don't understand the risks involved is a disgustingly bad idea. Players would have no idea the risks involved in going to low sec, arbitrarily murdering them without actually giving them an idea of what is going own is outrageously dumb. There is a difference between going into low sec and dying with the ship you were prepared to loose and had an appropriate idea of how to avoid loosing it versus being forced into low sec with little to no idea what awaits with everything you have spent hours earning.
We don't want them to loose anything until THEY ARE PREPARED TO LOOSE IT. It isn't fun to die when you have no choice of whether or not you will die, and it wont teach noobs anything except that "You will be raped in the butthole by stronger players whenever you enter low sec"
If you are introduced to a pvp area in a way that teaches you to manage risk, then you will be able to comfortably understand and adapt to changes at you. When you first learn to swim, do you throw them into the ocean after only teaching them how to float on there back in water you can stand in?
This is partly what causes carebears to be so paranoid about low sec, they run into rancer without a single clue and they die before there grid loads. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
49
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 05:03:00 -
[691] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: Smartbombs don't need a lock time, so your going to want to stack warp core stabs on a smart bomb fitted ship since they cause no real penalty.
Killing noobships and poorly fitted and flown tech 1 frigates is very easy, alpha tornadoes sebo ed and smartbomb battleships could do it with very minimal risk, unlike a gate camp made of more combat focused ships.
Killing a player when they don't understand the risks involved is a disgustingly bad idea. Players would have no idea the risks involved in going to low sec, arbitrarily murdering them without actually giving them an idea of what is going own is outrageously dumb. There is a difference between going into low sec and dying with the ship you were prepared to loose and had an appropriate idea of how to avoid loosing it versus being forced into low sec with little to no idea what awaits with everything you have spent hours earning.
We don't want them to loose anything until THEY ARE PREPARED TO LOOSE IT. It isn't fun to die when you have no choice of whether or not you will die, and it wont teach noobs anything except that "You will be raped in the butthole by stronger players whenever you enter low sec"
If you are introduced to a pvp area in a way that teaches you to manage risk, then you will be able to comfortably understand and adapt to changes at you. When you first learn to swim, do you throw them into the ocean after only teaching them how to float on there back in water you can stand in?
This is partly what causes carebears to be so paranoid about low sec, they run into rancer without a single clue and they die before there grid loads.
First of all, the mission description would tell them about the risks associated with lowsec.
Second, this is EVE. Prepared or not you're going to lose ships and things. The whole point is to show them this in a controlled environment where the losses are minimal. What's probably worse is if that player goes the Mining route and then gets ganked in highsec immediately after buying their first mining barge which they depleted their wallet to buy because they had no concept of loss in this game. I wonder how often this has happened.
You know maybe there should be more than one place where you lose something. Maybe a few where you just lose your ship and then maybe 1 or 2 where your pod gets killed too. This way they understand the meaning of "Don't fly what you can't afford to lose" before they invest everything into one ship that gets blapped.
As for smartbomb BS. Well if the gate defenses are beefed up on High to Low gates, or if the defense escalates it would be tough for them to perma camp smartbomb cycle gates like that. Besides you could always get a HIC to snag one up pretty easy. Free BS kills? Don't mind if I do! |
Ewersmen
Radiant core construction Green Alien Growth
9
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 06:38:00 -
[692] - Quote
I agree with minoc dumbest idea ever EVER......... Makes me laugh reading what you write ......oooo the carebears don't wanna come in low sec.
Lol why would you want to go in low sec when everyone one wants to blow you up constantly never ending ...Never ending
This is a sandbox people play how they want ....so if you want to play in high sec you do ....you retards throw the word carebear round like your some sort of hero ...and this idea would only make the game worse for new people.
|
Claire Raynor
NovaGear Limitless Inc.
156
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 06:45:00 -
[693] - Quote
After a long time - and having re-read this thread - I would again ike to offer my support to this idea!
There are already small Hi-Sec islands. They do work well. They do cause a dynamic to manifest itself that you don't get elsewhere. They do cause local flavour that is created by the "island's" inhabitants - this is spontaneous and player driven. They cause PvP to happen - it is somehow fun for everyone involved - even when I lose industrials and freighters. It's just odd - but come to Orien and check out the atmosphere - spend a week there!
I beleive that these smaller islands would scale up as larger "Islands" were created - as per the OP.
I'd love to see a careful consideration in terms of bottlenecks between the empires - a cost benefit of risk and reward - between bottlenecked direct trunks and then safer, (multi route), but indirect, (Slow), alternatives.
I'd love a neutral (ORE?) - highsec island in the middle!. . . .
- just loads of fun things that can be done
I think this would be ace |
Claire Raynor
NovaGear Limitless Inc.
156
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 06:52:00 -
[694] - Quote
Ewersmen wrote:I agree with minoc dumbest idea ever EVER......... Makes me laugh reading what you write ......oooo the carebears don't wanna come in low sec.
Lol why would you want to go in low sec when everyone one wants to blow you up constantly never ending ...Never ending
This is a sandbox people play how they want ....so if you want to play in high sec you do ....you retards throw the word carebear round like your some sort of hero ...and this idea would only make the game worse for new people.
Yes you are right - but Come to Orien and try it out for a bit. I think you might find the lifestyle quite good fun - comming from me - a Highsec LvL 4 running, high sec mining, Lo-sec PI and Lo-Sec exploration character.
PVP for me is NOT losing my industrial. It is still PvP. There are techniques to sneaking around. I would be considered a Carebear - but I don't think this proposal would hurt us.
I have no vested interests - other than I want my game to be fun for everyone. I think this would be fun. Please give the Orien island a try if you are of strong opinion against this proposal. Hand out with the pirates or with the anti-pirates like BCA - or any of the "carebear" people making a good living back and forth across Lo and High. Molden Heath is best region :) |
Ewersmen
Radiant core construction Green Alien Growth
9
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 11:13:00 -
[695] - Quote
Claire Raynor you are right ...for me and many others we have lived in null and low sec ...so i don't have a problem but there are many people in high that want to hang with there friends and enjoy the game ....they know as soon as they step into low sec to mine or anything else , someone will come around to kill em ...so its just not viable |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
49
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 04:03:00 -
[696] - Quote
Ewersmen wrote:Claire Raynor you are right ...for me and many others we have lived in null and low sec ...so i don't have a problem but there are many people in high that want to hang with there friends and enjoy the game ....they know as soon as they step into low sec to mine or anything else , someone will come around to kill em ...so its just not viable
This idea isn't to have lots of small high sec islands scattered about. Just the 4 major empires separated by lowsec. So continents instead of islands.
Nobody will be forced into lowsec. If you want you can just stay on your empire's continent for your entire eve career. If you do however decided to make the jump through low sec, there would be lots of opportunity to make money. |
Humang
Sefem Velox Swift Angels Alliance
5
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 06:48:00 -
[697] - Quote
It might sound redundant but what about a compromise between the current system and the one proposed by Commander Ted?
Split the main faction regions by low-sec as suggested but keep one or two regional gates that connect from one regions high sec to another and place a "toll-gate" like charge based on ship size, so that ships with good size-to-cargo ratio are still profitable to move items between regions with, but constantly moving smaller ships would be much less so.
Possible Issues
- Easy to camp "toll pipe" for high-sec gankers.
- Toll amount would have to be carefully worked out to be effective, but no overly restrictive.
Possible Benefits
- (Ties in with the first Possible Issues) It is not completely safe and should still have the affect that Commander Ted wanted.
- It could still encourage people to venture into low-sec to avoid the toll.
- Have low-sec seem a more natural part of life in space as pilots are exposed to it more often.
TLDR; Split Empire regions by lowsec, keep one or two highsec paths between each and add a toll based on ship size, but still have many alternative routes that travel though low. Have people make the choice to use the safer (but more expensive) or the cheaper (but more dangerous) routes to get where they want to go. |
Dave Stark
3250
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 09:07:00 -
[698] - Quote
i'll be honest, personally the idea would just add inconvenience and tedium for no reward.
instead of moving 1 ship i'd have to purchase multiple ships, one in each of the now high sec islands, and get to them via a ship that won't get ganked as soon as i try to move between the different areas of high sec... it's just going to to be tedious and boring for no real reason other than because some one thinks it'd be "cool".
but hey if people want to add boring and uninteresting features, go for it. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
764
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 15:31:00 -
[699] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:i'll be honest, personally the idea would just add inconvenience and tedium for no reward.
instead of moving 1 ship i'd have to purchase multiple ships, one in each of the now high sec islands, and get to them via a ship that won't get ganked as soon as i try to move between the different areas of high sec... it's just going to to be tedious and boring for no real reason other than because some one thinks it'd be "cool".
but hey if people want to add boring and uninteresting features, go for it. More pvp= tedious and boring
Also the point is to make moving ships an infrequent event. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
764
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 15:31:00 -
[700] - Quote
Humang wrote:It might sound redundant but what about a compromise between the current system and the one proposed by Commander Ted? Split the main faction regions by low-sec as suggested but keep one or two regional gates that connect from one regions high sec to another and place a "toll-gate" like charge based on ship size, so that ships with good size-to-cargo ratio are still profitable to move items between regions with, but constantly moving smaller ships would be much less so. Possible Issues
- Easy to camp "toll pipe" for high-sec gankers.
- Toll amount would have to be carefully worked out to be effective, but no overly restrictive.
Possible Benefits
- (Ties in with the first Possible Issues) It is not completely safe and should still have the affect that Commander Ted wanted.
- It could still encourage people to venture into low-sec to avoid the toll.
- Have low-sec seem a more natural part of life in space as pilots are exposed to it more often.
TLDR; Split Empire regions by lowsec, keep one or two highsec paths between each and add a toll based on ship size, but still have many alternative routes that travel though low. Have people make the choice to use the safer (but more expensive) or the cheaper (but more dangerous) routes to get where they want to go.
Ehhhhhh I don't like it but it is a compromise that is better than now. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Paiel Saavuj
Saavuj Industries
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 17:12:00 -
[701] - Quote
How about this for a compromise?
1. Sure, separate hisec into islands.
2. Change what low-sec means a bit -- still no concord presence, but make it compensated by beefing up gate security (based on sec-status) and making the guns fire at criminals in range, thus making gatecamps less possible. People will be less hesitant to enter lowsec because there will be fewer gatecamps. Please note I said 'Less possible", not impossible.
Pvp'ers would actually get to hunt down their target rather than the tedious waiting, bonus being that there will be more people making excursions into lowsec for the extra resources found there. Really, do you want to smack on an industrial or some silly missoner who decided he wants to go find a 6/10 DED plex to run in a ridiculously expensive fitted ship? Might even run into a mining barge or three who decided the less-often gatecamps would be worth snagging some of that low-sec ore.
Just an idea for a compromise-- As it is, the idea of just separating low-sec is too much. Way too many subscriptions would be lost because non-pvpers don't like to pvp, they like to make isk. Give them a chance to make isk (not risk free, of course), pvp'ers a chance to track them down in low sec with less of that silly gatecamp business, and people might decide that overall it's more fun with low-sec becoming a fun place to live.
With less gatecamps, people might even decide to move a freighter or two through lowsec if they thought they would have a decent chance of getting away with it.
Btw, if you're going to quote someone, or respond to them, putting the words 'blabla' or something else trivializing what they say is not a good way to continue dialog. It's just rude.
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
765
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 17:49:00 -
[702] - Quote
Paiel Saavuj wrote: YOU NEED TO REPEAT EVERYTHING I SAID BECAUSE PEOPLE CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT THEY JUST SAW
Your post is adjacent to mine, stop whining that I have the manners to not quote the entire thing, its like when your the first person who responds to a thread and the OP is 2 pages long but you see the need to quote him. If I were truly trivializing them I wouldn't respond at all or only quote them as TL;DR.
Anyway if you can't kill someone on gate easily then how are you supposed to hunt down targets? Hope they warp to a belt? Having gatecamps is partly the point, as they lead to higher forms of pvp. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Paiel Saavuj
Saavuj Industries
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 18:00:00 -
[703] - Quote
Editting because I don't want to be like Ted.
Here's the gist: Gatecamps are the barrier to entering lowsec. Lower the barrier, and more people will play in lowsec. Oh look, the barges & ratters have a better chance at getting to the belts? Let's go find some! Think it through before you have a raar gatecamp pirate moment. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
765
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 18:01:00 -
[704] - Quote
Paiel Saavuj wrote:Ya, not sure why I'd post in a topic started/frequented by you. You don't give honest consideration to anyone who's ideas don't agree 100% with yours. Keep your fingers in your ears towards dissenting opinions & compromises, keep being rude. Keep up the current stereotype of the low-sec frequenter. The gatecampers will love you, and they make up a larger portion of the game than any other subset, right?
TLDR I can do it too: "Nyahnyah I can't hear you."
Honest consideration means not saying what I think? Are you just ignoring the part where I responded to what you said? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Paiel Saavuj
Saavuj Industries
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 18:04:00 -
[705] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Paiel Saavuj wrote:Ya, not sure why I'd post in a topic started/frequented by you. You don't give honest consideration to anyone who's ideas don't agree 100% with yours. Keep your fingers in your ears towards dissenting opinions & compromises, keep being rude. Keep up the current stereotype of the low-sec frequenter. The gatecampers will love you, and they make up a larger portion of the game than any other subset, right?
TLDR I can do it too: "Nyahnyah I can't hear you." Honest consideration means not saying what I think? Are you just ignoring the part where I responded to what you said?
Nope, just suggesting this thing called 'tact' when you're wanting people to radically change their gamestyle to fit you.
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
765
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 18:09:00 -
[706] - Quote
Paiel Saavuj wrote:
Nope, just suggesting this thing called 'tact' when you're wanting people to radically change their gamestyle to fit you.
Fallacy of tone https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Wrayeth
Inexorable Retribution
97
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 18:25:00 -
[707] - Quote
I can't be bothered to read the whole thread at this point (I just woke up), but I will say that I support this idea...
...especially since I proposed the exact same thing on at least two separate occasions in the last 8 years. |
Ewersmen
Radiant core construction Green Alien Growth
9
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 01:30:00 -
[708] - Quote
Lol what's wrong with you people ...give them a chance to track the people down ...wont force them into low sec lol ....are you people ******** ....People do not want to go in low sec because they will get constantly killed lol ....someone kills me I make no profit ....................................PEOPLE DO NOT WANT TO GO TO LOW SEC CAUSE ITS FULL OF A*S*S*H*O*L*E*S....END OF STORY ... |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
766
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 01:38:00 -
[709] - Quote
Ewersmen wrote:Lol what's wrong with you people ...give them a chance to track the people down ...wont force them into low sec lol ....are you people ******** ....People do not want to go in low sec because they will get constantly killed lol ....someone kills me I make no profit ....................................PEOPLE DO NOT WANT TO GO TO LOW SEC CAUSE ITS FULL OF A*S*S*H*O*L*E*S....END OF STORY ...
are you a troll? This post reads like a troll post. It's pretty bad. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Ewersmen
Radiant core construction Green Alien Growth
9
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 01:49:00 -
[710] - Quote
Not a troll ...its the truth .....people like you think there gonna get an endless stream of newbies in there low sec system ...so they can say i'm sooo awesome lol NO JUST no ....I am not a troll I am human:) |
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
766
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 01:56:00 -
[711] - Quote
Ewersmen wrote:Not a troll ...its the truth .....people like you think there gonna get an endless stream of newbies in there low sec system ...so they can say i'm sooo awesome lol NO JUST no ....I am not a troll I am human:) Your constant use of ........ and broken thought patterns in the text say otherwise. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Ewersmen
Radiant core construction Green Alien Growth
9
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 02:08:00 -
[712] - Quote
Thought patterns lol ...face it commander ted this is a bad idea . |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
766
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 04:30:00 -
[713] - Quote
Ewersmen wrote:Thought patterns lol ...face it commander ted this is a bad idea .
The very way you organize what your saying makes little sense. Maybe instead of ... you should find out what a comma is.
Really all your saying though despite being very poorly worded is that pvp players are assholes in a pvp centric game. Which really isn't a very good point.
Also are you just saying this because u mad about a billion isk navy caracal? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Dave Stark
3250
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 06:57:00 -
[714] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Dave Stark wrote:i'll be honest, personally the idea would just add inconvenience and tedium for no reward.
instead of moving 1 ship i'd have to purchase multiple ships, one in each of the now high sec islands, and get to them via a ship that won't get ganked as soon as i try to move between the different areas of high sec... it's just going to to be tedious and boring for no real reason other than because some one thinks it'd be "cool".
but hey if people want to add boring and uninteresting features, go for it. More pvp= tedious and boring Also the point is to make moving ships an infrequent event.
making each empire a high sec island doesn't guarantee more pvp. people who do not want to pvp will not pvp not matter what you do. people who stay in high sec (pretty much like me) do not have an interest in pvp.
also yes, more pvp = tedious and boring for people who find it tedious and boring. which are, most of the people who primarily live in high sec because... that's why they live in high sec. so yes in this specific case more pvp is tedious and boring. even for the pvpers it's the case. look at uedama etc where the suicide gankers have to think about their targets and select them with some level of care where as if it was a 0.4 system they could just shoot everything without a care in the world... i know which one sounds more interesting. (tip, it's the one where you have to think instead of mindlessly hitting f1 every time the gate flashes)
here's exactly what will happen. people will put 1 jump clone in every empire and never travel through low sec anyway. which just adds a 24 hour cooldown between moving from 1 area of empire to another. so, where's your "more pvp"? i'm unconvinced it's there. |
Rengas
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
182
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 10:16:00 -
[715] - Quote
Ewersmen wrote:Lol what's wrong with you people ...give them a chance to track the people down ...wont force them into low sec lol ....are you people ******** ....People do not want to go in low sec because they will get constantly killed lol ....someone kills me I make no profit ....................................PEOPLE DO NOT WANT TO GO TO LOW SEC CAUSE ITS FULL OF A*S*S*H*O*L*E*S....END OF STORY ... I assume you're talking about this gem of a fit? |
Selexim
Leader Dogs
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 11:21:00 -
[716] - Quote
All i could see that doing is making it a lot harder for newer players to get into trading, while allowing experienced players who have access to jump freighters to make more isk (as trading would lessen allowing them to exploit prices more).
While I personally could get around it using my Ark, its not something I would like to see as I like to help new pilots getting into trade and industry so they have the isk to blow on PvP, and this would hurt their ability to do so.
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
767
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 12:06:00 -
[717] - Quote
Selexim wrote:
All i could see that doing is making it a lot harder for newer players to get into trading, while allowing experienced players who have access to jump freighters to make more isk (as trading would lessen allowing them to exploit prices more).
While I personally could get around it using my Ark, its not something I would like to see as I like to help new pilots getting into trade and industry so they have the isk to blow on PvP, and this would hurt their ability to do so.
1.Get a badger 2. find a scout 3.????? 4. Profit https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
767
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 12:08:00 -
[718] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:
making each empire a high sec island doesn't guarantee more pvp. people who do not want to pvp will not pvp not matter what you do. people who stay in high sec (pretty much like me) do not have an interest in pvp.
also yes, more pvp = tedious and boring for people who find it tedious and boring. which are, most of the people who primarily live in high sec because... that's why they live in high sec. so yes in this specific case more pvp is tedious and boring. even for the pvpers it's the case. look at uedama etc where the suicide gankers have to think about their targets and select them with some level of care where as if it was a 0.4 system they could just shoot everything without a care in the world... i know which one sounds more interesting. (tip, it's the one where you have to think instead of mindlessly hitting f1 every time the gate flashes)
here's exactly what will happen. people will put 1 jump clone in every empire and never travel through low sec anyway. which just adds a 24 hour cooldown between moving from 1 area of empire to another. so, where's your "more pvp"? i'm unconvinced it's there.
Yea, that is the whole point of low sec, shoot everything. Of course suicide ganking isn't very hard either, scan hulls, find expensive loot, count to 3 and hit f5, collect isk. Now running a gatecamp where you are at great risk of being attacked yourselves requires a different level of engagement. Also what is the point of setting up a jump clone in every empire if your not going to move **** between them?
There is an equillibrium to be reached here, if few people cross lowsec because its to dangerous, then there will be little incentive for pirates to operate. If there are no camps, then people will start traveling low sec, causing camps.
If your a carebear move around them via cloak, wormhole, or alternate route.
Also I am not talking about carebears fighting. I am talking about pvp players fighting each other for control of gates or to simply eliminate gate camp players for fun. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
767
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 12:19:00 -
[719] - Quote
Rengas wrote:Ewersmen wrote:Lol what's wrong with you people ...give them a chance to track the people down ...wont force them into low sec lol ....are you people ******** ....People do not want to go in low sec because they will get constantly killed lol ....someone kills me I make no profit ....................................PEOPLE DO NOT WANT TO GO TO LOW SEC CAUSE ITS FULL OF A*S*S*H*O*L*E*S....END OF STORY ... I assume you're talking about this gem of a fit?
Yea, thats why he mad. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Ewersmen
Radiant core construction Green Alien Growth
10
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 16:03:00 -
[720] - Quote
lol I am never mad in a space game ......what you got butthurt your idea is bad |
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
774
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 17:50:00 -
[721] - Quote
Ewersmen wrote:lol I am never mad in a space game ......what you got butthurt your idea is bad
Ewersmen wrote:PEOPLE DO NOT WANT TO GO TO LOW SEC CAUSE ITS FULL OF A*S*S*H*O*L*E*S....END OF STORY ...
Looses expensive fit, proceeds to immediately post about how low sec is full of assholes. No connection https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Psychoactive Stimulant
TinklePee
18
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 18:23:00 -
[722] - Quote
I just took a trip into lowsec and ran around with a nice smile on my face for about 3 hours. I didn't see anyone the entire time. No gatecamps nothing. It kinda made me happy. I think I'll go back, maybe bring a sleeping bag with me or something. |
Benjamin Artoriana
The Goat Lords Excavation Inc
7
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 19:44:00 -
[723] - Quote
Still a poor idea. And will continue to be so. Something, something, don't be an idiot. Blah, blah, I love EVE and goats. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
774
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 19:52:00 -
[724] - Quote
Benjamin Artoriana wrote:Still a poor idea. And will continue to be so. why https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
213
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 20:38:00 -
[725] - Quote
For an entire host of reasons that have been pointed out and argued ad nauseum.
You are unwilling or unable to develop your idea further. You are unwilling or unable to accept any sort of compromise on your idea to make it more livable for those that it will affect negatively (most of EVE but you).
This would not do what you want, would hurt the game on almost every level, would punish the industrial backbone of EVE in such a way as to make the game extremely unfun for the majority of players.
It's a self serving, poorly thought out attempt to grab as much grief and rage as you can before the idea itself kills the game. In other words, it's a bad idea. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
774
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 20:55:00 -
[726] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:For an entire host of reasons that have been pointed out and argued ad nauseum.
You are unwilling or unable to develop your idea further. You are unwilling or unable to accept any sort of compromise on your idea to make it more livable for those that it will affect negatively (most of EVE but you).
This would not do what you want, would hurt the game on almost every level, would punish the industrial backbone of EVE in such a way as to make the game extremely unfun for the majority of players.
It's a self serving, poorly thought out attempt to grab as much grief and rage as you can before the idea itself kills the game. In other words, it's a bad idea.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3310619#post3310619 I did say I accept some compromise, such as the one linked AND accepted the possibility of sec status being flexible or two empires that are allied being connected. Isn't the entire point of a compromise that neither side be entirely happy because they only get part of what they want? In fact, why should I accept a compromise when what I accept has no bearing on what actually happens. I am opposed to most compromises because this idea will only work if it is implemented nearly entirely intact.
If someone posts something that I do not agree with I will argue against it, like the guy who whined about me shortening quotes.
The majority of Eve players don't enjoy pvp? That is not true. Mike. It is not true. http://youtu.be/7MZD6-vGQms?t=8m4s
Looks like 46% of players like pvp very much, and 29% just like it. This makes it the most preferred activity in the game above EVERYTHING else. While opinions on the Pve activities are much more lukewarm.
Then your ignoring the points already made in this thread multiple times extremely clearly on how this change won't affect most people, unless you seriously think you need to run the Damsel In Distress once in every empire. So really Mike it seems your greatly exaggerating how much this will ruin your game and the game of most people.
So the vast majority of players aren't peace loving hippies in a drum circle. Then on top of that, many of the industry pilots do there industry outside of hisec. Huh, your wrong on both accounts. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Stilp Sdrassa
Yoyodyne corporation Shadow Cartel
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 00:45:00 -
[727] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Ewersmen wrote:lol I am never mad in a space game ......what you got butthurt your idea is bad Looses expensive fit, proceeds to immediately post about how low sec is full of assholes. No connection
So. Many. Assholes.
You're welcome, Ewersmen. |
Fey Ivory
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
99
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 05:18:00 -
[728] - Quote
Commander Ted
i havent read through everything in this thread, but personally i think its bad to separate the empires by lowsec... but as a compromise, i have this idea, excuse me if it already been mentioned...
almost all empires have a few routes, with a few 0.5 sections along these "trade routes" so pirates players or those that wish so invest some kind of pirate LPs, when enough LPs been generated a pirate invasion starts along ONE of these trade routes, and temporary makes it into a sort of war zone, this could be linked to the FW, the need to rush in and clean up the pirates, to restore trade comunication, bascailly it be like a Sansha incursion, it will last a limited period of time, with set goals to keep it up and going, till maximum time upheld and pirates will withdraw... it add for a player controled unstability of highsec, and it not be something permanent... im sure those smarter in Eve balance can come up with balancing factors...
In any case a thought |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
213
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 08:06:00 -
[729] - Quote
I didn't say people don't like PvP. I'd have to answer positively to the question as well, though it's not my preference with the culture that exists now. Gate camping is another matter entirely. PvP would be hurt as markets run out of control.
This would negatively impact nearly everyone, and be ruinous to some. There are other ways you can get targets, and other ways to hunt. You want to alter the game to boost your playstyle at the expense of nearly everyone else.
Bad idea. |
Intar Medris
Arbitrary Spaceship Destruction The Devil's Warrior Alliance
105
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 09:03:00 -
[730] - Quote
Why so gate campers could have more easy targets. There is plenty of low sec systems out there. Most are empty as hell. The problem with low sec is the risk far outweighs the reward. Mining? Nope would rather go to null where I am actually much safer with far better rewards. Ratting? Nope same as mining just better bring a good ship or a friend or two.. Missions? Nope not much better than high sec. What is broken in low is the two things.
1. So called pirates don't bother asking for ransoms before exploding ships. They would just rather kill the ship and the pod. As a result actual pirates are becoming an endangered species.
2. There is nothing in low sec that makes taking the risk of getting blown up by the first blow hard that you into worth it.
Fact is what is most broken about low sec is the pretend pirates that have become a cancer. You shoot anything that moves and 9 times out of 10 don't even offer a ransom. Then you have the ones that do that don't honor them. You guys broke low sec and you are the only ones that can fix it. Stop blowing up anything and everything, offer ransoms, honor those ransoms and people may once again see low sec as an opportunity to make good ISK. Not wasteland it is now. I try to be nice and mind my business just shooting lasers at rocks. There is just way too many asshats in New Eden for that to happen. |
|
Roime
Ten Thousand Years Shinjiketo
3092
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 09:24:00 -
[731] - Quote
Intar this isn't about fixing lowsec, it's not broken. Actually it's the best functioning area of New Eden after wormholes.
This idea aims to make EVE a better game by creating more interesting, varied and volatile markets.
+1 again, CCP make it so
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
Gawain Edmond
Angry Mustellid
9
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 10:19:00 -
[732] - Quote
i like the idea could do it so the empires explode the star gates of the empire they're at war with so amarr/caldari still have high sec connections to start with and if faction warfare changes then do the same with the high sec or some such. i just like the idea of more low sec |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
776
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 14:29:00 -
[733] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:I didn't say people don't like PvP. I'd have to answer positively to the question as well, though it's not my preference with the culture that exists now. Gate camping is another matter entirely. PvP would be hurt as markets run out of control.
This would negatively impact nearly everyone, and be ruinous to some. There are other ways you can get targets, and other ways to hunt. You want to alter the game to boost your playstyle at the expense of nearly everyone else.
Bad idea.
Why would markets run out of control, I think we settled this question to.
Also you neglect to mention exactly what play styles would be destroyed by this. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Silent Rambo
Legion of Seven
15
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 17:51:00 -
[734] - Quote
+1
Id like to see both alliances (Ammar/Caldari, Minmatar/Gallante) be separated by some low sec. This game lacks nationalism. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
49
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 19:16:00 -
[735] - Quote
Selexim wrote:
All i could see that doing is making it a lot harder for newer players to get into trading, while allowing experienced players who have access to jump freighters to make more isk (as trading would lessen allowing them to exploit prices more).
While I personally could get around it using my Ark, its not something I would like to see as I like to help new pilots getting into trade and industry so they have the isk to blow on PvP, and this would hurt their ability to do so.
This has been adressed already, but I know its nearly impossible to read through 60some pages of posts.
So the thing about using a JF is ... Dundundun... It uses fuel. The cost of fuel will take away some of your profits. This means there will be things that won't be worth the cost of fuel to use a jump freighter to move. This leaves stuff for the regular haulers to move around too.
Then there's the fact that ccp changed the way ice is gathered. High sec has a limit on the isotopes you can harvest. This means if a lot of people start using JFs to get from empire to empire, the demand will increase dramatically and the price will be reflective. That means things will only be worth jumping when there is enough extra profit to cover the increasing costs of fuel. Ironcially fuel will probably always have a margin to make from jumping it because its price will always be perportional to the cost of itself ;).
The higher fuel costs get, the better margin there would be for people to move things in small haulers.
Disagree? |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
49
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 19:44:00 -
[736] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:I didn't say people don't like PvP. I'd have to answer positively to the question as well, though it's not my preference with the culture that exists now. Gate camping is another matter entirely. PvP would be hurt as markets run out of control.
This would negatively impact nearly everyone, and be ruinous to some. There are other ways you can get targets, and other ways to hunt. You want to alter the game to boost your playstyle at the expense of nearly everyone else.
Bad idea.
What's to stop the pirates from moving things themselves and making profit? How would pirates camp every system between each empire? In what way will the markets go out of control? Who exactly will be negatively impacted?
This really has nothing to do with generating targets, this has to do with generating content. Expecially for haulers and traders. Why do you think everyone needs access to all of high sec at all times? |
Octoven
Phoenix Productions Headshot Gaming
168
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 20:26:00 -
[737] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Luc Chastot wrote:Because that's not something that happens. Borders between most countries are closely guarded, especially between sworn enemies. Closely guarded by concord? You would figure that military presence and a 3rd party police enforcement would be completely unrelated as seen by the current militia situation. Also the gameplay improvement would greatly outweigh any damage to the lore.
I would submit to you that this point is not true. You compared empire boarders to that of the US Mexican border. However, FEDERAL Agents patrol that border, not Texas state police. Just as CONCORD patrols empire boarders not empire police. Its ironic that you chose the US because it is similar to eve. Just as individual states act as empire police, the feds act as concord. As for damage done to lore, I dont see that being outweighed by gameplay improvement. We have already went on lore damaging sprees as of late. For instance, a hulk can hold upwards of 10K m3 and a Mackinaw can hold upwards of 35K m3. One would assume that the Mackinaw model would be larger than the hulk. However, we know by size comparison that the hulk is a larger ship. Thus it makes absolutely no sense at all. Yet we accept it in the name of improved gameplay.
Personally, I think the empires are fine the way they are. By the way, good luck finding a wh that goes from amarr high sec to caldari high sec that will fit a freighter through. If you do, its likely not to fit very many. These frontiers you speak of exist in 0.0 not empire space. The only reason there are low sec systems is lack of resources to patrol them, not because they are on the edge of frontier space. You speak as is all 4 empires are completely cut off and separate from one another. However, combined with jovians, concord was formed to patrol the border areas that are 0.5-0.7 along the empires. If you look at the map you can see that the home systems for the empires are 1.0 systems as you move away from those home systems it works its way down to 0.5 where concord is. Thus your metaphor of the US Mexican boarder is completely true in this instance. What YOU are asking for is a US Mexican boarder with no patrol at all. |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
1470
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 22:39:00 -
[738] - Quote
Intar Medris wrote: The problem with low sec is the risk far outweighs the reward. No that's the reason why low sec is great. I can run a mission in high sec and be bored to tears. In low sec I can run a mission with a moderate chance somebody is going to scan me down and get a fight.
min/maxing isk/hour ----> Don't do it in low sec. min/maxing fun/hour and still make isk ------> Low sec baby.
Anyways, it would be interesting to see the economic upheaval going from one central market based in Jita to four more fragmented markets. Would everybody move to Forge? Would Sinq Liason be as empty as Solitude?
Either way though. No big deal.
|
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
213
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 01:01:00 -
[739] - Quote
Why would markets run out of control? This is one of your intended consequences, market pressure to get haulers into lowsec. Attempting to force all trade through relatively tiny blockade runners or the crapshoot that are wormholes are a bad joke. I would have thought the issue was discussed in as much detail as anyone could want too, but neither side accepts the other's view.
What stops pirates from becoming haulers? What stops them now? If they wanted to do this, they would be doing it. As has been said, pirates are not a homogenous bloc either, just because one decides to haul does not mean the others will let him. If there is a big enough profit to be made (as will happen when the markets get too stupid) the big alliances will come and secure pipes to move what they want, and then they will close them or let the pirates do it for them to maximize profit.
You finally admitted that much of the point of this is a boost to gate camping. That's all it really is. At least until the game perishes to the pirate's actions.
The gameplay you want is already possible, go do it. No need to wreck everything else for it. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
780
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 01:31:00 -
[740] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:Why would markets run out of control? This is one of your intended consequences, market pressure to get haulers into lowsec. Attempting to force all trade through relatively tiny blockade runners or the crapshoot that are wormholes are a bad joke. I would have thought the issue was discussed in as much detail as anyone could want too, but neither side accepts the other's view.
Ok, now how would that affect the market.
At all.
We have discussed in extreme detail, in fact even if trade went down to near 0 the market would survive and possibly be better off. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Jezza McWaffle
The-Hole-Idea Void-Legion
31
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 07:11:00 -
[741] - Quote
I dont get how this would affect the market either. Sure there'll be bigger price fluctuations but that will just encourage more industrialists to spread out and serve their local trade hubs. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
214
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 11:00:00 -
[742] - Quote
Its remotely possible that making hauling many times more expensive will have little effect on the market. If that is the case your idea won't work. Without the market fluctuations sufficient to cover the loss of a billion+ ship plus cargo, the incentive won't be there to bother with any of this except people like me that like to move around. Everything either gets made locally, or the markets run wild... What you want does not allow for the fantasy that fat targets that have no reason to run that gauntlet decide to put their ship and cargo on the line for a very mild profit increase.
There is no version of your idea yet that both works as you intend and does not destroy the game. Either the profit motive is there, or it is not. Given the ludicrous risk of the weapons free gank zone that is lowsec, the profit potential of going through there has to be monsterous to get anyone who does not already like that playstyle in there. Those people are already there. You can downplay and softsell the risk all you want, but the fact that you are trying to boost lowsec gate camping should be all anyone that isn't a lowsec gate camper needs to hear.
With hisec suicide ganking of freighters the cost to pop a freighter is almost as much as the freighter itself. Right around 800 million is the break even point to profit. The same job in lowsec is much easier and safer for the pirate in lowsec, and without the cost--- which is why you want it forced through there. Moving loaded freighters in hisec isn't safe, it's just a lot more expensive to pirate them. Your suggestion offers no way to offset that additional risk to the hauler except market fluctuations, which would have to be ruinous to cover the potential cost.
With the changes as you propose them either the market tanks and takes the game with it, or the point of the changes does. Either way your idea fails. I wish it didn't. It does not have to be that way, but with the state of PvP balance in the game and the culture in lowsec, that's how it is. |
Claire Raynor
NovaGear Limitless Inc.
156
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 12:06:00 -
[743] - Quote
The issue of cross boarder trading - and the Pirate and gate camp thing - I think are being looked at from possibly too narrow a point of view.
Gate camps effects can be reduced by increasing the number of potential bottlenecks - this can be engineered into a game mechanic with shorter and longer routes with correspondingly less and more possible options. To fly currently from Minmatar space to Jita I can take the short route through Rancer or the longer highsec route. If in the split-empires scenario there was a direct route - but also many longer alternatives - people would have choices to make. Flight time is almost equal to profit per hour for trading - and so you would get something of a risk reward system being made manifest. Gate camps themselves are a bit of a lowest common denominator mechanic and I feel that it is a shame that a pirate has not more options available to them than the gate camp tactic. But gate camps and the mechanics that make them more-or-less the only method of entry into a losec pirating scenario is beyond the scope of the OP in my opinion although it does affect the proposal.
I don't feel the proposal's design intent is really to force people who are averse to losec into losec, I beleive the proposal can change what "LoSec" really means to players. I don't feel that the proposal's strength is in forcing more non-consentual PvP. In fact if that were to be the most significant affect then i wouldn't support the proposal because I think it would drive people away from the game.
The proposal would affect people who trade between the empires most. Undoubtedly. But would the issue be insurmountable? People run jump-freighters out and to Jita from null. But that probably raises the barrier to entry too high if these expensive and skill intensive ships were made necessary for that profession. However the creation of distinct and seperate markets would also open opportunities to traders. If managed correctly I beleive that this could give traders and all character more decisions and options for managing their EvE careers. I don't sell at Jita because the Rens market works well for me as an example. The PI changes, for example, made me think I would quit PI, but they actually made PI more lucrative for me. The PI change was a well managed change in my opinion - even though I opposed it to start with. Enhancing the character and indeviduality of local trade hubs would be a by product and would present options. Is it so great that currently Jita is so busy? Does that not actually make the world a smaller place?
The proposal fails in my opinion if there are a lot of players who really don't want to go into LoSec, (even if the proposal changes what the reality of losec actually is in practice), but do like flying between the empires at will. If these players regardless of any local trade opportunities, local regional character being created (maybe), greater access to a possibly different in nature lo-sec, etc. will feel too restricted - then it wouldn't be fair to them.
But I sincerly beleive that with the selection of some countermeasures to perceived or actual barriers to entry the benefit would be great. There are many options and some have already been almost implemented - non-freighter goods transport ships have larger holds - maybe Border gates could have much increased weaponry or EWar on their LoSec sides to offer a beach head into Lo - maybe expensive-to-use gates between the empires could be implemented - these just come to mind as potentially bad but never-the-less possible options for handling a transition? |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
215
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 14:19:00 -
[744] - Quote
I don't disagree.
To be clear, I'm not against the idea in particular, just implemented in the current environment.
Change the nature of the PvP this is meant to enhance, and you radically change the value of the suggestion. As it is, he stated a page or so back that the point was gatecamps, which is why he is Ok with a toll conduit between empires, but not with making the entry gates to lowsec safe on the lowsec side.
A lot of the problem is indeed perception. Make lowsec something other than a a guns free gank zone, and you will get more people in there. This is largely due to the people that inhabit it now--- they have hunted their prey to extinction, and only a few masochistic pilots, fellow gankers, and those passing through to Null are left.
There are so many reasons for a bear to go to Lowsec, from POS to level 5 missions, better ores, higher rat bounties, etc... But the gank culture of ambush predators makes it all worthless. This proposal won't change that, and forcing trade into the blender won't make for a stable market, which he admits is the point when he's not trying to softsell the results.
This idea is fine if it comes on the heels of a massive change in how PvE and PvP is balanced. As it is now it's poisonous to the game. |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
1477
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 17:07:00 -
[745] - Quote
You can use the current cost of a JF service from high sec to low sec as a guide to estimate costs.
Add 50-80 million isk to 1 billion isk cargo. With increased demand this number may go up, or more people will eventually get into JFs and it will come back down.
JF's may not be able to transport massive volumes like a high sec freighters, so perhaps high volume (size) items (ships, minerals) will turn into local products while low volume (modules) will still flow through Jita. ? |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
49
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 18:43:00 -
[746] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:I don't disagree.
To be clear, I'm not against the idea in particular, just implemented in the current environment.
Change the nature of the PvP this is meant to enhance, and you radically change the value of the suggestion. As it is, he stated a page or so back that the point was gatecamps, which is why he is Ok with a toll conduit between empires, but not with making the entry gates to lowsec safe on the lowsec side.
A lot of the problem is indeed perception. Make lowsec something other than a a guns free gank zone, and you will get more people in there. This is largely due to the people that inhabit it now--- they have hunted their prey to extinction, and only a few masochistic pilots, fellow gankers, and those passing through to Null are left.
There are so many reasons for a bear to go to Lowsec, from POS to level 5 missions, better ores, higher rat bounties, etc... But the gank culture of ambush predators makes it all worthless. This proposal won't change that, and forcing trade into the blender won't make for a stable market, which he admits is the point when he's not trying to softsell the results.
This idea is fine if it comes on the heels of a massive change in how PvE and PvP is balanced. As it is now it's poisonous to the game.
I think the problem here is your lack of experience (or amount of negative experience) in low sec. You don't understand how many options you have to get around low sec. You also don't seem to understand what a trade hub is, and why it exists. And there are already trade hubs in every empire. Nobody goes to jita every time they need something, unless they live right next to it.
There are already dozens of paths from one empire to the other through low sec space. It would be impossible to keep them all camped constantly. There are already lots of people (nullsec carebears) that fly through low sec to get their stuff to high sec markets. All the stuff that you think will happen probably won't. And for the people who do like to do stuff in every empire then either they can risk their ship going from place to place (warp stab fit anyone?) Or they can just set up jump clones everywhere and buy ships where they need them. Do you think its good for the economy if everyone could exist without ever losing a ship?
And I'm not sure what you're talking about pvp vs pve balance. Pve can't be pvp because you can't simulate another player. Players have lots of options, play styles and tricks. If they did give the npcs similar randomness then missions would have a high fail rate, especially if they all equip warp disruptors. Missions with neuts are already fairly devestating to most mission runners. Much less having a blob of ships with random ewar too.
You do keep stating the market would be ruinous. Please, give us an example of one item that would be of ruinous value and explain how you envision it getting to that point. I can't see that happening personally. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
49
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 19:01:00 -
[747] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:You can use the current cost of a JF service from high sec to low sec as a guide to estimate costs.
Add 50-80 million isk to 1 billion isk cargo. With increased demand this number may go up, or more people will eventually get into JFs and it will come back down.
JF's may not be able to transport massive volumes like a high sec freighters, so perhaps high volume (size) items (ships, minerals) will turn into local products while low volume (modules) will still flow through Jita. ?
Yes anything that can be done locally will be now, instead of it being freightered in for free from jita.
You also need to remember, jfs use fuel to jump. They also reduced the access to fuel in high sec. So if people do start to JF more, they will use more fuel and the demand will go up. When the demand goes up the price goes up, so the price of JFing stuff goes up. As more people use JFs more fuel is used again, causeing fuel prices to go up even more. So the cost of JFing things around becomes very high and then people will stop JFing. It will eventually reach an equalibrium where people will only jump certain things that will make a profit and everything else will not be worth the price of fuel. This will leave the door open for people to move stuff from place to place in small haulers.
I envision having buy and sell orders on the border systems and someone moves stuff from one border system to the opposite side of the low sec gap and then the buyer freighters it to their local trade hub when they gather enough of said item.
The original seller makes money, the hauler makes money and the buyer makes money. Everybody wins! You don't have to be the original buyer and end seller to make a profit here. |
Aramis Defranzac
Wild.Stallions
23
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 19:44:00 -
[748] - Quote
Yarrr!!!!!
Love the idea for more attacks of opportunity, not so much this idea.
I'd prefer to shrink the overall size of Hi Sec versus creating faction based Hi Sec islands.
Aramis |
Ghosteagle Knight
Radiant core construction Green Alien Growth
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 20:13:00 -
[749] - Quote
Sounds to me from what i have read that some one pissed in Commander Ted's cheerios.... |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
215
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 20:33:00 -
[750] - Quote
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. |
|
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
49
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 02:34:00 -
[751] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote: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. First of all you didn't answer the question of how prices would be "ruinous". You just keep repeating that they would.
You also say that for this to work there would need to be a redistribution of ores so there is a shortage in each empire. THIS WOULD MAKE PRICES RUINOUS!!!
The only things that would be significantly effected are the Empire Faction gear and Ice products. Ores would stay the same so you could have local production. This would ensure prices on the market will remain steady and not "Ruinous". Everything else would trend based on supply and demand in a region.
Second, There's no way every gate would be camped at all times. It's just not possible. First of all there's not enough people dedicated enough to camp all the gates constantly. And even if there were enough pirates, they'd all have to play nice with each other and we all know that pirates don't play nice.
Please stop writing lame posts and explain why you think this stuff will happen the way you see it. Describe the chain of events that will occur that will end EVE online as we know it. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
216
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 16:31:00 -
[752] - Quote
It's an either/or proposition.
It either does nothing, and thus time would be much better spent on a change that would better EVE for everyone, or the full body of changes is implemented to give the effect the OP wants, and the game is ruined.
I already answered your question, you just don't agree. That is fine. Hopefully it will remain forever unproven either way, as the only way to find out is to go ahead and do it.
The core of the idea is market differences driving enough reward to make the radically increased risk balanced, thus providing gate campers with content. Faction ammo and the few mods worthwhile in each empire won't drive that. It will have to affect nearly the entire production chain to be worth the risk. As the prices go up more and more pirates will join the lazy few already doing this, as it has now become both mandatory for the haulers and exceedingly lucrative for the pirates. It's that simple. If this isn't done so that no empire can float significant production on it's own everything will just stay local, no one new will travel lowsec, no new content is created for anyone, and the idea fails.
The vast bulk of the marketing for this change is aimed at softsellijg the risk that drives the profit increase for the haulers. Without the risk, rewards will not increase, the idea ends with the same situation we have now, the idea fails.
The idea exists purely to boost gatecamping by creating insane fluctuation in the markets from region to region. The effects would be devastating, and it would not take long, unless it came with measures to ameliorate the damage, which would hamstring the 'benefit'.
There is no third fairy tale option that ends with all the risk adverse haulers rejoicing as they swallow the costs of their losses and discover that being preyed upon really is more fun than completing their goals. |
Brujo Loco
Brujeria Teologica
972
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 16:58:00 -
[753] - Quote
Been skimming this thread lately ....
I proposed something like this a LOOOOONG TIME AGO, but with different twists, in my infamous ARCHIPELAGO THEORY back in 2007.
As a blast from the past you can see some replies to my thread back in 2007 mirror some of the ones here, when you have been for so long here, you will begin to laugh at how cyclical these forums are, hence why I love them to death
Though I hardly like most of your ideas, the core concept, of having a Hi Sec Island surrounded by Lo sec is extremely appealing to me and I have done a living over the years under different guises in two of the most fun (for me anyway) "Islands" currently ingame, one in Gallente Territory (you deserve everything if you manage to thrive there and survive the gatecamps) and the one in Ammatar Space (slow traffic, good nice lite pvp)
EVE Needs better "Islands", with a core set of L1-L4Agents , some decent Industry/Research slots and low enough hi-sec for enterprising corps to mount their POSes.
I have tried (sometimes miserably) to set up small market hubs in these desolate places. It-Ķs a pain, but very, very doable.
So, I like your idea, but needs more refining.
What I would love to see is at least a SINGLE NPC station in the Island have a MEDICAL FACILITY ... Inner Sayings of BrujoLoco: http://eve-files.com/sig/brujoloco |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
785
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 18:58:00 -
[754] - Quote
When you say Islands I am not entirely sure what you mean. Are you talking like 10-20 little areas or what I am talking about?
You can't break up Hi-sec TO much or else you really would have large price hikes across lots of items.
With few producers for each area you would see the issue of having certain things be in short supply in some areas because nobody is capable or willing to make them and people would just specialize for the things everyone needs. Because the fewer industry people you have the less flexibility you have.
Of course the extra chaos in how things are broken up would make it much much easier to do trade because you would probably not run into gate camps often making moving regular freighters and badgers much more feasible.
Also this is definitely the largest of any thread of this type, so it isn't entirely cyclical. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
4004
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 19:24:00 -
[755] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Commander Ted wrote:I keep seeing Fozzie respond to new posts all the time so I know he has read this. That is correct. Pushing you past the quadruple 6's... . |
Roime
Ten Thousand Years Shinjiketo
3099
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 21:14:00 -
[756] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote: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.
All your posts are based on false premises. You project your own inability to adapt unto others, and see everything in either black or white, their division based purely on ignorance and adapted prejudices.
No, they only way would not be to force mineral shortage, where did you dig that up? It would be interesting to emphasize local flavours, but reducing total amount of resource makes no sense.
You say that every gate would be camped. Well, besides that being physically impossible, there would be more and stronger camps- but the camps would let their blues through, profiting both the hauler and themselves. They would keep the route clean for their own, while preventing competition. See, in EVE, people communicate, negotiate standings and form alliances- real, result-oriented and organized human interaction.
Another method you neglect to recognize is using jump freighters to avoid inbound gate camps.
There are already commercial freight operators providing low/null transport services, this proposed change would create more of them, and especially multi-disciplinary organizations.
Your vision of PVE vs PVP fits is a classic misconception. Do you think that sitting around a low/null/wh system in a PVP fit would improve your chances of winning, when you get jumped? If you are not the one picking the fight and controlling it, you lose. Ships and fits don't kill people, tactics do.
I haven't lost a PVE ship in lowsec in years. 90% of lowsec is barren, empty carebearing paradise. Furthermore, having the player skills required to hunt PVErs benefits one massively when assuming the role of the prey.
Again, OP's suggestion would benefit the whole game by creating an improved simulation of real global economy.
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
Kitty Bear
Disturbed Friends Of Diazepam Tribal Band
725
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 23:19:00 -
[757] - Quote
Jeanne-Luise Argenau wrote:
-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
the bumping mechanics would definitely need to be changed dis-aligning a freighter should take something with comparable mass. it should be impossible for something as small and light as a frigate to even slightly affect something with the mass of a freighter
but of course that would cause an outcry from the ganker/camper corner of the sandbox |
Johnson 1044
Johnson Organic Produce
28
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 01:25:00 -
[758] - Quote
Let's do it already. This game needs a shot in the arm. |
DataRunner Touch
Phlut Design Systems
5
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 02:17:00 -
[759] - Quote
actually I greatly support this idea, and I will provides thoughts of my own.
"Gatecamps Blah-blah-blah."
Currently the most popular gatecamps are found in bottleneck systems, as these are the easiest gate-camps to main as you will know that if something wants to get from point a to point b, they have to pass by your gate, if you add more entrences and start to take out the bottleneck systems, then you will discover that gatecamps will become easier to avoid cause if you use a little smarts, you just go into the next few systems down.
second thought: This will allow for more use of other types of Indy ships, currently the tech two indy ships are rather under used. Null sec alliances typically uses jump freighters to ship all their stuff from high sec to null sec. Blockade runners and Deep space transports actually see very little use when compared to the amount of use and demand that a Jump freighter has. With this, a blockade runner, with their ability to run expensive, yet small cargo between the different regions would make them a high value courier. As for the deep space transport, well that thing is a interesting bugger. They are slow and unwelding, but they make up for that with the ability to fit quite the scary tank, and with the fact that it starts with a +2 warp core stab built in, well it would be a tough bugger warp scram if fit correctly. If the empires are separated by low sec, I fore-see convoys of these guys shipping bulk orders between the the different empires.
And the final thought. If something like this does get in place, I fore-see many interesting things happening, new types of jobs popping up, I fore-see certain things becoming more in demand, and I also see people making quite the amounts of money by filling orders from empire space to empire space. |
Dani Lizardov
Otbor Chereshka GaNg BaNg TeAm
13
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 08:00:00 -
[760] - Quote
I like it! Now make it happen
I think that this game need changes, big changes, covered with more stories, to stay attractive for old and new players...
CCP did advertize this game like this: The Butterfly Effect bounty hunters
etc.... I am not going to link all good trailers here :) I just wanted to make a point: EVE Online looks much more exiting in the trailers then actually is. After initial excitement in a eve player pass (few mounts from start at best), he / she quickly finds a low risk and boring way to exist ... Ex. High Sec: Miner, Trader, Industrial, Mission runner Ex.: Low Sec: Gate Camper (*pirate), Missions/ Complex runner, Industrial Ex.: Null Sec: Join big alliance in a big fu** coalition and have half of eve player base blue to you :)
Any way the point is, I support this change, because it will bring something new and exiting, it can be covered with a good FW story. |
|
Oraac Ensor
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
262
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 08:06:00 -
[761] - Quote
Daft idea. |
Zappity
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
170
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 11:28:00 -
[762] - Quote
Supported as long as gate camps are nerfed. What about CONCORD at lowsec gates but nowhere else in the system? Hooray, I'm l33t! -á(Kil2: "The higher their ship losses...the better they're going to be.") |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
786
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 15:30:00 -
[763] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Supported as long as gate camps are nerfed. What about CONCORD at lowsec gates but nowhere else in the system? then what is the point of this. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
51
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 18:28:00 -
[764] - Quote
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. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
786
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 20:21:00 -
[765] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote: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. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
51
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 21:16:00 -
[766] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: 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.
It wouldn't be impartial to point out issues or flaws with an idea.
We do seem to be in a weird place as far as development goes. CCP is going back fixing the things that always needed fixing, but we're in a period of time where they're afraid to make the big changes that we need. Aside from combat and mining ship rebalance, everything has been "meh" level changes. Bounties, scanning, jump effects, ore redistribution... Meh...
Dear CCP,
Go big or go home!
Eve needs change! Give it to us!
On a related note, separating the empires could be a door opener for future ideas. You could build mechanics around faction warfare that could impact the empires. Such as tax rates on refining and trade causing self sustaining high sec dynamics.
But you'd have to take this first step. Or maybe its a leap? |
Zlake
Hual Miners Union
12
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 17:26:00 -
[767] - Quote
I do a lot of carebear stuff over the past few years. I would love to see this. There should be long and short routes between empires. So you can take longer routes to avoid large camps. To really think about it caldari and amarr are not buddies buddies. As soon as gal/Minmatar fall they would be fighting one another. They are allies of convenience. It would be easy to fit it into cannon too also tbh the pirates hate the empires too. There is soo much that can be done with low sec. Tbh right now FW is low sec. |
Call Rollard
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve The Fourth District
60
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 19:23:00 -
[768] - Quote
I do think its a good idea in ways, if this was to happen I wouldn't mind it at all, I may actually like it |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
218
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 21:23:00 -
[769] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Zappity wrote:Supported as long as gate camps are nerfed. What about CONCORD at lowsec gates but nowhere else in the system? then what is the point of this, at all.
You tell us. According to you these Gate Camps would be few and far between, easily evaded, casually avoided, and largely ineffective even when not distracted fighting off other pirates in the area.
So, since they are so unimportant already, surely making them impossible at the High/Low crossover gates would not make a difference in the effectiveness of your plan?
I can see it being more workable if you had 'shallow' and 'deep' lowsec. Shallow would have Highsec gates every jump or 2, being the fastest way through. Deep Lowsec would have tons of connections that would be difficult to lock down but a much longer route to get back to the shallow portions of lowsec. Most of your camps would concentrate on the shallow gates as the traffic must go through there.
I still think if it was profitable enough to be worthwhile you would wind up with big alliances simply moving in to control the commerce themselves, but it's not an idea without interest. I just don't like it with current PvP models.
EDIT: If every gate in Lowsec is patrolled by Concord, the whole point of this idea is completely negated as a means of making travel more expensive. |
Atomic Option
Taggart Transdimensional Virtue of Selfishness
66
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 22:21:00 -
[770] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: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.
Literally they will send your corpse to your family, and AFTER that they will come and sew your genitals to your face and put explosives in your face and in your genitals.
Grammar does some amazing things sometimes. |
|
Zappity
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
183
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 22:48:00 -
[771] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Zappity wrote:Supported as long as gate camps are nerfed. What about CONCORD at lowsec gates but nowhere else in the system? then what is the point of this, at all.
You tell me because I'm struggling to see the validity of this gate camper's wet dream.
Commander Ted wrote:This would buff trading by making it harder
If that were true it would get my unconditional support. Unfortunately, all it would do is decrease market liquidity. The majority of market opportunities (by volume) are created by cheap/easy inter-regional transport. If you make travel between market hubs more difficult then the smaller traders will be out of business. And they provide a lot of the liquidity due to their typically short term focus.
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. Hooray, I'm l33t! -á(Kil2: "The higher their ship losses...the better they're going to be.") |
Zlake
Hual Miners Union
12
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 22:55:00 -
[772] - Quote
Most people just do station trading. The small time traders wouldn't go under. They would keepup with their station trading. When I traded I just used a covert hauler to move my high vaule mods and I would go through low sec. If I was ever afraid of Smartbomb gatecamp I would warp to a planet off in another angel and jump through the gate that way. Also I wouldnt show up on the overview for them to time their bombs. Id mvoe about 200m-400m in mods at a time doing that. |
supernova ranger
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
42
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 04:54:00 -
[773] - Quote
Fine with me but to implement it I would increase the number of H2H WH's tenfold and then ween them off as people adapt to the new play style. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
789
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 19:02:00 -
[774] - Quote
Zappity wrote:
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.
Gate camps = pvp opportunities. People swarm around a gate, form a fleet and kill them.
also >implying Jita is at all volatile and that the other hubs are anything more than things people buy in bulk in Jita and move elsewhere.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
789
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 19:03:00 -
[775] - Quote
also, 20k views! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Zlake
Hual Miners Union Alliance of Abandoned Cybernetic Rejects
12
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 06:03:00 -
[776] - Quote
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. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
790
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 07:34:00 -
[777] - Quote
Zlake wrote: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.
Maybe if the changing sec status thing were added access to these agents would be dependent on how well the pirates were doing?
at .5 sec status no agents at .4 they are level 1 .3 at level 2 .2 level 3 .1 level 4 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Zlake
Hual Miners Union Alliance of Abandoned Cybernetic Rejects
12
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 08:41:00 -
[778] - Quote
I still think lvl 4 agents should be in null or also 100% you cant pickup LP items unless your in null |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
55
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 05:42:00 -
[779] - Quote
who needs NPC pirate missions when you'd have real pirate missions to do?
I'd say we can worry about that later if needed ;p |
Katie Door
the united Negative Ten.
9
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 07:55:00 -
[780] - Quote
[quote=Commander Ted]
Piracy isn't all that profitable either. (/quote)
Can we check your credentials somewhere ? how long have you been pirating to make such a, IMO, bold statement ? In my 6 years of gate camping, i've made my "fair" share of ISK. Just because you can't seem to make ISK off piracy doesn't mean somebody else can not either.
[quote=Commander Ted] eve pirates don't really affect commerce at all. (/quote)
ow really ? can I see the statistics of which you base this ? let me give you a statistic: in the six years we've been camping, we've destroyed and/or looted 7 TRILLION ISK. where do YOU think all those ships, modules and implants come from? thin air ?
[quote=Commander Ted] Common Arguments:
snip
Every system will be like Rancer
Rancer is Rancer because it is impossible to go around it. Their is only 1 link that connects Minmatar and Caldari space, only one. If new regions are added like I prescribe then it will always be easy to circumvent these camps with a little know how. (/quote)
Ow really ? I would suggest you check your starmap again, it might be out of date. ow wait, there has ALWAYS been a way around Rancer to get from Caldari space to Minmatar space..................................
[quote=Commander Ted] Gate camps aren't fun or pvp!
While mostly true the fact that gate camps exist will provide opportunities for pirates to make money actually pirating. More importantly the fact that a gate camp is there means that someone will want to come and break it up, encouraging fleet pvp off stations encouraging more fun.(/quote)
this argument, wether you agree with it or not, is riddled with incorrect "facts". first of all, like I alluded to earlier, I've been gatecamping for over 6 years, and still enjoy it. secondly, again wether you agree with it or not: gatecamping is most surely PvP (player(s) vs players(s) ): we (the united) are players, shooting at other players that come thru the gate, that makes it PvP.
So i ask you, good sir, please give us the be-all and end-all definition of piracy, something we ALL can agree on. I will grab some popcorn and watch you get flammed to Rancer and back. Also, PvP is large fleets bashing eachother over the head only ? Is PvP determined by the location where it takes place ? why does PvP need to take place off of stations or stargates ? otherwise, in YOUR opinion, it isn't "real" PvP ?
in closing, please don't mistake YOUR opinion for FACT, and check your other "facts"
|
|
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
57
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 20:40:00 -
[781] - Quote
Katie Door wrote:*snipped also*
What you're saying is that his facts are not correct.
The things he said were not fact specific but a generalistic overview.
"Piracy isn't all that profitable either."
What you read was "piracy isn't profitable". What he said was "piracy is profitable but not exceptionally so". What he said is true, its not the most profitable endevor to take up. Though it may be fairly profitable, there are other things you could do that are "all that profitable."
"Eve pirates don't really affect commerce at all."
Sure you've killed and looted lots of isks worth over a long period of time. But has that really affected commerce? You ask for statistics for that basis but this is a statement of a non-affect. The fact that there is no big news article or readily availible statistics is testament to its non-affect. On the other hand there is one example of one such event that impacted commerce. The Goon's ice interdiction had a huge impact on gallente ice commerce and it can be measured. Piracy in general has had no such effect.
As for the rancer thing. Yes its possible to go around it, but it requires a massive detour. Rancer is rancer because its the only effecient way to move between the two areas. Rancer is what we'd like to avoid with this kind of a change becuase it would put too much emphasys on too small of an area.
Gatecamps... Starting to think you missinterperate his post. Nothing of substance to repy here to. No big ideas here for someone to really agree or disagree with.
The posts are based on the understanding of how these thing work. The only entity with the "facts" or what exists of facts for these things are at CCP. Or in another point of view, what we would like to change are the facts of the current stale empire area of space. We don't know what the fact of the future would be after the change nor does anyone else, all we can use is our understanding of how people (in general) work. And based on past experience what would be likely in the future. |
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
5
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 21:58:00 -
[782] - Quote
In my Eyes Gate Camps is the Mining for PvP Pilots just a lame excuse to have a lot of alts, i prefer playing with only one Char and TBH no one wants to fly a Spy in my Corp.
I like the idea of Splitting the Borders (but only Caldari/Amarr Border vs. Gallente/Minmatar Borders) because it would make sense.
But if this happens please change the current Spy "mechanics" (maybe with a Module [and no i dont mean Cov Cloaks!]) and rethink the Gate Camp mechanic aswell, oh and please give us more Routes from High to Low and High to Null.
(BTW i dont care about Gatecamps because i use WH for travelling into low and nullsec but sitting behind the comfort of a cluster change is just dull and again a lame excuse for more alts (which also a Pest for a MMORPG but maybe thats more imho)...
PS: Sry for my bad english |
Katie Door
the united Negative Ten.
9
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 08:08:00 -
[783] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote: what you're saying is that his facts are not correct.
yes.
Erutpar Ambient wrote:The things he said were not fact specific but a generalistic overview.
ow really ? how is "there's no way around Rancer " anything but a statement of fact ? to me, that doesn't look like a generalistic overview.
Erutpar Ambient wrote:"Piracy isn't all that profitable either."
What you read was "piracy isn't profitable". What he said was "piracy is profitable but not exceptionally so". What he said is true, its not the most profitable endevor to take up. Though it may be fairly profitable, there are other things you could do that are "all that profitable."
you wanna argue semantics here ? you can make profit engaging in piracy. what I think you and OP are saying that the profit that IS made, is not enough for either of you. again, there is no way of ascertaining what you base this on. is this based on personal experience or what you've heard in NPC corp channel ? what you also seem to ignore is my request for credentials. how long has OP been pirating to make such a blanket statement?
Erutpar Ambient wrote:"Eve pirates don't really affect commerce at all."
Sure you've killed and looted lots of isks worth over a long period of time. But has that really affected commerce? You ask for statistics for that basis but this is a statement of a non-affect. The fact that there is no big news article or readily availible statistics is testament to its non-affect. On the other hand there is one example of one such event that impacted commerce. The Goon's ice interdiction had a huge impact on gallente ice commerce and it can be measured. Piracy in general has had no such effect.
Ow really ? so all the ships, modules and implants we have destroyed came out of thin air ? gotcha.....
Again, you are arguing semantics. previously mentioned ships,modules and implants have for the most part been bought of the market. after their destruction they'll hopefully be replaced by our "customer", AKA bought from market. I think what you are trying to say is that the magnitude of the effect piracy has on commerce ("the market") is negligible. since both of us do not have access to the volume of trading in New Eden, it is a personal opinion wether or not you think the effect is negligible. not a statement of fact. on the off chance of "commerce" is meant to entail trading, transporting and the likes: try to get Black Frog to move your stuff to Rancer or Tama, then come back to me, and tell me that piracy has not effected commerce.
Erutpar Ambient wrote: As for the rancer thing. Yes its possible to go around it, but it requires a massive detour. Rancer is rancer because its the only effecient way to move between the two areas. Rancer is what we'd like to avoid with this kind of a change becuase it would put too much emphasys on too small of an area.
ok, so you want effeciency AND safety. in low sec. No, just no. there are already tools you can use, in or out of game, to make an informed guess as to the status of certain low-sec systems (map> statics, Dotlan). you want efficiency, find a way through Rancer. you want safety, go around. At this point in time, you can't have both. deal with it
(ran out of alotted quotes, CBA to make this a 2 post reply)
As for "Gatecamping isn't fun or PvP" : the first part is (most likely) OP's personal opinion, not fact. the last part is just plain false.
So try harder next time. check your facts.
|
Anthar Thebess
REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN
107
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 13:44:00 -
[784] - Quote
Just let doing mission for one side - will automaticly infilct the same negative impact on other faction standing.
Phantasm - 150% speed bonus in cloak - 2LY jump range
|
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
58
|
Posted - 2013.07.22 20:45:00 -
[785] - Quote
Katie Door wrote: *snipped*
A couple of things here. First the easy thing. Piracy has affected logistics to rancer sure. But in general piracy has not fad any noticable affect on commerce in general. Or as you put it, the affect is negligible meaning not noticable. When a person loses their pod or ship yes it stimulates the sales of implants ships and modules. But how much if this are pirates responsible? Blowing up what someone is hauling may increase demand or decrease supply, but are pirates destroying enough to affect commerce?
Nope. You would need to blow up a large portion of an individual item to impact commerce. And because most commerce doesn't have to go through low sec you wouldn't be given much of an oppurtunity.
Again on the profitability of piracy. First, how much isk could a single person make? Then, how many people could make this much through piracy?
Is piracy a viable profession for one person? Potentially Is piracy a continuous stream of money? Nope Is there a limit to the number of people that can profit from piracy? Yes
I just wanna make it clear, I'm not talking about high sec ganking.
This change would create a steady stream of haulers through low sec. And there will always be tards and unlucky risk takers out there looking to make a quick buck just waiting for someone to grab em. As of now, pirates don't have much to work with. The normal arguement is that they ran em all off by being pirates but that's probably true. There's no real reason for people to go to low sec nowadays other than FW or passing through to null sec. This would be a way to create a steady stream of traffic through. |
polly papercut
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 18:21:00 -
[786] - Quote
posting in a stealth buff gate camps thread.
|
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
325
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 18:29:00 -
[787] - Quote
I love the idea of a low sec separating the empires.
Play with the available pirates and sites a little bit and it means all things DON'T go through Jita, you would actually have regional markets that would create interesting oppurtunities and risks for the traders, haulers, PvPers, basically everyone if they do it right.
....and yes its quite easy to get around Rancer, and Ammamake for that matter.
Just not if you are in a hurry. |
polly papercut
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 03:20:00 -
[788] - Quote
If this happened you would have to revert back to full pay out on bounties to the killer, also anyone with a sec status less then 2.0 can not collect on bounties. Besides this will never happen but I bet the OP feels like he is getting somewhere . |
M1k3y Koontz
Thorn Project Surely You're Joking
184
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 13:52:00 -
[789] - Quote
Yes. Yes, yes yes. Yes.
More regions like Solitude would be awesome! How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp. |
Vaihto Ehto
25
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 14:24:00 -
[790] - Quote
M1k3y Koontz wrote:Yes. Yes, yes yes. Yes.
More regions like Solitude would be awesome!
Why would anyone live in Solitude? All the cons of deep lowsec and none of the benefits, basically. Why would you not use an alt to post on the forums? |
|
Roime
Ten Thousand Years Shinjiketo
3193
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 14:28:00 -
[791] - Quote
Deep lowsec has no cons
Solitude <3
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
59
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 03:15:00 -
[792] - Quote
polly papercut wrote:If this happened you would have to revert back to full pay out on bounties to the killer, also anyone with a sec status less then 2.0 can not collect on bounties. Besides this will never happen but I bet the OP feels like he is getting somewhere .
What in the world is your reasoning for these ideas??????
What does it impact at all? It makes absolutely no sense. Please explain. |
Dues Incarnine
Haul Miners Union
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 23:18:00 -
[793] - Quote
ID love to see this change. That's all I have to say. Also the current bounty system is. Way better than the last |
Darth Khasei
Wavestar Business Ventures Inc.
109
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 23:55:00 -
[794] - Quote
Respect.
I don't think the OP and some others have fully fleshed this idea out taking into account the full ten year history of this game and the perspective of ALL of the players that pay and play the game.
Luckily, the devs have and that is why you see hi-sec,low-sec, null-sec in their present forms.
As a Merchant of Death I encourage all kinds of increased player interaction, but must draw the line at something that would ruin the game entirely.
I think that player emergant gameplay is the answer, not the artifically induced non emergant forced sheep herding that was originally proposed. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
62
|
Posted - 2013.07.27 05:30:00 -
[795] - Quote
Darth Khasei wrote:Respect. I don't think the OP and some others have fully fleshed this idea out taking into account the full ten year history of this game and the perspective of ALL of the players that pay and play the game. Luckily, the devs have and that is why you see hi-sec,low-sec, null-sec in their present forms. As a Merchant of Death I encourage all kinds of increased player interaction, but must draw the line at something that would ruin the game entirely. I think that player emergant gameplay is the answer, not the artifically induced non emergant forced sheep herding that was originally proposed.
What are you talking about? Has high,low,null sec been in any other form in the past? I wasn't aware of this.
Please explain how the "full ten year history of this game" has anything to do with this idea.
Please explain how this would "ruin the game entirely."
You could fully flesh out your ideas to tell us why you believe what you say.
On the other hand, there have been quite a few issues brought up in this thread that have all been thought through. I don't there's really anything new that hasn't already been given attention. |
Don Purple
Snuggle Factory
27
|
Posted - 2013.07.27 08:06:00 -
[796] - Quote
Interesting Idea but I never see it happening. How about add multiple low sec routes that shorten the distances between the trade hubs to 1-2 jumps. But then we have Rancer happening all over again. Idk fun idea though. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
77
|
Posted - 2013.08.03 06:33:00 -
[797] - Quote
There is something i want you guys to think about. What periods of time in history are the most interesting? Times of Peace or times of War? What period of time would you guys consider New Eden to be in right now?
Seriously though, who thought that peace time was the right time for the setting of this game in the first place? Wouldn't it have been grand to be playing at the time of the Minmatar rebellion instead of reading about it? Or the Caldari-Gallente war. Or the Amarr Jove war?
Seriously, peace time is a time for the real world. Not video games. Turn Eve into the Warzone it should be!!!
|
Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Against ALL Authorities
55
|
Posted - 2013.08.03 12:22:00 -
[798] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:There is something i want you guys to think about. What periods of time in history are the most interesting? Times of Peace or times of War? What period of time would you guys consider New Eden to be in right now?
Seriously though, who thought that peace time was the right time for the setting of this game in the first place? Wouldn't it have been grand to be playing at the time of the Minmatar rebellion instead of reading about it? Or the Caldari-Gallente war. Or the Amarr Jove war?
Seriously, peace time is a time for the real world. Not video games. Turn Eve into the Warzone it should be!!!
have you been to nullsec lately? its constantly war. its mostly just default war with peace between selected groups (blues) |
Afuran
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
22
|
Posted - 2013.08.03 15:49:00 -
[799] - Quote
I like it- would create more areas for pirates to operate and more 'escorts' for valuable cargo moving from one empire to the other.
Id also vote for system security to be variable depending on outcomes from faction war. So some .5 systems become .4 and vice versa as borders ebb and flow with the outcome of whatever is going on with faction wars. |
DrysonBennington
Eagle's Talon's
39
|
Posted - 2013.08.03 16:29:00 -
[800] - Quote
Why not place command towers at the gates where one empire meets the other?
To enter into an empire's territory you would have to have the necessary standings plus an Empire Passage Certificate that would need to be purchased on a weekly basis.
The Command Towers would not allow a pilot to pass if they didn't have the necessary documents.
|
|
Mr Barbeque
Mayhem and Ruin
3
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 19:18:00 -
[801] - Quote
DrysonBennington wrote:Why not place command towers at the gates where one empire meets the other?
To enter into an empire's territory you would have to have the necessary standings plus an Empire Passage Certificate that would need to be purchased on a weekly basis.
The Command Towers would not allow a pilot to pass if they didn't have the necessary documents.
Why? You already need appropriate sec status and faction standing to enter faction highsec as it stands. Your missing the purpose of this idea. All yours would do is make travel have an unneeded tax and quite irksome, without having a positive impact on the economic or pvp landscapes. Boo.
To the OP: This deserves dev attention. Conceptually this would fit well with eve's philosophy. +1
I see most opposition to this taking the stance of fear of camps, or that it will decrease Interhub trade. These positions are flawed.
Its clear that the OP is proposing the idea so that camping all routes should be infeasible. Cloaky haulers will work most times, as they're very hard to catch. There are may options to avoid destruction with a little ingenuity, and the idea that all gates will be hell camped is just fear talking.
Those that think this will hurt interhub trade seem to misunderstand the difference between difficult, and worse. True it will make trading between hubs more difficult, and as a result some people will stop. But traders are opportunists, and will seek to cover the emergent gaps to claim the profit for themselves. This adds more opportunities for competition to the market, making for a much more dynamic climate. This is a positive effect, not worse. If you find yourself thinking that this would make your gameplay more challenging and that's a bad thing, I question your choice of MMO. Why choose eve compared to its much less challenging competitors? Recruiting |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
78
|
Posted - 2013.08.06 01:47:00 -
[802] - Quote
Yes, if this and a handful of other changes got implemented we could have some amazing new game features. Maybe a bit more racial distinction. ;) |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3809
|
Posted - 2013.08.06 04:18:00 -
[803] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:The borders between allied empires could be also insecure, since they may be frontier areas since this idea comes with adding new regions that disrupt gate travel, these areas would be a frontier, thus not very well secured.
Seems pretty safe to me.
Anyway, sure, why not. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Cross Barret
Pod or be Podded
14
|
Posted - 2013.08.06 09:52:00 -
[804] - Quote
no time to read this entire threadnaught, but u get my +1 |
Yandros Soban
ExoGen Foundation The DEAD Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 11:09:00 -
[805] - Quote
Sounds to me like you just want to jump back in time to 2003 when the empires were divided by low sec. CCP didn't seem to like that system though, thus:
3 July 2003
New Superhighway system up and running!
03.07.2003 14:59| By Svarthol Under the leadership of CONCORD a new superhighway system has been constructed to link distant parts of the empires together. The hub of the new highway system is in the Yulai system, the location of the CONCORD Headquarters. From there space travelers are in easy reach of every empire region in just 2 or 3 jumps. All systems that are part of the highway network have a beefed-up security, so using the highway network offers a secure and comfortable way to travel. The superhighway network grid is still in its experimental stages, so people are advised to show caution while using them. Downtimes and operational failures are to be expected. To compensate, using the highway gates will be free of charge until all problems have been ironed out. Welcome to the internet where men are men, women are men and children and the FBI. |
Janna Sway
22
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 13:51:00 -
[806] - Quote
Dear OP,
I cannot comprehend how the isolation of empires would fit into the lore and even if the lore was ignored overall, still would it be very unplausible and strange to isolate the empires and turn them into four islands surrounded by the lawless waters you call "lowsec" in your thread.
Whenever two empire's territories approach one another, a border forms naturally and border zones are the most guarded areas. Border zones are hot zones with pressure and tension between the nations.
The "purposes of CONCORD is to ease the fragile tension and create a foundation for the empires to work their differences out in a peaceful manner." (https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/CONCORD). Therefore, CONCORD's core interest is to be the most active at the empire's borders and not to be absent, for that's what lowsec means - CONCORD's absence.
Your thread is literally an outcry to abolish CONCORD and its noble values and its replacement by detestable piracy, which is an abomination.
Chaos and disorder are not from God and God through the Empress opposes the proposed conditions in disgust. ALL four empires oppose the proposed condition of isolation and the ulcer of piracy. All four empires are and will keep supporting CONCORD's deeds and values with all force. |
BOS Hydra
Ubiquitous Hurt
3
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 16:13:00 -
[807] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Mara Rinn wrote:
If you want to be a pirate, what is stopping you being a pirate today?
There is nothing to shoot but other pirates. You don't make isk pirating, you make isk doing merc contracts or something completely unrelated to pvp. The reason that nobody cross low sec in freighters except for the very rare extra stupid idiot is that you can do it afk with 0 risk through hi-sec. It does happen occasionally but it is a very rare occurrence to see someone enter low sec with a freighter. It isn't even a question worth asking really it is so obvious. Their is 0 advantage to using low sec for trade right now, what requires thought and actually being at the keyboard in lowsec is done in hisec without you even being there at the cost of only 5 extra jumps. (some posts later) You say that it would increase the price of all goods but how exactly would that happen? You have to provide some justification, otherwise it is a completely baseless and irrelevant statement since this change would only increase the price of certain goods in certain areas.
There's plenty of people in FW space, though it may not always be the kinds of fights you are looking for. Also the only relevant means of low sec trade is Black Frog.
Your argument is flawed, that just because jump freighters are expensive and take a bit to get into means that no one will train them, or that the ones who have the skills for one won't consider hopping in one. If anything it will mean increased alts trained for them, the market is not going to simply stop just because the means got a little harder. That doesn't mean regular freighter pilots are going have an epiphany that they must take their freighter through low sec.
I realize you have said before that you don't like jump drives, but jump freighters are a major reason why null sec entities can behave the way they do, and also why very few people fly freighters in low sec. If each empire was on an island there would be virtually no meaningful trade travel between regions; only those with jump freighters or the money to consistently use Black Frog would ever move anything of notice on a large scale between hubs. That's great for those already established and Black Frog because supply goes down and demand should stay about the same, prices rise, and thus makes it harder for newer players to play. How much would prices rise?
Based on some napkin math and looking at trade volumes in Amarr, the increased use of JFs to carry the same amount of goods in volume between hubs, assuming that regular freighters are around full, meaning 3 JF trips for each freighter trip, would increase the DEMAND of isotopes by __20-30%__.This is only counting what is hauled through _Red Frog_ since I don't know how much is hauled outside of it. This would put more pressure on null sec alliances to mine their own fuel AND export their ice to high sec (high sec ice, when mined perfectly from EVERY site spawn, provides 80% of EVE's _CURRENT_ fuel usage, the MINIMUM amount of increased isotpoe demand makes that to 67%.) This will encourage some indy corps to migrate out of high sec into null to mine ice. Most likely this will mean some trillionairs get 15 mackinaw alts and hell bubble some backwater systems. Due to the high opportunity cost of mining in null sec (which would almost certainly be increased because of the knowledge that fuel demand has gone up by a great margin, thus more possible hunting/harassing of mining ops), null alliances will charge more for their exported ice, increasing Black Frog costs, increasing trade costs between null<-->high and high<-->high all without seeing the presence of normal freighters traveling through low to be ganked.
Speculate all you want about the prices this will imply, but a minimum of 20% (let's be generous and say 15%) increased isotope usage is not something you can just brush off as a side effect.
This is more than just jump freighter fuel costs rising, this directly intertwines into BPO research, capital, T2, T3, and drug manufacturing costs. I'm sure there are plenty of other facets of EVE affected that aren't covered by my explanation of what would likely happen. This is also not counting what might happen with the shifting supply/demand of particular isotopes. Everything would become more expensive everywhere, thus quite possibly less PvP due to lack of funding or production ability due to fuel constraints.
The only way this change would cause growth in low sec is creating a few more Rancers for Black Frog routes and the occasional freighter lemmings who didn't get the memo, only the first week of this change would produce many freighter kills after witnessing Burn Jita 2.0. I imagine there would be more instalocking camps and low sec intel channels being marginally more useful. |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
1525
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 21:04:00 -
[808] - Quote
Yandros Soban wrote:To compensate, using the highway gates will be free of charge until all problems have been ironed out. I think they've been ironed out. Where's the toll booth??!!
|
Phaade
Debitum Naturae WHY so Seri0Us
63
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 22:10:00 -
[809] - Quote
+1
Make the game crazier! It's already been 10 years, let's do it. |
Heather Tsukaya
Feather Ventures
4
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 23:14:00 -
[810] - Quote
I think this would be neat. |
|
Dimaloun Vyreen
Venture Corporation
10
|
Posted - 2013.08.16 01:47:00 -
[811] - Quote
I'd love this idea. The only thing is there should be some highsec routes, however very long or else just have one or two of them. There are three things you say to the police. "Yes, sir", "No, sir" and "I want a lawyer". There is one thing you say to Concord, "Wait, it wasn-" |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
823
|
Posted - 2013.08.16 01:51:00 -
[812] - Quote
Dimaloun Vyreen wrote:I'd love this idea. The only thing is there should be some highsec routes, however very long or else just have one or two of them.
For my purposes 1 route through hisec= 20 routes through hisec.
Also as long as autopilot exists anything shorter than 35 jumps would be fairly pointless for the purposes of trade, as anyone patient would still use the long way, which is most good traders. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
WilliamMays
Stuffs Inc.
61
|
Posted - 2013.08.16 02:32:00 -
[813] - Quote
I have liked this idea from the start of my time in eve. Also, giving the empires separate currency would create even more trade opportunities.
From a RP/storyline side of things, it could be spun as the empires having less ability to control pirates and capsuleers, resulting in more and more mistrust between the empires. start the POS revamp NOW--make it happen |
BOS Hydra
Ubiquitous Hurt
4
|
Posted - 2013.08.16 09:24:00 -
[814] - Quote
No big surprise, but obviously this is just a troll thread. The OP is active and only replies to supporters or straw man arguments. I believe my scenario is not unlikely and yet there was no acknowledgement of it. No counter argument, no "give me some time to think about that", just another reply to someone who agrees.
have fun o/ |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
83
|
Posted - 2013.08.17 07:09:00 -
[815] - Quote
Yandros Soban wrote:Sounds to me like you just want to jump back in time to 2003 when the empires were divided by low sec. CCP didn't seem to like that system though, thus: 3 July 2003New Superhighway system up and running! "2003"
Now that we have people in the game this is no longer necessary.
Janna Sway wrote:Dear OP,
I cannot comprehend how the isolation of empires would fit into the lore and even if the lore was ignored overall, still would it be very unplausible and strange to isolate the empires and turn them into four islands surrounded by the lawless waters you call "lowsec" in your thread.
During the event "The Battle for Caldari Prime" there was a conflict between Caldari and Concord resulting in the temporary cancellation of Concord services. The YULAI Convention is just an agreement enforced by the 4 empires on a voluntary basis. They have the ability to cancel it whenever they want. In fact currently with the high tension between Caldari > Gallente and Amarr> Minmatar and the most recent Gallente > Minmatar tension not only is this very plausible, but starting to look on the more than likely side.
If you're going to argue on the side of lore then please know your lore.
BOS Hydra wrote:No big surprise, but obviously this is just a troll thread. The OP is active and only replies to supporters or straw man arguments. I believe my scenario is not unlikely and yet there was no acknowledgement of it. No counter argument, no "give me some time to think about that", just another reply to someone who agrees.
have fun o/ You're comment was probably TL;DR for the OP. Infact i saw it and thought to myself "i'll just come back and read it later." And it probably requires it's own entire reply to break down. So maybe i'll go read it when i get the chance. |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
469
|
Posted - 2013.08.17 07:14:00 -
[816] - Quote
remove the 4 empires and make a goon online there too |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
83
|
Posted - 2013.08.17 07:27:00 -
[817] - Quote
BOS Hydra wrote: Jump freighters, market spikes, doomsaying? etc etc etc So after reading your post, first of all the OP was talking about Freighters, NOT Jump Freighters. Flying Freighters through low sec is not very smart unless you got some major coverage. And we know that just because JFs are expensive doesn't mean people won't train for them.
As for your Market spikes and speculation, i really have to call Bullshit on you.
The idea you paint is that there will be absolutely no way to move things from empire to empire without using a Jump Freighter. That is just absolutely not true.
I've brought this point up a few times throughout this thread but i'll bring it up again to you.
When prices increase as much as you think they might, people will start using other means of Hauling to increase their profit. If prices do spike between the Empires then someone in an Iteron (or whatever they call them now) can actually make money by hauling. JFs will only be useful as long as fuel prices are low enough to make money on hauling and that trickles down to hiring JFs too. There will only be a handful of things that will have general rarity between empires constantly. The basics will be available in all space, such as minerals and PI stuff. Moving faction specific stuff is where all the money will be made.
If the price of Fuel jumps too high, people will just run their Transport ships back and forth from each Empire. Transport ships don't require any fuel to move. And with the right scouts and the right fit you'll be really hard to catch.
The speculations you made are really without a logical basis.
With that said there are still going to be people camping gates. There are still going to be people getting caught. There will also be a greater concentration of that stuff in the areas between the empires. This will cause an increase of Camp breaking and all around fighting. Who knows there might even be some "good fights" to be had too. But if you want to pvp, you'll know where to get it. |
Mr Barbeque
Mayhem and Ruin
3
|
Posted - 2013.08.17 19:06:00 -
[818] - Quote
BOS Hydra wrote: There's plenty of people in FW space, though it may not always be the kinds of fights you are looking for. Also the only relevant means of low sec trade is Black Frog.
Your argument is flawed, that just because jump freighters are expensive and take a bit to get into means that no one will train them, or that the ones who have the skills for one won't consider hopping in one. If anything it will mean increased alts trained for them, the market is not going to simply stop just because the means got a little harder. That doesn't mean regular freighter pilots are going have an epiphany that they must take their freighter through low sec.
FW space is active yes, however piracy and lowsec pvp are not synonymous. When was the last time you issued, were issued a ransom? The OP's argument is that there is no advantage to using lowsec routes because they have a disproportionate risk to reward ratio, a core element in the "lowsec is broken" concept. I agree with you that this will not stop traders from training their X amount of freighter accounts into jump freighters, and use them to bridge most of the gap. It does however add risk to the endeavor. Even jumping to a cyno inside the docking perimeter there is a session timer, which can be taken advantage of to bump the target out of range. Do not confuse challenging with impossible.
BOS Hydra wrote: I realize you have said before that you don't like jump drives, but jump freighters are a major reason why null sec entities can behave the way they do, and also why very few people fly freighters in low sec. If each empire was on an island there would be virtually no meaningful trade travel between regions; only those with jump freighters or the money to consistently use Black Frog would ever move anything of notice on a large scale between hubs. That's great for those already established and Black Frog because supply goes down and demand should stay about the same, prices rise, and thus makes it harder for newer players to play. How much would prices rise?
...
This is more than just jump freighter fuel costs rising, this directly intertwines into BPO research, capital, T2, T3, and drug manufacturing costs. I'm sure there are plenty of other facets of EVE affected that aren't covered by my explanation of what would likely happen. This is also not counting what might happen with the shifting supply/demand of particular isotopes. Everything would become more expensive everywhere, thus quite possibly less PvP due to lack of funding or production ability due to fuel constraints.
Previously you argued that people effected by this change would adapt with ways of minimizing the risk and maximizing their profits. Following that line of reasoning, and including your argument regarding the increase of fuel demand, people would logically determine that it would be more profitable to produce goods within their local market area. Material, module, and small ship trade all still possible, and arguably more profitable, with transport ships. Larger entities with the capability to contract or jump their goods would have to move enough volume to offset the price of doing so, which would increase the ability to compete on a smaller scale. Chaos is profitable, with decentralized markets prices would fluctuate, creating more trade opportunities between markets, and promoting player traffic to get the best deal. The reward of the best deal on either the side of the consumer, or the side of seller, is offset by the increased risk of travel. The initial turmoil of the change would likely cause a unilateral rise in prices, but once the fear subsides patters of stability would establish themselves. Prices would shift with the local trends and the cost of trading, but comparing the lowest price from any hub in said scenario to the current price would not be a prohibitive difference. People would still be able to afford pvp ships on small and large scale alike, especially if they shop around.
BOS Hydra wrote: The only way this change would cause growth in low sec is creating a few more Rancers for Black Frog routes and the occasional freighter lemmings who didn't get the memo, only the first week of this change would produce many freighter kills after witnessing Burn Jita 2.0. I imagine there would be more instalocking camps and low sec intel channels being marginally more useful.
he OP has clearly demonstrated that the cartography of this change be designed to apply the GĮĢneedle in a haystackGĮĨ defense. Some balancing would be in order to make pipes having less lowsec jumps fewer, yet many 'backwater' entrances of longer routes. The number of which should be plentiful enough to give the necessity security from 'hell camps' like Rancer and Amamake. However the precise system layout is a discussion of its own.
It is important to note that since the normal highsec routes that have the attention of suicide groups would be gone, their attention would then be drawn to the local hubs and the popular routes. Those that choose operate in lowsec would face the added risk of the drawing the eye of bigger fish. Since highsec gankers face little unpredictable risk, I believe this to be an improvement.
Burn Jita ad Hulkageddon are prime examples of the playerbase rebelling against current mechanics, and manipulating them to impose risk in a relatively riskless area. Its effectively slapping devs in the face and further shows that ideas like this deserve dev attention. Its simmilar to how coalitions were player formed 'alliances' before the alliance mechanic. This idea is a step in the right direction in fixing the risk verse reward ratio issue in Eve.
BOS Hydra wrote: No big surprise, but obviously this is just a troll thread...ect
There you go. Your argument has been acknowledged and challenged. Do you feel better? Sheesh you didn't even wait 24hrs. Recruiting |
Trinkets friend
Rules of Acquisition Acquisition Of Empire
1103
|
Posted - 2013.08.18 11:56:00 -
[819] - Quote
Vaihto Ehto wrote:M1k3y Koontz wrote:Yes. Yes, yes yes. Yes.
More regions like Solitude would be awesome! Why would anyone live in Solitude? All the cons of deep lowsec and none of the benefits, basically.
I use Solitude for refuge from wardecs. No one EVER bothers chasing you. if the 4 Empires were separated by lowsec, wardecs would be a trice to avoid, and wardec griefing corps would have to nut up or shut up in their attempt to interdict their targets. YOLO is the Carpe Diem of Gen Y http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
Keldor Eternia
Multnomah Interstellar Holdings Inc.
3
|
Posted - 2013.08.20 09:13:00 -
[820] - Quote
Adds meaning to having four empires. I approve |
|
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
167
|
Posted - 2013.08.20 11:20:00 -
[821] - Quote
I definitely approve of this change. local scarcity is what creates trade opportunities.
+1
|
Varg Euronymous
Swarm Coalition
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.20 17:07:00 -
[822] - Quote
This needs to happen. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
827
|
Posted - 2013.08.20 20:45:00 -
[823] - Quote
Varg Euronymous wrote:This needs to happen. Yea it does.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
DrysonBennington
Eagle's Talon's
48
|
Posted - 2013.08.20 22:35:00 -
[824] - Quote
Why not place a border fence lined with large anti-ship mines between the races? Ever watch The Last Star Fighter?
In order to pass into another races territory you would have to have a special pass key issued to you by the race based on your standings with the race.
The higher the standings means you can go pretty much anywhere. Lower standings means that you would be restricted to certain systems until your standings increased.
....or we can just launch 150,000 Doomsday Weapons...say the hell with it and hope for the best....
Where is GoonSwarm when you need them to do something like this?
Probably partying at the Goon Tower. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
172
|
Posted - 2013.08.20 23:13:00 -
[825] - Quote
Wasn't the last startfighter a film about a juvenile taking a spaceship computer game very seriously indeed?
No way are we like that!
Um...
;-)
|
Ludi Burek
Toilet Emergency JIHADASQUAD
248
|
Posted - 2013.08.21 01:01:00 -
[826] - Quote
DrysonBennington wrote:Why not place a border fence lined with large anti-ship mines between the races? Ever watch The Last Star Fighter?
In order to pass into another races territory you would have to have a special pass key issued to you by the race based on your standings with the race.
The higher the standings means you can go pretty much anywhere. Lower standings means that you would be restricted to certain systems until your standings increased.
Yeah, npc restriction based on standings.... get out |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
827
|
Posted - 2013.08.21 02:58:00 -
[827] - Quote
DrysonBennington wrote:Why not place a border fence lined with large anti-ship mines between the races? Ever watch The Last Star Fighter?
In order to pass into another races territory you would have to have a special pass key issued to you by the race based on your standings with the race.
The higher the standings means you can go pretty much anywhere. Lower standings means that you would be restricted to certain systems until your standings increased.
....or we can just launch 150,000 Doomsday Weapons...say the hell with it and hope for the best....
Where is GoonSwarm when you need them to do something like this?
Probably partying at the Goon Tower.
That sounds extremely unfun.
"Thats right, you can pass through our space, after 400 missions!" https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Altered Ego
Firesworn Assassins Firesworn Nation
9
|
Posted - 2013.08.21 15:03:00 -
[828] - Quote
TLDR;
IRL, I'm not going to get mugged crossing from France into Germany ... but crossing between North and South Korea might be a different matter. If you really want to separate the empires then you make it based on -security-.
NPC corps from one empire should not be allowed to freely enter the space of an enemy empire, problem solved.
Player corps would be asked but not required to declare themselves for an empire. If they wish they can remain neutral, but will face higher corp fees and taxes.
Anyone could war-dec a neutral corp and vice versa, but would be unable to war-dec a 'friendly' corp ... or perhaps they could at a higher cost.
This would actually create a -real- division between the empires, instead of a stealth gate camping boost.
|
Humang
Sefem Velox Swift Angels Alliance
11
|
Posted - 2013.08.21 15:46:00 -
[829] - Quote
Altered Ego wrote:TLDR;
IRL, I'm not going to get mugged crossing from France into Germany ... but crossing between North and South Korea might be a different matter. If you really want to separate the empires then you make it based on -security-.
NPC corps from one empire should not be allowed to freely enter the space of an enemy empire, problem solved.
Player corps would be asked but not required to declare themselves for an empire. If they wish they can remain neutral, but will face higher corp fees and taxes.
Anyone could war-dec a neutral corp and vice versa, but would be unable to war-dec a 'friendly' corp ... or perhaps they could at a higher cost.
This would actually create a -real- division between the empires, instead of a stealth gate camping boost.
Wouldn't that possibly be a problem for new players that wonder into the wrong systems? and It doesn't really solve the issue Ted is trying to get across; its not about restricting players, its about adding a degree of danger to a risk-free-isk system. |
Mr Barbeque
Mayhem and Ruin
4
|
Posted - 2013.08.21 17:01:00 -
[830] - Quote
Altered Ego wrote:TLDR;
IRL, I'm not going to get mugged crossing from France into Germany ... but crossing between North and South Korea might be a different matter. If you really want to separate the empires then you make it based on -security-.
The change is based on security, the security of the systems connecting the empires.
Altered Ego wrote: NPC corps from one empire should not be allowed to freely enter the space of an enemy empire, problem solved.
False. Genuine new players should not be restricted in travel based on anything but their wits. Just slapping restrictions around doesn't help anyone.
Altered Ego wrote: Player corps would be asked but not required to declare themselves for an empire. If they wish they can remain neutral, but will face higher corp fees and taxes.
So declare yourself for an empire, inhibiting your ability to travel as a trader (or anyone), or don't and face higher taxes, inhibiting your ability to trade. This wouldn't help anyone either.
Altered Ego wrote: Anyone could war-dec a neutral corp and vice versa, but would be unable to war-dec a 'friendly' corp ... or perhaps they could at a higher cost.
Wardecking NPC corps, which must be what your referring to (since you can go to war with any player corp). Id love to lay waste to highsec hugging npc corpies, but 5 seconds of forethought says incredible amounts of abuse would happen. And that would be much more threatening to the casual play style. Buff to rage quit?
Altered Ego wrote: This would actually create a -real- division between the empires, instead of a stealth gate camping boost.
Downright silly. The change is about risk vs reward and player traffic. Gate camps are a byproduct of high consistent traffic through a bottleneck. The eventuality of increased attention on the empire connections has been appropriately acknowledged and addressed.
TL:DR = I'm too lazy to properly educate myself on this subject and am likely about to show my ignorance. Not only in the issues arising and addressed about a given topic, but also my lack of fundamental understanding of economics, social engineering, and game mechanics. Recruiting |
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
828
|
Posted - 2013.08.21 19:48:00 -
[831] - Quote
Altered Ego wrote:
This would actually create a -real- division between the empires, instead of a stealth gate camping boost.
how is it stealth when it is in the OP?
Also what is the point of saying TL;DR when I posted a TL;DR summary? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
BOS Hydra
Ubiquitous Hurt
7
|
Posted - 2013.08.21 22:37:00 -
[832] - Quote
I went to preview this and it completely ate the reply.. so I hope I can remember everything I wanted to say. I will admit I was quick to jump the gun of "someone reply to me!"
Erutpar Ambient I think this can answer you as well, I ran out of room to use quotes.
Quote: FW space is active yes, however piracy and lowsec pvp are not synonymous
We can debate semantics all day, but yes I agree that FW pvp and low sec pvp in general are different. That's why I mentioned that FW space may not be to your liking, but there is simply more happening there.
Quote: Previously you argued that people effected by this change would adapt with ways of minimizing the risk and maximizing their profits... People would still be able to afford pvp ships on small and large scale alike, especially if they shop around. ... The OP has clearly demonstrated that the cartography of this change be designed to apply the GĮĢneedle in a haystackGĮĨ defense.
If you're talking about "shopping around" as in cherry picking the cheapest mods from empire to empire and then consolidating them into one location, that is entirely dependant on your playstyle and how many hours you are willing to haul mods just to get good prices on them, which isn't fun.
I'm not sure how else to explain it, but least amount of risk that is the most similar to flying a freighter is a jump freighter, there simply is no alternate option for that kind of cargo space. Again if you're just taking a handful of mods, ships, or faction stuff then a cloaky hauler can work just fine, but it depends on if you think it's worth it to carry 1+ bil in a Viator with the potential of stumbling on a instalock camp, or sheer bad luck. The only scenarios of flying a freighter through low sec with any acceptable amount of risk involve waiting until low traffic timezones to move, and not everyone has the luxury to be on around those times at will, thus less potential freighters to catch.
What I was trying to allude to is that null sec alliances HAVE to mine more ice in their space and it is a significant amount. This very directly gives them more control over T2 prices, and you can't say that MOST pvp ships aren't T2 fitted. Local T1 mod and ship production won't change a whole lot because high sec mining is where essentially all minerals in EVE come from (however ores are not evenly distributed through empire, thus more JFs), but T2 materials come from null. My question is how much would T2 and fuel rise? This sort of ties into hulkageddon.
Quote: Burn Jita and Hulkageddon are prime examples of the playerbase rebelling against current mechanics, and manipulating them to impose risk in a relatively riskless area.
Unless I completely missed the underlying point of Burn Jita 2.0, it was simply goons and test teaming up to gank freighters and shiny ships for the lulz, and then extended it for another week because people are dumb and didn't see the numerous adverts saying FREIGHTERS IN JITA WILL DIE.
Hulkageddon did throw the banter out to afk high sec ice miners about how safe they have it, but you can't look at the market data and tell me someone didn't just say "you know, I like monopolies. I think I'll make my own for a short time" and then controlled the market through domination of ice fields under a guise of "nerf high sec." Let's say there's another hulkageddon, the prices rise even more because of the increased reliance on fuel.
Quote: It is important to note that since the normal highsec routes that have the attention of suicide groups would be gone, their attention would then be drawn to the local hubs and the popular routes. Those that choose operate in lowsec would face the added risk of the drawing the eye of bigger fish. Since highsec gankers face little unpredictable risk, I believe this to be an improvement.
I'm not sure what you are getting at here. Yes, most high sec gankers would relocate to trade hubs or random 0.5 systems, most wouldn't go to low because they have no cajones and there would be no freighters there. Someone mentioned having an extremely long high sec path between empires as an alternative to shorter low sec routes but all that does is condenses freighters to be easier gank and war targets in high sec. it's almost certainly not enough of a deterrent to make freighter pilots choose to go into low sec.
Another interesting issue is how do you deal with incursions? I tried to find the ISK income chart I saw at fanfest but I can't seem to find it. I'm pretty sure incursions make a lot of money so if incursions aren't handled properly there's suddenly a lot less ISK flowing into the market. They are mostly crowded enough as it is so I don't think having one incursion per empire would be quite enough, and low/null incursions are scarcely run in any serious manner. Unpackaged battleships cannot be fit into a JF and there is no way in hell these people will risk their 4bil vindies in low sec. |
Pidgeon Saissore
Sacred Templar Knights Metatron Inc. Alliance
31
|
Posted - 2013.08.22 04:39:00 -
[833] - Quote
You could compare some of this to rl The borders between hostile nations are heavily patrolled on either side with a patch of no mans land in between. In eve this equates to setting the sec status of border systems to 1.0 and setting the gap between them to 2 jumps of faction warfare. The borders can shift depending on the results of faction warfare.
This would also change the way faction warfare works. The losing empire's high sec system would become vulnerable after the adjacent low sec was dominated by the enemy for about a week. At which point the agressing empire could storm the high sec system and destroy the gate guns, police force, and reinforce the stations. At this point the sec status of the border shifts. A high sec becoming vulnerable would alert the entire faction warfare alliance possibly resulting in an epic fleet battle. I would also suggest that the transition to this system would be to simply make all the current border systems vulnerable and the attackers would turn it to low sec.
I understand this would take a whole lot of coding and a significant redraw of the starmap so it is going to be a very long process if it is decided on. |
Andracin
Sickology
196
|
Posted - 2013.08.22 06:17:00 -
[834] - Quote
A gate for every tornado and a tornado for every gate! |
Janna Sway
37
|
Posted - 2013.08.22 14:38:00 -
[835] - Quote
Pidgeon Saissore wrote:You could compare some of this to rl The borders between hostile nations are heavily patrolled on either side with a patch of no mans land in between. In eve this equates to setting the sec status of border systems to 1.0 and setting the gap between them to 2 jumps of faction warfare. The borders can shift depending on the results of faction warfare.
This would also change the way faction warfare works. The losing empire's high sec system would become vulnerable after the adjacent low sec was dominated by the enemy for about a week. At which point the agressing empire could storm the high sec system and destroy the gate guns, police force, and reinforce the stations. At this point the sec status of the border shifts. A high sec becoming vulnerable would alert the entire faction warfare alliance possibly resulting in an epic fleet battle. I would also suggest that the transition to this system would be to simply make all the current border systems vulnerable and the attackers would turn it to low sec.
I understand this would take a whole lot of coding and a significant redraw of the starmap so it is going to be a very long process if it is decided on.
Factional Warfare follows a snowball mechanic. If a faction starts to lose, then it will keep losing more, and that faster. Factional Warfare would be a realistic idea, but as long as FW is broken as it is currently, it cannot be taken in consideration for this.
Overall, this thread is just theorycrafting and for the fun, with a lot of nonsense, just saying. No need to take this seriously. |
Phaade
Debitum Naturae WHY so Seri0Us
78
|
Posted - 2013.08.22 15:57:00 -
[836] - Quote
Johnson 1044 wrote:Bold moves like this are what will keep this game interesting for years to come.
QFT. +1 |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
831
|
Posted - 2013.08.22 15:59:00 -
[837] - Quote
Just saying, my first post has x5 the likes as the Ahac rebalance and this thread has about 1/3 the views. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Phaade
Debitum Naturae WHY so Seri0Us
78
|
Posted - 2013.08.22 16:21:00 -
[838] - Quote
Janna Sway wrote:Dear OP, I cannot comprehend how the isolation of empires would fit into the lore and even if the lore was ignored overall, still would it be very unplausible and strange to isolate the empires and turn them into four islands surrounded by the lawless waters you call "lowsec" in your thread. Whenever two empire's territories approach one another, a border forms naturally and border zones are the most guarded areas. Border zones are hot zones with pressure and tension between the nations. The "purposes of CONCORD is to ease the fragile tension and create a foundation for the empires to work their differences out in a peaceful manner." ( https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/CONCORD). Therefore, CONCORD's core interest is to be the most active at the empire's borders and not to be absent, for that's what lowsec means - CONCORD's absence. Your thread is literally an outcry to abolish CONCORD and its noble values and its replacement by detestable piracy, which is an abomination. Chaos and disorder are not from God and the Empress opposes the proposed conditions in disgust. ALL four empires oppose the proposed condition of isolation and the ulcer of piracy. All four empires are and will keep supporting CONCORD's deeds and values with all force.
CONCORD is in an ongoing power struggle with Sansha's Nation, and their Incursions have taken a toll. CONCORD, in an effort to maintain the security and prosperity in the heart of each Empire, has chosen to withdraw from the more outlying systems, leaving the "borderland" systems a hostile environment run by Pirates, and Criminals. Space between Empires has been, unfortunately, left to the wilds.
BOOM |
Ragnarok Knight
ROGUE - DRONES
31
|
Posted - 2013.08.22 18:06:00 -
[839] - Quote
The question is not do we put low-sec between the empires. The question is HOW MUCH.
I think M and G should have small numbers of 0.3-4s A and C should have small numbers of 0.3-4s
G and C should have a big chunk of 0.4-0.1s A and M should have a big chunk of 0.4-0.1s |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
832
|
Posted - 2013.08.22 22:38:00 -
[840] - Quote
Ragnarok Knight wrote:The question is not do we put low-sec between the empires. The question is HOW MUCH.
I think M and G should have small numbers of 0.3-4s A and C should have small numbers of 0.3-4s
G and C should have a big chunk of 0.4-0.1s A and M should have a big chunk of 0.4-0.1s
If there is a small number of systems between M and G/C and A then they will be more easily camped. They should be equal, but thinner. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Mr Barbeque
Mayhem and Ruin
4
|
Posted - 2013.08.22 23:19:00 -
[841] - Quote
BOS Hydra wrote:If you're talking about "shopping around" as in cherry picking the cheapest mods from empire to empire and then consolidating them into one location, that is entirely dependant on your playstyle and how many hours you are willing to haul mods just to get good prices on them, which isn't fun. Agreed, however the conversation wasn't about how much fun it is to put in the extra work for the best price. Of course people will pay for convenience, its a matter of how much its worth to a particular person. The point is that its all still possible, and would be more profitable to do so. You have directly reinforced my previous argument that this change supports more trade opportunities balanced by increased risk.
BOS Hydra wrote:I'm not sure how else to explain it, but least amount of risk that is the most similar to flying a freighter is a jump freighter, there simply is no alternate option for that kind of cargo space. Again if you're just taking a handful of mods, ships, or faction stuff then a cloaky hauler can work just fine, but it depends on if you think it's worth it to carry 1+ bil in a Viator with the potential of stumbling on a instalock camp, or sheer bad luck. The only scenarios of flying a freighter through low sec with any acceptable amount of risk involve waiting until low traffic timezones to move, and not everyone has the luxury to be on around those times at will, thus less potential freighters to catch. In said scenario, make friends. Scouts and support makes that cloaky hauler nigh uncatchable. Flying freighters in low is a poor choice, and I'm not attempting to argue that this would change. Only that hauling through lowsec is indeed viable on small and large scale alike.
BOS Hydra wrote:What I was trying to allude to is that null sec alliances HAVE to mine more ice in their space and it is a significant amount. This very directly gives them more control over T2 prices, and you can't say that MOST pvp ships aren't T2 fitted. Local T1 mod and ship production won't change a whole lot because high sec mining is where essentially all minerals in EVE come from (however ores are not evenly distributed through empire, thus more JFs), but T2 materials come from null. My question is how much would T2 and fuel rise? This sort of ties into hulkageddon.
Hulkageddon did throw the banter out to afk high sec ice miners about how safe they have it, but you can't look at the market data and tell me someone didn't just say "you know, I like monopolies. I think I'll make my own for a short time" and then controlled the market through domination of ice fields under a guise of "nerf high sec." Let's say there's another hulkageddon, the prices rise even more because of the increased reliance on fuel. The only reason way a monopoly can exist is without competition. Say what you fear comes to pass and fuel spikes, causing a reciprocate reaction in the t2 market. This would make it more profitable to mine ice, so people would fill the gap to get their own slice of the profit pie. Competition would bring the price down, so say more hulkageddon events crop up (emergent, player created content). Competitors would the face the 'adapt or die' situation. A skiff can reach 100+k ehp with yield of 1110, thats tough to suicide. Add links and/or logi and it becomes increasingly unfeasible to suicide for market manipulation, as the incurred costs of doing so would begin to stack. Your argument coming to pass isn't really so much of a bad thing, it adds challenge to one of the least challenging aspects of eve. It will only stop those too uncooperative, unimaginative, or unwilling to adapt.
Market fluctuations are not an unforseen complication, but clearly an intended result. Dynamic gameplay > static gameplay.
BOS Hydra wrote:Unless I completely missed the underlying point of Burn Jita 2.0, it was simply goons and test teaming up to gank freighters and shiny ships for the lulz, and then extended it for another week because people are dumb and didn't see the numerous adverts saying FREIGHTERS IN JITA WILL DIE. I wasn't making a statement of the intent. Its a statement of the means. Burn Jita is a particularly good reason for decentralized markets in its own right.
BOS Hydra wrote:I'm not sure what you are getting at here. Yes, most high sec gankers would relocate to trade hubs or random 0.5 systems, most wouldn't go to low because they have no cajones and there would be no freighters there. Someone mentioned having an extremely long high sec path between empires as an alternative to shorter low sec routes but all that does is condenses freighters to be easier gank and war targets in high sec. it's almost certainly not enough of a deterrent to make freighter pilots choose to go into low sec. I agree most would not go to low, but as you mentioned they would relocate. Spreading them around can hardly be considered a bad thing, even for them. Less competition, even if just by proximity, is good from their perspective. Less predictable trade routes is a good thing for traders with the ingenuity to take advantage of the situation
Recruiting |
Mr Barbeque
Mayhem and Ruin
4
|
Posted - 2013.08.22 23:23:00 -
[842] - Quote
Apparently 900 characters short of 6k is still too may so...
BOS Hydra wrote:Another interesting issue is how do you deal with incursions? I tried to find the ISK income chart I saw at fanfest but I can't seem to find it. I'm pretty sure incursions make a lot of money so if incursions aren't handled properly there's suddenly a lot less ISK flowing into the market. They are mostly crowded enough as it is so I don't think having one incursion per empire would be quite enough, and low/null incursions are scarcely run in any serious manner. Unpackaged battleships cannot be fit into a JF and there is no way in hell these people will risk their 4bil vindies in low sec.
Incursions are something I hadn't considered, but I don't see them being a problem. All it would do is further promote player traffic. You could repackage incursion ships and ship them to where needed. If you don't want to buy new rigs, use some scouts and fly them the old fashioned way. People do fly vindi's, mach's, and bhaalg's in low. You mentioned not being able to put an unpacked battleship in a jump freighter due to size constraints. You cannot put unpackaged ships in the cargohold of a freighter at all. You could double package, which wouldn't fit, but costing someone the price of rigs to 'safely' move their bling ship to the current isk faucet isn't a bad thing. More risk for that reward is a positive change. Regardless the incursions would still be run, even if less crowded, meaning the same amount of isk would be injected into the market. Recruiting |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
204
|
Posted - 2013.08.23 00:10:00 -
[843] - Quote
I don't see why incursions are a problem if the empires are separated by lowsec. If you're a professional incursion runner and you don't like flying a pimped ship in lowsec, surely you'll just fit out 4 incursion ships and keep one in each trade hub?
Or you can use wormholes to get from empire to empire (as can traders...).
It's just not a problem.
The separation of empires with lowsec absolutely has to happen. It will create real price discrepancies, read trade opportunities, and real reasons to have industrial fleets guarded by gunships.
As for mission runners getting from empire to empire to keep their standings even, they can use a shuttle or a noobship can't they?
A Capacitor Transporter is a device for transporting capacitors. An Energy Transfer Array is a device for transferring energy from one spaceship to another. Please learn the difference. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
832
|
Posted - 2013.08.23 00:16:00 -
[844] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:I don't see why incursions are a problem if the empires are separated by lowsec. If you're a professional incursion runner and you don't like flying a pimped ship in lowsec, surely you'll just fit out 4 incursion ships and keep one in each trade hub?
Or you can use wormholes to get from empire to empire (as can traders...).
It's just not a problem.
The separation of empires with lowsec absolutely has to happen. It will create real price discrepancies, read trade opportunities, and real reasons to have industrial fleets guarded by gunships.
As for mission runners getting from empire to empire to keep their standings even, they can use a shuttle or a noobship can't they?
I think the bigger question is why should mission runners bother to keep there standings even with each empire? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
204
|
Posted - 2013.08.23 00:26:00 -
[845] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:I don't see why incursions are a problem if the empires are separated by lowsec. If you're a professional incursion runner and you don't like flying a pimped ship in lowsec, surely you'll just fit out 4 incursion ships and keep one in each trade hub?
Or you can use wormholes to get from empire to empire (as can traders...).
It's just not a problem.
The separation of empires with lowsec absolutely has to happen. It will create real price discrepancies, read trade opportunities, and real reasons to have industrial fleets guarded by gunships.
As for mission runners getting from empire to empire to keep their standings even, they can use a shuttle or a noobship can't they?
I think the bigger question is why should mission runners bother to keep there standings even with each empire?
Because some mission runners grow up and become wormhole dwellers, and they value the freedom of being able to dock and trade wherever their wormhole happens to open up.
I am such a player. I was once -7 to amarr empire because I did not realise the impact of offing thousands of amarr military ships while running federation navy missions. Selling goods in Amarr (the best hub for wormhole salvage) was an utter ballache.
A Capacitor Transporter is a device for transporting capacitors. An Energy Transfer Array is a device for transferring energy from one spaceship to another. Please learn the difference. |
Janna Sway
37
|
Posted - 2013.08.23 02:12:00 -
[846] - Quote
Phaade wrote:Janna Sway wrote:Dear OP, I cannot comprehend how the isolation of empires would fit into the lore and even if the lore was ignored overall, still would it be very unplausible and strange to isolate the empires and turn them into four islands surrounded by the lawless waters you call "lowsec" in your thread. Whenever two empire's territories approach one another, a border forms naturally and border zones are the most guarded areas. Border zones are hot zones with pressure and tension between the nations. The "purposes of CONCORD is to ease the fragile tension and create a foundation for the empires to work their differences out in a peaceful manner." ( https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/CONCORD). Therefore, CONCORD's core interest is to be the most active at the empire's borders and not to be absent, for that's what lowsec means - CONCORD's absence. Your thread is literally an outcry to abolish CONCORD and its noble values and its replacement by detestable piracy, which is an abomination. Chaos and disorder are not from God and the Empress opposes the proposed conditions in disgust. ALL four empires oppose the proposed condition of isolation and the ulcer of piracy. All four empires are and will keep supporting CONCORD's deeds and values with all force. CONCORD is in an ongoing power struggle with Sansha's Nation, and their Incursions have taken a toll. CONCORD, in an effort to maintain the security and prosperity in the heart of each Empire, has chosen to withdraw from the more outlying systems, leaving the "borderland" systems a hostile environment run by Pirates, and Criminals. Space between Empires has been, unfortunately, left to the wilds. BOOM
This is new information and I am always excited to learn more. Could you please post your references? After reading the first sentence I knit my brows already... |
Theresa Khayleth
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.23 21:12:00 -
[847] - Quote
This thread is an interesting thought experiment, but there is pretty much zero chance that this will be implemented, because it would cause at least 10% of the player base to unsub if they could no longer travel freely between empires. For every gate camper salivating at this idea, there are five high sec residents who would hate to be forced into non-consensual pvp.
Many of these players only play a couple hours per week and are not active on the forums, so you don't notice them much, but they are important for financing Eve's further development efforts. Especially, because they actually pay for their accounts instead of plexing them. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
833
|
Posted - 2013.08.23 21:34:00 -
[848] - Quote
Theresa Khayleth wrote:This thread is an interesting thought experiment, but there is pretty much zero chance that this will be implemented, because it would cause at least 10% of the player base to unsub if they could no longer travel freely between empires. For every gate camper salivating at this idea, there are five high sec residents who would hate to be forced into non-consensual pvp.
Many of these players only play a couple hours per week and are not active on the forums, so you don't notice them much, but they are important for financing Eve's further development efforts. Especially, because they actually pay for their accounts instead of plexing them.
Why would they unsub when they wont be forced into any kind of pvp. It really is just mind bogglingly ridiculous how an extremely minor change for hisec carebears that would offer a mountain of content to pvp players is so negatively received. It makes 0 sense.
In fact, even if your 10% number were anywhere close to true, I am sure the new ease in finding combat adjacent to hisec would bring in many many more subscribers and be much better than faction warfare.
Also people who plex accounts do pay for accounts, if people didn't use plex then people wouldn't buy plex with real money. If plex didn't exist, that would be a large % of the accounts in eve no longer being subbed and the money going into plex vanishing. Your statement about how people who mission don't use plex is logically unsound as well since it is based on 0 evidence anecdotal or otherwise. Your also implying that plex users are second class citizens, even if they were a separate demographic from hisec dwellers (which they aren't) saying that there needs are secondary to primary subscribers is moronic on every level.
In fact that stance isn't even taken by developers of free to play games, because free users (which plex users aren't) are necessary as content for paid users. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Janna Sway
38
|
Posted - 2013.08.23 23:14:00 -
[849] - Quote
The separation of the empires creates a very unfriendly game atmosphere overall, and that not only for new players with low skill points, but for everybody. The districts between empires would be utterly infested with pirates - which by itself is a disgusting idea to support alltogether.
I just wonder how low-SP players, who start running the Epic arc missions (The Blood-Stained Stars) are supposed to travel through the four empires, while year-old and advanced pirates camp the gates between empires. Or how friends from all four empires, who just find themselves online at a particular moment can just find together to have good time for an hour or two.
EVE Online is a MMO game and it seeks to bring people together, and not to separate them. EVE Online seeks to unite players from all over the world from all four empires and desires to create a good and healthy community. Is the separation of the empires contributing to this mindset somehow? - Of course not. The contrary is the case.
The idea of separating the empires is not new. CCP had this idea already and it was reality in the game. CCP replaced this nonsensical idea through that what we have today. And nobody with common sense will turn back to the vomit of the past that he left behind.
I am utterly disgusted by piracy, isolation, separation, and darkness and seek light, peace, joy, righteousness, and unity. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
84
|
Posted - 2013.08.23 23:16:00 -
[850] - Quote
Theresa Khayleth wrote:This thread is an interesting thought experiment, but there is pretty much zero chance that this will be implemented, because it would cause at least 10% of the player base to unsub if they could no longer travel freely between empires. For every gate camper salivating at this idea, there are five high sec residents who would hate to be forced into non-consensual pvp.
Many of these players only play a couple hours per week and are not active on the forums, so you don't notice them much, but they are important for financing Eve's further development efforts. Especially, because they actually pay for their accounts instead of plexing them.
Yeah, replies like this are really lame. You claim this to be an interesting "Thought experiment" yet saying "at least 10% of the player base would unsub" is just a "thought result" of this thought experiment. Saying that is just as true as saying 100% of the player base would unsub for the same reasons. It's just some silly idea that pops into your head for whatever reason.
The truth is that yes, this does affect the largest portion of the player base. So it is definitely something scary for the Devs to do in the very unlikely chance that what you think ends up true.
Your comment really adds nothing to the discussion at hand. You make no points regarding anything other than the fact that these subscribed players who don't plex (as if it's a bad thing) would quit playing if they're forced into non-consensual pvp.
Another thing that you and many many other commenters that are opposed to this idea seem to have in common is that you're are looking at this from a very narrow point of view.
You seem to view these changes from the point of view of a pilot that is: Solo to the point of not communicating with others, a care bear, completely unable to adapt to changes in the game, so extremely unaware of the mechanics of the game that they will continuously fly into low sec die and repeat for no reason, for some reason requiring to go to all the empires constantly.
The item i highlighted is especially important. You seem to think that this 10% of the player base is ******** and unable to adapt. You obviously have no faith in your fellow pilots. Just because it applies to you doesn't mean it applies to 10% of other people. |
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
833
|
Posted - 2013.08.23 23:37:00 -
[851] - Quote
Janna Sway wrote:The separation of the empires creates a very unfriendly game atmosphere overall, and that not only for new players with low skill points, but for everybody. The districts between empires would be utterly infested with pirates - which by itself is a disgusting idea to support alltogether.
I just wonder how low-SP players, who start running the Epic arc missions (The Blood-Stained Stars) are supposed to travel through the four empires, while year-old and advanced pirates camp the gates between empires. Or how friends from all four empires, who just find themselves online at a particular moment can just find together to have good time for an hour or two.
EVE Online is a MMO game and it seeks to bring people together, and not to separate them. EVE Online seeks to unite players from all over the world from all four empires and desires to create a good and healthy community. Is the separation of the empires contributing to this mindset somehow? - Of course not. The contrary is the case.
The idea of separating the empires is not new. CCP had this idea already and it was reality in the game. CCP replaced this nonsensical idea through that what we have today. And nobody with common sense will turn back to the vomit of the past that he left behind.
I am utterly disgusted by piracy, isolation, separation, and darkness and seek light, peace, joy, righteousness, and unity. 1. Yea lets all make drum circles and sing kumbayah while we mine. Challenges bring people together, not having **** to do but sit around and do nothing doesn't and just makes people quit the game, like most noobs who start playing Eve, run missions and get bored out of there skulls and quit the game forever. In fact I know for certain that through war decing corps in hisec, I have preserved subscriptions. I know of at least 10 people I war deced who I encouraged to do the exact same thing and keep playing instead of quitting because there corp taught them to do nothing but be bored.
2. Why would low SP players need to go between empires? Also the epic mission arc can easily be retooled/ sucks anyway.
3. Eve is a multiplayer COMPETITIVE game. Players form groups for the purpose of overcoming obstacles created by other groups of players. Ya know your spaceship has GUNS on it for a reason. Players get the trial for eve because they find out about billion isk scams, betrayal, and interstellar wars, not because mining sounds exciting. Low sec is a place where players can more easily form obstacles to be beaten. Players are there to shoot you, its up to you to see if you can beat them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGplrpWvz0I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oq2oxt7Nrxo CCP agrees with me on this, I play Eve because I want to beat other players, not because I just want to cit around and circle jerk in space.
4. CCP had this idea when the game had 10k players and you couldn't warp to 0 on a gate.
Maybe the game for you is second life so you can frolic with furries. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
85
|
Posted - 2013.08.24 00:20:00 -
[852] - Quote
Janna Sway wrote:The separation of the empires creates a very unfriendly game atmosphere overall, and that not only for new players with low skill points, but for everybody. The districts between empires would be utterly infested with pirates - which by itself is a disgusting idea to support alltogether.
I just wonder how low-SP players, who start running the Epic arc missions (The Blood-Stained Stars) are supposed to travel through the four empires, while year-old and advanced pirates camp the gates between empires. Or how friends from all four empires, who just find themselves online at a particular moment can just find together to have good time for an hour or two.
EVE Online is a MMO game and it seeks to bring people together, and not to separate them. EVE Online seeks to unite players from all over the world from all four empires and desires to create a good and healthy community. Is the separation of the empires contributing to this mindset somehow? - Of course not. The contrary is the case.
The idea of separating the empires is not new. CCP had this idea already and it was reality in the game. CCP replaced this nonsensical idea through that what we have today. And nobody with common sense will turn back to the vomit of the past that he left behind.
I am utterly disgusted by piracy, isolation, separation, and darkness and seek light, peace, joy, righteousness, and unity. Eve is not a glorified chat program. I know that might be what you play for but it's really a space ship game that pits players against other players in almost all aspects of the game. The only except of course is Mission running. Only in mission running are you given your own little place created just for you. There's no competition to finish that mission against another person or to even get that mission in the first place. This is the only thing in all of EVE Online that has no inherent competitive nature. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
216
|
Posted - 2013.08.24 00:30:00 -
[853] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Janna Sway wrote:The separation of the empires creates a very unfriendly game atmosphere overall, and that not only for new players with low skill points, but for everybody. The districts between empires would be utterly infested with pirates - which by itself is a disgusting idea to support alltogether.
I just wonder how low-SP players, who start running the Epic arc missions (The Blood-Stained Stars) are supposed to travel through the four empires, while year-old and advanced pirates camp the gates between empires. Or how friends from all four empires, who just find themselves online at a particular moment can just find together to have good time for an hour or two.
EVE Online is a MMO game and it seeks to bring people together, and not to separate them. EVE Online seeks to unite players from all over the world from all four empires and desires to create a good and healthy community. Is the separation of the empires contributing to this mindset somehow? - Of course not. The contrary is the case.
The idea of separating the empires is not new. CCP had this idea already and it was reality in the game. CCP replaced this nonsensical idea through that what we have today. And nobody with common sense will turn back to the vomit of the past that he left behind.
I am utterly disgusted by piracy, isolation, separation, and darkness and seek light, peace, joy, righteousness, and unity. Eve is not a glorified chat program. I know that might be what you play for but it's really a space ship game that pits players against other players in almost all aspects of the game. The only except of course is Mission running. Only in mission running are you given your own little place created just for you. There's no competition to finish that mission against another person or to even get that mission in the first place. This is the only thing in all of EVE Online that has no inherent competitive nature.
Unless someone scans you down and steals the Damsel away before you can rescue her. I would never do that to someone, honest... A Capacitor Transporter is a device for transporting capacitors. An Energy Transfer Array is a device for transferring energy from one spaceship to another. Please learn the difference. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
85
|
Posted - 2013.08.24 01:48:00 -
[854] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:Unless someone scans you down and steals the Damsel away before you can rescue her. I would never do that to someone, honest...
Yes it's possible to have PVP in all aspects of EVE. The only way to avoid it is by ship spinning in station or sitting in a safe spot cloaked drifting away.
I did say however that Mission running is the only activity in EVE that is not "inherently" a competitive activity. |
Janna Sway
38
|
Posted - 2013.08.24 05:08:00 -
[855] - Quote
@ Comment #850, the OP.
Factional Warfare has been created for people who seek to have an introduction to PvP on one hand and or are fairly experienced players already on the other hand. Factional warfare is available from day 1, available to anybody, and one does not need much skilltraining to join it. Furthermore, it is not even required to be highly skilled or to fly expensive ships. It is even recommended to fly frigates and destroyers. Fairly quickly you make friends and form fleets, be it through the militia channel, simply through the fleetfinder, or more likely right on the field. Just fit a ship and go out and have fun. Factional warfare offers arena-like fights, and one can chose to warp in the plex to fight or not. Factional warfare has been designed to introduce players to PvP, and it is a very nice concept and I appreciate it a lot.
Now notice this, CCP does not pursue piracy as motive for PvP, and as a matter of fact, NULLSEC is the only area where "lawlessness" is even allowed. Lowsec means that CONCORD has no mobile strikeforce active, however though, the law runs and the stationary weapons at gates and stations are in position and they shoot at all those who break the law of CONCORD. That's why you get punished by getting your security status being lowered, and when you break the law way too often and get a too low security status, then you will find yourself pretty much banned out of all empires.
I just checked your security status and your employment history, its currently at -1.6, thus you are a criminal, and I cannot even count how often you changed the corporations since 2009, currently in an NPC corp again. In MMO's, or in general in life, one tries to find a group of people with same ideas, goals and intentions and makes the decision to stick with that group, to form harmony, trust, and deep friendship, and one leaves the corp when compromises become impossible. All your corporation jumpings just tell me that you have not really found a goal and peace in the game, and that you are still searching. You seem to be bitter and you want to enforce your bitterness upon others, by dragging them into fighting you, using wardecs against to yourself unknown corporations and what not and call this "competetive play". Well, you have a negative security status, and all that comes through breaking the law as a criminal.
The "competition" and action you will find in nullsec, where alliances live in a constant state of war and spend billions on a single day during a battle. The idea of separating the empires does not lead to "competition". Its intention is to grief, harass, and to cause inconveniences, to bring chaos and lawlessness upon New Eden, and to dispower CONCORD and its noble values. Creating one pseudo-"CONCORD" each for every empire.
To 1) First of all, I don't like you calling players noobs just because they do not do what you want nor like. Furthermore, you just found 10 like-minded people in the game whom you kept in, that's all, and you griefed lets say at least 20 others who left the game because they did not want to play a "griefer game". All your actions have consequences, and pirates and criminals cause more harm than good. And to be honest, there is nothing honorable in that what you do; you wardec corporations in highsec that are even unknown to you, just in order to grief them. Highsec wardec's for the "legal" PvP are nothing new.
I have friends who come back from work and ENJOY mining for two hours in peace of highsec. It gives them a good feeling and they relax by doing so. Mining is like fishing and it VERY RELAXING. It might be unthinkable to you, but some people are just not interested in PvP and just want to sit in an asteroid belt and mine. After 4 days in the game I was recruited into an industrial corp and I had one of my best days in EVE back then, yes priceless days. We all just met and mined together and we had such great time chatting for hours and days. Wardecs and ganks would have at least ruined me, for I started with 5000 ISK and had nothing.
To 2) The purpose of the Blood-Stained Stars Epic Arc is to familiarize the new players with the game, game mechanics, and the four empires in New Eden in more detail, all packed in a story, told through subsequent missions. I finished the tutorial missions and started the Epic Arc missions in Arnon right away. A new player seeks PvE, stories, and information about the game and the environment, that is normal.
To 3) You are misunderstanding "competetive play". The first linked video, Causality, describes the story of two "competing" Mega-Alliances warring over entire nullsec constellations. The second linked video, The Butterfly Effect, describes the term "Sandbox", EVE's trademark, to a broad and uninformed audience (it is a Machinima presentation) by again telling the story of two "competing" nullsec Mega-Alliances. This is just what I already wrote above, i.e. "competition" you find in nullsec, in such mega-alliances that control large nullsec-areas (where the law of CONCORD is not running). Thus, its the alliances that set up laws and rules, valid in their territory. "Competitive" play you find in "alliance tournaments". "Competetive" play you find between Mega-Alliances, who fight over constellations, vast recources, and spend billions in the twinkling of an eye. "Competetive play" has nothing to do with small scale PvP at high->lowsec gate camps, stations and plex-gates, where pilots have some fun with 10 million ISK frigates for the lulz. "Competetive play" has to do with politics and a lot of ISK and real money, and especially time in 0.0
To 4) I argued above and in former posts why this idea is nonsense, and CCP did not need much testing to come to the conclusion that the empire separation was just simply a bad idea. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
217
|
Posted - 2013.08.24 11:11:00 -
[856] - Quote
This thread needs to be made sticky, and it needs to happen.
And no, I'm not a pirate but I get bored that everything is the same price everywhere. The is no real economy in Eve. Economies evolve through disparities in the availability of goods and services.
Navy Dominixes should be cheaper in Dodixie than they are in Jita. Then there would be a competitive business in getting navy domis to jita safely. The Jita premium would eventually represent the transport risk plus the cost of the transporter's time.
A Capacitor Transporter is a device for transporting capacitors. An Energy Transfer Array is a device for transferring energy from one spaceship to another. Please learn the difference. |
Kitty Bear
Disturbed Friends Of Diazepam
786
|
Posted - 2013.08.24 13:14:00 -
[857] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:This thread needs to be made sticky, and it needs to happen.
CCP already tried this before.
Can you think of a reason why the game is not like that anymore ? Can you give a reason or two why CCP changed it to the current system we have now ?
|
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
217
|
Posted - 2013.08.24 13:22:00 -
[858] - Quote
Kitty Bear wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:This thread needs to be made sticky, and it needs to happen.
CCP already tried this before. Can you think of a reason why the game is not like that anymore ? Can you give a reason or two why CCP changed it to the current system we have now ?
Because when they tried it they did not have covops, covert transports, jump freighters and wormholes in the game?
A Capacitor Transporter is a device for transporting capacitors. An Energy Transfer Array is a device for transferring energy from one spaceship to another. Please learn the difference. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
85
|
Posted - 2013.08.24 15:52:00 -
[859] - Quote
Kitty Bear wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:This thread needs to be made sticky, and it needs to happen.
CCP already tried this before. Can you think of a reason why the game is not like that anymore ? Can you give a reason or two why CCP changed it to the current system we have now ?
When they tried it before (10 years ago) there were not enough people or the means to fully benefit from the situation.
The current state of EVE is very much able to support this system at this time.
To say CCP already tried this before is like saying Blizzard already tried having a deep and intricate skill system for Diablo 3. (they originally came out with the system that Path of Exile has now but changed it in early development)
CCP games in general are fairly unique. They seem to be brought out of official Beta testing years before they actually come out of functional Beta testing. Was EVE a complete game 10 years ago when this feature was changed? |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
86
|
Posted - 2013.08.24 19:41:00 -
[860] - Quote
Janna Sway wrote:Your post was too long to quote Here is an excerpt from the main site. http://www.eveonline.com/universe/people-personalities/ "Fame and fortune can be found as a loyalist, to be sure, but the most notorious and well-known pilots are very often outer region warlords, pirates or freedom fighters" CCP does acknowledge Piracy as a profession.
Now to tackle your points.
FW is fine, but it does have it's limits. Those limits are FW space. If FW is supposed to be the Main Focusing Feature of low sec then shouldn't all of low sec be part of FW? And then if you get into lore and realism, wouldn't the fact that FW exists be completely contradictory to not just a single empire space but also the extreme mix of opposing faction NPC corps in each other's space?
Piracy is a motive for pvp in and of itself. It doesn't need CCP to pursue it. Also your interpretation of pirate is wrong. It doesn't matter if they're in Low security, Null security or even high security. If they attack and rob your ship, they're a pirate. There's high sec entities that do this for profit. Though they're traditionally referred to as "High Sec Gankers" the ones that gank freighters for profit are by definition pirates. This game was designed for CONCORD to not have a strike force in low security space. This allows pirates to exist there, and this feature really has no other impact on anything else. So by this we can deduce that not only does CCP acknowledge piracy as a profession, but they do pursue it as a motive for pvp.
Having negative standing doesn't automatically mean you're a criminal. Helping someone like an allied corp or attacking pirates in Low Sec before they attack you will give you a negative status hit. Now if his standing was -5.0 to -10.0 then there would be a much greater likelihood of him being a pirate. But not with a -1.6 or a -1.anything. And also using wardecs is not a criminal action and will not have any impact on standing and is not considered piracy.
Your comments about null sec make it obvious that you've never lived there.
You do seem to make an assumption that the person you're talking to has had any impact on anyone. You seem to think that he's a griefer and has made at least 20 people unsub. I have to say, you are dumb. Sorry it's not nice but if you realy think this then you are dumb..... This change would not cause the automatic grief of anyone. This does not force anyone into low sec. There is nothing in this game that forces people to move through lowsec against their will. If they get killed because of this change it's because of a decision they made. This is different than War Decs. When you get war dec'd you do not get to make the decision to accept it, it is applied to you without your consent. War Decs are legal, yet non-consensual PVP. Do not compare this idea to a War Dec. Your friends will still have an entire Empire of high sec to enjoy mining in. We're not trying to get all of high sec turned into low sec.
If you believe what you say about the Blood-Stained Stars epic arc then why can almost none of them kill Dagan alone?
The problem with your argument is that it's incredibly narrow minded. You can't see past your own inconvenience. And the Greatest impact of this idea on any person or group of people is convenience.
This was never a simply bad idea. The only reason they got rid of this so early on was because the game was so new, there were very few players and MOST IMPORTANTLY there was not the Trade/Market infrustructure we have today. If they implemented it now not only would everything be fine, but it would create a lot of activity in the game. A lot of non-autopilot activity.
I just want to say this again.
The only way this will impact everyone/anyone is in convenience! And really that's it!!! |
|
Mr Barbeque
Mayhem and Ruin
4
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 03:18:00 -
[861] - Quote
Do not feed the troll. Recruiting |
Ella Echerie
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 07:13:00 -
[862] - Quote
I like this idea |
Silenciel
Penguins at school
2
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 08:22:00 -
[863] - Quote
I don't really like the idea but i'm not very against too.
My main grief concern the smalls commercials structures. Low sec on routes will directly impact small structures wich are going to be stricly maintained in one faction area. Faction commercial trade will directly give fantastic profits for medium/big structure, happy to see small structures unable to follow. I see great distubance in wealth distribution.
Other thing, cooperatives factions should still have hi sec borders. No hi sec between Amarr and Minmatar's borders => perfectly logical. No hi sec between Amarr and Gallente's borders => perfectly logical. No hi sec between Amarr and Caladari's borders => strongly illogical. etc...
But if we follow this logic, a complete NPC stations remap would be logical too. No Amarr corporations in both Gallente and Minmatar's space. No Gallente corporations in both Amarr and Caldari's space. etc...
At least, this is interressant.
My two cents. |
Cavalira
Valar Morghulis. Goonswarm Federation
157
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 11:36:00 -
[864] - Quote
Hi, I have a jump freighter. I love to jump between two barren lowsec spots and make a killing, because I can avoid the lowsec between the factions. Owait. I don't make a killing because everyone else does it aswell. The areas between factions would probably be camped by sad nerds who have a ton of falcons/logi. GL |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
221
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 12:19:00 -
[865] - Quote
Your jump freighter represents a 7bn isk investment in infrastructure which gives you a competitive advantage in terms of risk and freight capacity.
This models commercial reality very well. You have just made a convincing argument in favour of the separation - it incentivises hisec haulers to invest in jump freighters, something they would not have considered before.
thus the overall economy of eve is improved. A Capacitor Transporter is a device for transporting capacitors. An Energy Transfer Array is a device for transferring energy from one spaceship to another. Please learn the difference. |
SKINE DMZ
The Scope Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 12:42:00 -
[866] - Quote
Love this idea, thinking about it there should definitely be dangerous space between the major empires.. I mean, why isn't there? I disagree |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
86
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 19:46:00 -
[867] - Quote
Silenciel wrote:But if we follow this logic, a complete NPC stations remap would be logical too. No Amarr corporations in both Gallente and Minmatar's space. No Gallente corporations in both Amarr and Caldari's space. etc...
At least, this is interressant.
My two cents. The way i'd like to see this implemented is with a long chain of Real Time Player events.
Wouldn't it be cool if they allowed all of the non-faction stations in each empire to be destroyable when this stuff starts happening. Maybe they could allow FW aligned Corps to jump their dreads into the Empire they're aligned with for these special events. And if there's still dreads in the systems after the events they can just move them like they would normally or just allow FW pilots to jump into empire space in general.
And i guess the area between the Empires could be additional FW space. Maybe instead of it being Amarr vs Minmatar or Caldari vs Gallente it could just be a 4 way power struggle to control those systems. This means there would need to be a good reason to want to have control of those systems. Maybe we could allow FW to build outposts in them and control them like outposts in sov space. The difference would be that they would be a lot cheaper to build (maybe a special type of FW LP bought version) and they'd be destructible when a system is either vulnerable or totally captured.
This is just one of the things i think would be great that would be made possible by first separating the empires.
What do you guys think about something like this? |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
224
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 21:03:00 -
[868] - Quote
I was thinking that the way to do it would be to gradually lower the sec status of each border system over time. Maybe 0.1 per week or something, to represent the withdrawal of law enforcement over time.
It would also give people time to adjust.
A Capacitor Transporter is a device for transporting capacitors. An Energy Transfer Array is a device for transferring energy from one spaceship to another. Please learn the difference. |
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
66
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 21:16:00 -
[869] - Quote
Why not make it adjustable with FW, if Minmatar/Gallente gains the Upper Hand it turns into Highsec for them but lowsec or (unclaimable) 00 for Amarr and Caldari. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates RAZOR Alliance
178
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 21:20:00 -
[870] - Quote
After spending many years there, I hate highsec, but this change would be for the best. |
|
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
224
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 21:28:00 -
[871] - Quote
You could make it "player enforced" hisec. FW pilots could get LP for keeping the peace somehow. No need to involve concord.
A Capacitor Transporter is a device for transporting capacitors. An Energy Transfer Array is a device for transferring energy from one spaceship to another. Please learn the difference. |
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
66
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 21:41:00 -
[872] - Quote
If its war related the Borders had to be changed, war is a continue change so why shouldnt the "Winner" take the price.
Anything else wont make sense, static lowsec Borders just get camped on the main routes. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
841
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 21:44:00 -
[873] - Quote
Lephia DeGrande wrote:If its war related the Borders had to be changed, war is a continue change so why shouldnt the "Winner" take the price.
Anything else wont make sense, static lowsec Borders just get camped on the main routes. I really dont think it makes a difference to camping if the borders are static or not. The best place to camp will always be somewhere along the route that you get when you put in shortest or safest. Anywhere the gets more traffic can be seen on the map through statistics and pirates would adapt accordingly. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
66
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 21:49:00 -
[874] - Quote
Let the Camping aside, dynamic borders are:
A. More interesting and B. more logic
Thats enough for my Statement.
If FW would have some meaning (LP aside) the whole mechanic would have purpose. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
841
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 22:08:00 -
[875] - Quote
Lephia DeGrande wrote:Let the Camping aside, dynamic borders are:
A. More interesting and B. more logic
Thats enough for my Statement.
If FW would have some meaning (LP aside) the whole mechanic would have purpose. would these borders meet to form a safe hi-sec bridge? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Horus V
Drunken Hyena Association
30
|
Posted - 2013.08.26 04:41:00 -
[876] - Quote
+1
REMOVE LOCAL !!! |
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
67
|
Posted - 2013.08.26 05:49:00 -
[877] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Lephia DeGrande wrote:Let the Camping aside, dynamic borders are:
A. More interesting and B. more logic
Thats enough for my Statement.
If FW would have some meaning (LP aside) the whole mechanic would have purpose. would these borders meet to form a safe hi-sec bridge?
It depends... if the FW "Winner" can hold the constilation long enough why not?
Maybe i am to Dark Age of Camelot centered but in RvR to keep your advantage against the Enemy was the Most Fun Part.
It could be that some Konstalations may be to small or to big but that would be CCPs Job to balance i just want more RvR in my PvP in EvE. ^^ |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
844
|
Posted - 2013.08.26 18:44:00 -
[878] - Quote
Cavalira wrote:Hi, I have a jump freighter. I love to jump between two barren lowsec spots and make a killing, because I can avoid the lowsec between the factions. Owait. I don't make a killing because everyone else does it aswell. The areas between factions would probably be camped by sad nerds who have a ton of falcons/logi. GL
One misclick you die, and lemme just get some tornadoes to blow up those falcons and then **** the gang that is sitting there. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mr Barbeque
Mayhem and Ruin
5
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 23:26:00 -
[879] - Quote
Solvent system security is a bad idea. It seems cool but widely impractical, devs are just getting around to off grid boosting issues and still wont touch the off grid part because it too much coding. Also terrible as a FW reward, good FW pilots normally have various negative sec statuses. Highsec is not a reward, its a hindrance. Why would pilots fight to have territory removed from their possible area of operations?
And of course there's the flip side. If you can have lowsec become highsec, the you must be able to do so vice versa. How many do you think would try to lower as much highsec as possible to low security? Recruiting |
Emily Jean McKenna
The Scope Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2013.08.28 20:07:00 -
[880] - Quote
make it happen |
|
Phaade
Debitum Naturae WHY so Seri0Us
82
|
Posted - 2013.08.28 20:55:00 -
[881] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Kitty Bear wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:This thread needs to be made sticky, and it needs to happen.
CCP already tried this before. Can you think of a reason why the game is not like that anymore ? Can you give a reason or two why CCP changed it to the current system we have now ? When they tried it before (10 years ago) there were not enough people or the means to fully benefit from the situation. The current state of EVE is very much able to support this system at this time. To say CCP already tried this before is like saying Blizzard already tried having a deep and intricate skill system for Diablo 3. (they originally came out with the system that Path of Exile has now but changed it in early development) CCP games in general are fairly unique. They seem to be brought out of official Beta testing years before they actually come out of functional Beta testing. Was EVE a complete game 10 years ago when this feature was changed?
Blizzard vs POE:
Did they really? WTF was blizzard thinking?
And YES! This thing needs to get done. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
849
|
Posted - 2013.08.31 18:54:00 -
[882] - Quote
Sure right now there is a lot of pvp in low sec, but wouldn't everyone be happy if there was more? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
ComDoggy
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 19:26:00 -
[883] - Quote
More dev posts here pls |
Rhnra Pahineh
Organized-Chaos Apocalypse Now.
8
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 06:18:00 -
[884] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Sure right now there is a lot of pvp in low sec, but wouldn't everyone be happy if there was more? All I see in lowsec are people able to put super-capitals on a fight. There are people too powerful and impossible to remove from those area of space. Elsewhere, there are area totally empty. I don't think that would change with your solution, even worse it would accentuate the current issues! The area between empires would be overrun with so called "pirates" and the rest of low-sec space would be, well, meaningless to wander in?
If you want to verify what i'm saying, try to do a less-secure roam via this route: http://evemaps.dotlan.net/route/3:Amdonen:Old_Man_Star:Rens:Amamake:Amdonen
But you won't get far, as the people near Ami can and will stop you. If you're strong enough, they'll not engage. And that's the rule for lowsec: if you're strong you're probably safe. If not, you're already dead. And that's why most people don't go live in lowsec.
That aside, the only reason I see why the empire spaces would be separated by lowsec space is a war between those empires. And man, that would be awesome! I'm not talking about factional warfare, but more like the Reclaiming of the Amarr empire. |
Xeen Du'Wang
Perkone Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 14:52:00 -
[885] - Quote
As I do agree, Super Caps shouldnt be all inclusive in low sec... Not what they are meant for anyway. Difficult to say that other caps are allowed in low sec though with that in mind, so have to keep them all.
I also agree there should be a separation of the Empires, and neutral zone if you will that really becomes low sec space. |
Phaade
Debitum Naturae WHY so Seri0Us
89
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 21:22:00 -
[886] - Quote
So when is this happening! It's time to change up the Eve universe.
Between all the Pirate factions, sleepers and wormholes, ongoing warfare between the Caldari Amarr and Gallente Minmatar factions, Sansha Incursions.......
And, you know, cuz it'd be fun. |
Janna Sway
45
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 14:58:00 -
[887] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:Kitty Bear wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:This thread needs to be made sticky, and it needs to happen.
CCP already tried this before. Can you think of a reason why the game is not like that anymore ? Can you give a reason or two why CCP changed it to the current system we have now ? Because when they tried it they did not have covops, covert transports, jump freighters and wormholes in the game?
The game was first developed with four empires, separated from one another and Kitty Bear asks what reasons moved CCP to undo such a major and foundational game concept in favor of a better game concept like that what we have now (otherwise they would not have had changed it). The changing of such a significant game concept, the empire-separation, means that CCP saw themselves confronted with foundational problems that moved them not to a reform or improvement of the condition (i.e. the separation of empires) but its total removal, or in other words its absolute trashing and disposing.
You argue that the foundational problem that moved CCP to trash the empire-separation as game concept was the lack of cloaking technology and the wormhole dimension?!
Well, we have the wormhole dimension and cloaking technology by now, and that for a fairly long time already and thus the problem has been solved by now obviously, according to your argument.... So, why is CONCORD not getting disempowered and put aside out of the border zones and replaced by lawlessness and anarchy? Is it because CCP did not find the time yet to fix this issue?!
Whether 'CONCORD holds the authority to work with the empires to settle their political interests in a "peaceful" manner' is neither based on cloaking technology nor on the existence of wormholes. I hope you can understand the significance of such a drastic game change - the separation of the empires and the disempowerment of CONCORD. We are talking about major and gamebreaking principles here. This is not about "oh, separating the empires sound cool, yeah that sounds like a funny idea, so let's do it for the lulz and see what happens". It is about "do we destroy Eve Online's foundation and do we create a new one instead". This is serious business and I hope you understand the significance and you can be absolutely sure, the reasons are neither cloaking nor wormholes. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
308
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 16:27:00 -
[888] - Quote
Sir you are mistaken. I am not advocating the disempowerment of CONCORD in hisec. I am advocating the provision of player-driven law enforcement in lowsec.
Winter marauders - Mutant Ninja Space Turtles
|
Mr Barbeque
Mayhem and Ruin
5
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 20:54:00 -
[889] - Quote
Janna Sway wrote:Everything you said that I wont waste character space reposting... (Not a real quote) The key element that has failed to be mentioned, but mentioned earlier in the threadnaught: Lack of established production and trade. The infrastructure commonly taken for granted didn't exist in yester-decade when the empires were separated; no centralized trade or production, a very small player base, t2 was a glimmer in CCP's eye, ect...
Now we have Jita, the walmart of eve, a trade hub in every empire, and players running multiple clients auto piloting between the hubs. This is effectively botting. Bots are bad, mmm'kay.
Not to mention the ulterior solutions to minimize fear and risk previously brought up: Covert cloaks, jump freighters, direct HS - HS wormholes, bribes, ransoms, escorts, and anything else the creative (and very well established) player base can come up with.
I've noticed that you (Jenna Sway) put a lot of weight on the lore. That aspect of eve merely sets the stage for the players to act on. The stories and lore made by the people that play the game is what makes 3rd party news and draws people in. The tales of ransoms, heists, and the clashes of 0.0; all generated from player interaction. This is part of what makes eve stand out and something we all love. If you stand on the lore, how to you explain the recent mechanical changes to mods and all the rebalancing? What about much earlier changes like MWD's not working in deadspace flipping? Or how scrams didn't turn off MWD's but now do? How all webs used to be 90% instead of 60%? The original change and recent rechange of nosferatues? What about the '08 nano nerf? Stacking prop mods?
The fact is that the lore follows the gameplay, not the other way around. This change would set the stage for increased player interaction, even if in a hail of gunfire. More players working together or against each other is universally a good thing. Recruiting |
Janna Sway
45
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 05:15:00 -
[890] - Quote
Mr Barbeque wrote:Janna Sway wrote:Everything you said that I wont waste character space reposting... (Not a real quote) @ Quote #888.
I keep repeating in my posts what the roles and purposes of CONCORD are, reason for its mere existence, and to keep focus on the plot. CONCORD's goals are exactly contrary to the empire separation, and as long as CONCORD exists as we know it, there won't be any empire separation. Furthermore I pointed out that the four empires themselves support CONCORD and that they are satisfied with how they operate. Because of CONCORD's rising power some voices have been raised in the empires that CONCORD might get too mighty and abuse its power, however though, CONCORD has not shown any signs of that, yet. I base this on the lore, the foundation and meaning of the Eve universe, and I am not writing out of my own feelings.
Oil and water do not mix, so don't bother trying. Meaning that you cannot compare NPC-based lore with player-made lore. By that I want to say that CONCORD is a NPC organization and its purpose and existence you can follow in the lore behind it and it has been created by the game-designers, period. Player cannot influence that, player have nothing to do with that.
Now overall about the lore and its significance: As an example, have a look at just the T2 assault frigates of all four empires. Look at their resistances. Amarr T2 assault frigates have exclusively been designed to tank Minmatar weapon systems, having high resistances in explosive and kinetic. Minmatars have an absurd tank against EM and Therm damage to tank Amarr weapon systems. Similar it is for the other two empires. Even the used weapon systems of all four empires are particularly designed to counter the warring hostile empire. Why do Gallente even use drones? - The Gallente decided to utilize drones because drones are not countered by missiles, the main weapon system of the Caldari. And you can also follow in the lore that this condition caused the Caldari a lot of trouble and that the Jove empire came to aid the Caldari against the Gallente, even sharing technology with the Caldari.
The lore forms the foundation of Eve's NPC-based world, which is a rather significant part of Eve, for each and every player is interacting with it from the very moment he logs in until he logs off again. Every time you fly in an anomaly, you fend off hostiles of the empires who are guarding for example natural phenomena, who are building outposts, and what not. For killing those you receive bounties. What are for example Data sites? Data sites are secret NPC-pirate outposts with purposefully dampened signal emissions, too weak for ordinary ship scanners to locate like as it is for anomalies. Thats why they are "secret" and one can only find those by using scanner probes and the explorer "hacks" NPC-pirate buildings and each building unit has a system core, protected by various defensive systems installed by the owner of the building unit. That's what the "minigame" is all about.
All that has nothing to do with module and ship rebalancing, like nerfing the Dominix damage/level bonus by 2.5% for example, shifting some boni values up and down, here and there. Compare apples with apples, and pears with pears. You cannot compare apples with pears. The separation of the empires and its consequences upon the Eve universe you cannot compare with minor rebalancings like reducing the ship resistance/level boni from 5% to 4%.
Last thing I need to mention. Mr Barbeque, may I ask you to keep it civilized and disciplined in your posts, please, if you wish to be taken seriously and to be respected. In the last post you quoted my contribution in post #886, changing it into "Everything you (Janna Sway) said that I wont waste character space responding..." Your contribution to my post #854 was "don't feed the troll". I merely base my argumentations on facts and you are absolutely free to check the things I mention for yourself in evelopedia and other sources. Not one argument I present is based on my personal feelings. You are free to contribute to the discussion, and please add to your posts at least on what sources you base your arguments. Immature expressions of anger, by calling me a troll or discrediting my posts, calling them a waste, do not contribute anything to the discussion and may I suggest that these were your last two disresepectful comments in the forums from now on. |
|
Janna Sway
45
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 05:53:00 -
[891] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:Sir you are mistaken. I am not advocating the disempowerment of CONCORD in hisec. I am advocating the provision of player-driven law enforcement in lowsec.
The "player-driven law enforcement" is a condition you find in nullsec. Low-sec is called low-sec because CONCORD's laws and rules apply there and CONCORD has stationary weapon systems and stations in lowsec systems. The difference between lowsec and highsec is that CONCORD has no mobile strike force in lowsec, that's all. Nullsec is the wild west of the EVE universe and there is no CONCORD law enforcement, and at most a player-driven law enforcement.
So, what is the meaning of your post I have just quoted? You are "advocating the provision of power-driven law enforcement in lowsec", that means that you do not want the CONCORD-driven law enforcement in "lowsec". No CONCORD, no security, that means nullsec. That's what the "-sec" is all about, it means how much security CONCORD is offering to the star system.
Thus, you advocate the removal of the current 3-security-system, i.e. nullsec, lowsec, and highsec, and you wish to have a 2-security system, i.e. nullsec and a highsec system.
Please feel free to correct me if I have misunderstood the meaning of "security" and its relation to CONCORD. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
327
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 08:37:00 -
[892] - Quote
You do indeed misunderstand me. The forums as they stand no not make it easy to see all my posts as a continuous thread. If you saw them this way I think what I had written would make sense to you.
Winter marauders - more replies than any other thread, for a ship that no-one flies :-)
|
Janna Sway
45
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 09:51:00 -
[893] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:You do indeed misunderstand me. The forums as they stand no not make it easy to see all my posts as a continuous thread. If you saw them this way I think what I had written would make sense to you.
Hm, the statement "I am advocating the provision of player-driven law enforcement in lowsec" is pretty crystal clear and based on that an analysis followed. I cannot see any double-meanings in that sentence either, for it is a clear statement.
I have followed the thread from the very beginning and have read the all comments. I am familiar with the mentioned arguments in this thread.
My reply might have had disappointed you and you might feel like as if I have stepped on your toes, but words and sentences mean what they mean and one cannot distort their meanings, just to feel better, or distort the meanings because the responses received were not pleasant to the ears and honey to the heart.
The issue with this thread and the thought experiment of separating the nations is that it is just a thought experiment, a "cool idea that would be a lot of fun", but it has no solid foundation it could rest upon. The thought experiment is built upon sand. Many visitors of this thread have plainly asked simple questions about the empire separations, just check post #856 for example, or go through my posts in the past. Nobody gives any answers based on facts or mentions any sources. The only justification of this thought experiment are personal feelings, like "let's do this, for this would be a hell lot of fun". When I ask for sources, I do not receive any. When I ask whether I did a mistake in my interpretation, I do not receive any answers and corrections based on facts and sources, only based on personal feelings. I receive insults and notes of anger and frustration just because I am challenging arguments and base them on sources that are classified as "lore" here.
The thread is almost 1000 comments long and very detailed concepts and ideas have been presented in this thread concerning the empire separation, however, quantity of posts do not say anything about the quality of the thought experiment. I can remember the OP even argueing that this thread would be a serious subject because of the likes he had received or because of the amount of the posts in this thread - just the activity in this thread. Well, feelings, likes, or the quantity of posts do not provide a solid foundation for a thought experiment but facts do, and I am just missing those facts and am flooded with feelings, emotions and even insults. That's why following this thread is a nice leisure activity during the coffee breaks, nothing more, for the building is shaky. |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
440
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 10:05:00 -
[894] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: Post in the thread if you like this idea help! A simple "I like this idea!" would be nice!So moving stuff from place to place in eve isn't really all that dangerous, difficult, interesting, or that profitable most of the time. Piracy isn't all that profitable either. So why not add more lowsec between the 4 empires. By more I mean, it would be utterly impossible to get from gallente space to caldari space without crossing lowsec at some point. When doing this I wouldn't want the routes to be setup where there are only 1-2 chokepoints you have to cross, I would also prescribe the addition of new regions. This would buff trading by making it harder, weird i know but hear me out. The less freighters going back and forth from jita to dodixie moving ice, the more expensive ice is in the area's where it can't be mined. Faction modules become items that must be smuggled across dangerous open waters. Pirates actively hunt badgers full of ore, trading corporations setup large fleets to escort freighters, etc. When I watch TV and see pirates they are plundering trade routes and making commerce harder, eve pirates don't really affect commerce at all. Imagine all the fun that can be had when you actually have to be at risk to move things? Sure their is suicide ganking but that only happens if your hauling a stupid amount of things or are just unlucky. If this change was added i would consider a cloaking hauler to move items myself since I am not as inclined to do research to exploit the market under the current landscape. To ease the transition for players who may be heavily dependent on say building things in Amarr and moving them to Jita or Jita based station traders who can't move things themselves, I propose a few temporary changes to help the transition to a new Eve economy. Every player will get 3 Interbus free move vouchers that can transport 900km3 of items each from any hisec system to another. Players will also get a voucher to move ANY 5 fully assembled ships regardless of cargo. These vouchers would only last for one month. Additionally the number of direct Hisec-HIsec wormhole connections could be boosted 300%, and over 6 months be slowly brought down to normal levels to assist the redistribution of materials. Common Arguments: This would make everyone just live in Jita!
If all hisec players lived in Jita then who would do amarr missions and mine amarr ice/ore? Not everything can be found in one empire making it nessecary that players spread themselves out evenly. Every system will be like Rancer Rancer is Rancer because it is impossible to go around it. Their is only 1 link that connects Minmatar and Caldari space, only one. If new regions are added like I prescribe then it will always be easy to circumvent these camps with a little know how. This interrupts my playstyle!Do you really need to do Damsel in Distress once for every faction? Is it really that big a deal if you now need to sell your products locally instead of at one super hub as an industrialist? It will all just be jump freightered across the gap!There are a limited number of jump freighters to move items. At 6bil a pop it will be very difficult to move lots of ships and over the gap constantly. Also with the next patch about to increase fuel prices, such a constant demand for ships jumping will make the JF option less attractive. If you had the number of jump freighters going back and forth between the empires as you do freightesr autopiloting from amarr to jita, it is likely that the number of pirate dreadnaughts ready to blap you would also go up over time, so obviously a JF isn't totally risk free either. It is impossible to cross low sec safely and it disrupts traders gameplay!On the contrary, empire to empire wormholes that can fit freighters and cloaking haulers are available to traders. Volumes of items being moved to make prices more homogenous will be reduced meaning greater profits will be made each trip making the use of these methods more profitable. It doesnt make sense lore wise!WRONG. Borders between enemy nations do not have to be safe and are often not. Security status is not determined by the presence of the empires military but concord's ability to secure those areas. 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. The borders between allied empires could be also insecure, since they may be frontier areas since this idea comes with adding new regions that disrupt Jugate travel, these areas would be a frontier, thus not very well secured. Gate camps aren't fun or pvp!While mostly true the fact that gate camps exist will provide opportunities for pirates to make money actually pirating. More importantly the fact that a gate camp is there means that someone will want to come and break it up, encouraging fleet pvp off stations encouraging more fun. New thread about this topic started in CSM Assembly Hall https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=175823&find=unreadProposed layout of the new regions and lore explanation https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2234451#post2234451
FUN fact, you can indeed go around Rancer...completely through high sec.
|
Gigi Barbagrigia
Digital Oddity
1
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 10:57:00 -
[895] - Quote
This idea would be quite neat if it were dawn of the century and much of what we have now was already developed. Right now ... way too much work for not enough return.
Racial diversity brings in far more problems than its lore based reasons justify. At the end of the day, it's a sandbox, screw lore. In a sandbox players create lore. With that out of the way what remains is complicating hisec supply chains in the name of risk/reward. That in itself is fine; actually it's excellent. Until you realize how much of a rebalancing it required. Gallente schools will now sell adv. missile skills? Oh wait, I was supposed to fly Proteus, my bad. Forgot most fly Tengus because most are Caldari. Not to mention lab POSes, etc. Also do they move all the stuff that's in Jita to ... oh I don't know, Yulai with downtime script? Think of it, that would be quite hilarious.
Lowsex is empty because a lot of people simply don't want confrontations with other people. They get enough of that during the day possibly, dunno. If you keep herding them into smaller and smaller areas they will oblige up to a point where those areas reach saturation and people stop playing.
It could be argued thay you are hanging out carrots across lowsec and for quite small portion of hisec dwellers and most of lowsec population you are. For most of former however you are breaking out big stick.
There's host of problems that need fixing, there's bunch of stuff CCP could do to increase pew-pew. This is neither fixing a problem nor promoting PvP. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
327
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 11:04:00 -
[896] - Quote
The OP is not so much about increasing non-consensual pew as creating scarcity which in turn drives more interesting trade opportunities for those willing to take them.
This is how a real economy works (in simple terms).
Winter marauders - more replies than any other thread, for a ship that no-one flies :-)
|
Jack Cassidy
Exemplary Orphans
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 11:12:00 -
[897] - Quote
I like it |
Janna Sway
45
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 11:37:00 -
[898] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:The OP is not so much about increasing non-consensual pew as creating scarcity which in turn drives more interesting trade opportunities for those willing to take them.
This is how a real economy works (in simple terms).
Could you please list some examples? What type of goods would become scarce, for I cannot remember any minerals that that I would need to import from another empire in order to manufacture my goods. What minerals are abundant in Amarr and scarce in Minmatar for example, that would force me to take the risk to travel between the empires through nullsec or lowsec?
What pirate faction modules would be rare? AFAIK, it is irrelevant what pirate faction drops the EANM, all will give a +40% resistance buff, etc. no matter in what empire you are.
Is there even anything that would be produced in Caldari that I absolutely have to have and would even pay massive amounts of ISK to get it? Would I pay massive amounts of ISK in order to import a Tengu and Pith- pirate faction modules otherwise I could not function? Or should I just buy myself a Legion and save myself a lot of trouble and ISK?
How can it be that a restriction in freedom to trade, by removing the freedom of moving freely throughout all regions will make the market flourish? The goal is to keep the market as free as possible and not to restrict it in any way. This is the free market economy i am used to. Purposefully the free market economy seeks to remove boundries and offer as much freedom as possible.
If the empires were separated, then I would not even bother about the other three empires anymore. I would live there where I was born, in Amarr, I would use the local (and cheaper) items. I would not bother even skilling for the other racial ships and only fly Amarr, and I would die in Amarr. The separation does not create scarcity because everything you need in order to manufacture and build, you can find everywhere in all empires. Nothing is locally scarce, thus there is no need to bother the risk of even leaving the Amarr empire.
Some examples for scarce goods would be really appreciated. |
Roime
Ten Thousand Years Shinjiketo
3328
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 12:17:00 -
[899] - Quote
Janna Sway wrote: Some examples for scarce goods would be really appreciated.
Ore, ice, deadspace and faction items are all tied to their regions. And no, not all deadspace items are the same, check for example Corelum vs Corpum in many items. Also items that are tied to their LP stores.
Turning border systems into lowsec does not restrict freedom, it factually increases it by allowing more people to move freely in New Eden. As you know, only high security space presents any mechanical limitations to the freedom of capsuleers in the form of faction navies and CONCORD.
I feel that people sticking to their factions (favouring ships of their race) more tightly would make this game more interesting and fortify the lore. 90% of EVE-O posts are read in Cartman voice by the common screen reader programs.-á |
Roime
Ten Thousand Years Shinjiketo
3328
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 12:20:00 -
[900] - Quote
Janna Sway wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:You do indeed misunderstand me. The forums as they stand no not make it easy to see all my posts as a continuous thread. If you saw them this way I think what I had written would make sense to you.
Hm, the statement "I am advocating the provision of player-driven law enforcement in lowsec" is pretty crystal clear and based on that an analysis followed. I cannot see any double-meanings in that sentence either, for it is a clear statement. I have followed the thread from the very beginning and have read the all comments. I am familiar with the mentioned arguments in this thread. My reply might have had disappointed you and you might feel like as if I have stepped on your toes, but words and sentences mean what they mean and one cannot distort their meanings, just to feel better, or distort the meanings because the responses received were not pleasant to the ears and honey to the heart. The issue with this thread and the thought experiment of separating the nations is that it is just a thought experiment, a "cool idea that would be a lot of fun", but it has no solid foundation it could rest upon. The thought experiment is built upon sand. Many visitors of this thread have plainly asked simple questions about the empire separations, just check post #856 for example, or go through my posts in the past. Nobody gives any answers based on facts or mentions any sources. The only justification of this thought experiment are personal feelings, like "let's do this, for this would be a hell lot of fun". When I ask for sources, I do not receive any. When I ask whether I did a mistake in my interpretation, I do not receive any answers and corrections based on facts and sources, only based on personal feelings. I receive insults and notes of anger and frustration just because I am challenging arguments and base them on sources that are classified as "lore" here. The thread is almost 1000 comments long and very detailed concepts and ideas have been presented in this thread concerning the empire separation, however, quantity of posts do not say anything about the quality of the thought experiment. I can remember the OP even argueing that this thread would be a serious subject because of the likes he had received or because of the amount of the posts in this thread - just the activity in this thread. Well, feelings, likes, or the quantity of posts do not provide a solid foundation for a thought experiment but facts do, and I am just missing those facts and am flooded with feelings, emotions and even insults. That's why following this thread is a nice leisure activity during the coffee breaks, nothing more, for the building is shaky.
Right, then provide facts why this idea wouldn't work.
90% of EVE-O posts are read in Cartman voice by the common screen reader programs.-á |
|
Janna Sway
45
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 12:52:00 -
[901] - Quote
Roime wrote:Janna Sway wrote: Some examples for scarce goods would be really appreciated.
Ore, ice, deadspace and faction items are all tied to their regions. And no, not all deadspace items are the same, check for example Corelum vs Corpum in many items. Also items that are tied to their LP stores. Turning border systems into lowsec does not restrict freedom, it factually increases it by allowing more people to move freely in New Eden. As you know, only high security space presents any mechanical limitations to the freedom of capsuleers in the form of faction navies and CONCORD. I feel that people sticking to their factions (favouring ships of their race) more tightly would make this game more interesting and fortify the lore.
Again...
- What ore is scarce in Amarr thus forcing me to import it from another empire? - none. - What ice I desperately have to import to Amarr otherwise I could not use my own Amarr technology? - none. - What Deadspace item I have to absolutely import, that local pirate NPC's do not drop, otherwise I would be in any kind of disadvantage? - none. - What faction item I have to import otherwise I would be severely in a disadvantage? - none. - As an Amarr pilot, what LP store items I absolutely have to import from for example the Federation, otherwise I could not run my own Amarr ships? - none.
Next question, how does taking the four empires who are not separated already and putting them into four seperated islands make them more free, what logic is behind that, please explain this to us. What "mechanical" limitation is there that restricts freedom when all four empires are already unseparated? I really do not understand what you mean. Since when does separation set me free and unity put in in any form of bondage? Since when the faction Navy and CONCORD restrict a capsuleer's freedom?
And about the facts why this empire separation would not work, read my previous posts and think about them. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
855
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 14:07:00 -
[902] - Quote
Janna Sway wrote: Again...
- What ore is scarce in Amarr thus forcing me to import it from another empire? - none. - What ice I desperately have to import to Amarr otherwise I could not use my own Amarr technology? - none. - What Deadspace item I have to absolutely import, that local pirate NPC's do not drop, otherwise I would be in any kind of disadvantage? - none. - What faction item I have to import otherwise I would be severely in a disadvantage? - none. - As an Amarr pilot, what LP store items I absolutely have to import from for example the Federation, otherwise I could not run my own Amarr ships? - none.
Next question, how does taking the four empires who are not separated already and putting them into four seperated islands make them more free, what logic is behind that, please explain this to us. What "mechanical" limitation is there that restricts freedom when all four empires are already unseparated? I really do not understand what you mean. Since when does separation set me free and unity put in in any form of bondage? Since when the faction Navy and CONCORD restrict a capsuleer's freedom?
And about the facts why this empire separation would not work, read my previous posts and think about them.
-Ores are in different distributions everywhere, if you are constructing a ship that requires more of the non locally abundant minerals you will loose efficiency http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/w/images/0/03/Glow_roid_grid.jpg
-Amarr poses are less effective at certain things than many other poses, people will not want to give up using there preferred pos to make less isk. Have you noticed that the goonswarm ice interdiction hasn't made everyone swap pos and capital types? Capital ship pilots also need a centralized place to buy ice, preferably one close by. -Any deadspace item other than the locally abundant one? I'd be pretty pissed if I couldn't get the modules i need for my mission ship. People who spend billions on these things just don't decide they don't want them anymore.
Every single point you make is dead WRONG. All the things you listed are clearly needed and desired everywhere, and going without those things are major pains for many many many people. Wrong wrong wrong wrong! "Pfft! I don't need deadspace modules so everyone else will just decide they don't want them either!" Ridiculous!
Which is ridiculous, many deadspace items in certain categories are clearly inferior, your also ignoring the fact that price speculation and increased demand for certain items (Burn Jita and the ice interdiction) https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mr Barbeque
Mayhem and Ruin
6
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 20:30:00 -
[903] - Quote
Janna Sway wrote:Last thing I need to mention. Mr Barbeque, may I ask you to keep it civilized and disciplined in your posts, please. In the last post you quoted my contribution in post #886, changing it into "Everything you (Janna Sway) said that I wont waste character space responding..." Your contribution to my post #854 was "don't feed the troll". I merely base my argumentations on facts and you are absolutely free to check the things I mention for yourself in evelopedia and other sources. Not one argument I present is based on my personal feelings. You are free to contribute to the discussion, and please add to your posts on what sources you base your arguments, so that I can read those and learn more about the game Eve Online, the game we all love so much. Immature expressions of anger and frustration, by calling me a troll or discrediting my posts, calling them a waste, do not contribute anything to the discussion and may I suggest that these were your last two disresepectful comments in the forums from now on.
My not-a-quote was not intended to be a personal attack. I did not want to quote your post in bulk because of character limitations, neither cherry pick lines to quote as thats a pain to format well.
I did contribute to the discussion by arguing against your reasoning as to the "fundamental problems" of CCP's previous empire separation. The proposition is more than a change in system security Its a change in map cartography: new stargates, new systems, new routes. You say you wouldn't move around in spite of price discrepancy. That's fine, those willing to try harder will have a competitive edge. Eve has always rewarded those that innovate to overcome their obstacles. I also argued that the lore is irrelevant when considering the mechanics of gameplay, and cited examples of why I think so.
My "Don't feed the troll." comment was in response to the apparent nature of your posts at the time that I perceived. After rereading your history on this thread, (notably #848 and #805) my troll theory isn't baseless. Recruiting |
Spacemover
Cathouse Club The Kadeshi
3
|
Posted - 2013.09.25 22:00:00 -
[904] - Quote
to be honest... i wouldn-Ķt have come with that idea myself because i never thought about it although i played a lot of games where i liked beeing pirate and marauder :D
i just like your idea. would make hauling more efficient highsec not the afk-autopilot-thing it is now and reduce the isk ingame in a great amount :D
/signup for this and for beeing a real pirate not that poor lowsec-missionrunner-killing version xD |
supernova ranger
The End of Eternity Ad-Astra
72
|
Posted - 2013.09.25 23:15:00 -
[905] - Quote
The courier business is hurting pretty bad these days and this would put it ahead of all the other industries.
Freighters would travel too and from the boarders and industrial would take it across lowsec...
Problem is the gate camps, there needs to be at least 20 different short routes or otherwise they will be perma-camped and the courier industry will go the other way with them having far too much in the loses category trying to break through.
Additionally with different roids on either side, they will not be able to neglect each others trade. |
Sera Kor-Azor
Amarrian Mission of the Sacred Word
1
|
Posted - 2013.09.26 03:56:00 -
[906] - Quote
I like this idea, I have suggested it before myself as a way to 'fix low sec'.
The reason I like it is because it reflects the mythology of the unexplored, the frontier regions, which every good story (and history) revolves around. The story of the Odyssey is about leaving the safety of Greece and moving into dangerous unknown waters. The Roman Catholic church maintained the early highways of Europe because they were camped by brigands. Marco Polo had to traverse dangerous trade routes to get to and trade with China. Explorers such as John Cabot discovered North America only when they were looking for new trade routes, because the known 'silk roads' were too dangerous. We know the name 'Jack Sparrow' and 'Blackbeard' because the pirates of the Caribbean are a story of intrigue and excitement.
This is the way things are in real life. There are areas of 'Empire', or high security, which are surrounded by low security or even null security space. Yes, it's true that we can ship products from China to America relatively safely nowadays, but these are never the sorts of stories which make for interesting reading.
During the age of exploration, about the 1400s, England, France, Spain and Portugal could be considered the four empires. The high seas were low-sec, not an area where you could live....but an area you HAD to cross to trade or do business. It was pretty well understood that when you crossed the Ocean, you were taking your life into your own hands.
By separating the four empires, you really do make EVE seem bigger, and the four factions seem more exotic. If crossing the ocean is a dangerous thing to do, it becomes a great adventure. If it is a simple matter of taking a 12 hour flight six times a year, it becomes dull and routine.
Also, no one is FORCING anyone to jump into low-sec, or FORCING anyone to travel between factions. You can stay within your own factional space and still do well. I'm a high sec carebear in Amarr myself, and there are plenty of regions in Amarr to trade between. Also, if you run Level 4 missions it takes you months to grind standings. You could easily learn to fly a cloaky hauler within that time. Mind you, unless there is a low-sec buffer zone between the four factions, what is the point of flying a cloaky hauler, really?
As it has been pointed out, everything that a player needs can be easily made within the region where it is used and sold. It's not as though the market will crash because there is no more easy route to Jita. It might happen that some ships and modules from other factions will become more expensive, but that's only because the adventurous 'Marco Polo' type has realized he/ she can sell it for more profit. Why shouldn't the Amarrians fly mostly Amarrian ships, and the Caldari fly mostly Caldari ships?
If you want to get into PVP, you can train to be a tackler in 3 days, but it will take you months or even years to be able to fly and fight proficiently. If you want to get into mining, you can fly a Venture in a few days, but it will take you years to get into a Hulk or an Orca. These are highly developed professions with an extensive skill-tree. Shouldn't hauling and trading be the same? High sec hauling is easy, but shouldn't hauling to other Factions be more difficult/ adventurous/ exotic/ profitable?
It would make the profession of hauling and trading in EVE seem a lot more like the Marco Polo adventurers, or the early traders with caravans or Galleons, rather than the Wall Street executives that sit in glass towers and arrange trades by telephone, or shipping goods by rail.
Also, low-sec is not as dangerous as it sounds. It is not 'Insta-death'. I have travelled through many low sec systems with ten or so pirates in local and was never engaged. Most of low sec (99%) is empty. With a little planning, you can check the map for 'jumps in the last hour' and 'ships destroyed in the last hour' and avoid those systems to map out a safe route. If low sec was expanded so that it separated the factional empires, there still wouldn't be enough pirates to cover all the possible routes from one Empire to the next.
Since faction warfare takes place in low-sec, it is likely that most of the people in that system would be the Factional militia on your side. A little cooperation with them might ensure safe passage through that system, as well as a potential contract for ships and modules. Yes, the enemy could be there too, or pirates, but that is the risk you take.
One of the things people are forgetting is that it is COMBAT which drives the EVE economy. Take a look at the market list, practically everything is a war ship, or a combat module. When ships blow up, there is a need for new ships to be built. That means more minerals need to be mined, and hauled, and sold, and so on.
It's also possible to travel through wormholes, completely bypassing the low-sec areas and the possible gate camps.
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS type X
55
|
Posted - 2013.09.26 04:19:00 -
[907] - Quote
Another "you can only agree with me post"
yeah for those not confident enough in their idea for counter arguments.
btw, if you make the game frustrating enough for we highsec carebears this game is likely to go belly up, so be careful what you ask CCP to do that might get large numbers of carebears to rage quit for keeps. |
kidkoma
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
2
|
Posted - 2013.09.26 05:59:00 -
[908] - Quote
Just read OP and nothing else. I like it, this might be fun. Everything will get hella-expensive. But blockade runners still exist and are a great option.
This would be a huge-ish disruption to Jita/market stuff, prices would almost certainly go up, which is actually good if you are an enterprising Capsuleer.
This is a game, and risky adventure would be the name of it, if it wasn't already called EvE.
Perhaps that could be the name of the expansion? I mean, prediction, winter expansion is going to be called Risky Adventure, You heard it first here.
EvE: Risky Adventure. |
Mr Barbeque
Mayhem and Ruin Point Blank Alliance
7
|
Posted - 2013.09.26 06:57:00 -
[909] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Another "you can only agree with me post"
yeah for those not confident enough in their idea for counter arguments.
btw, if you make the game frustrating enough for we highsec carebears this game is likely to go belly up, so be careful what you ask CCP to do that might get large numbers of carebears to rage quit for keeps. Plenty have tried, and I fail to see a counter argument not defeated. Funny how confident you try to portray yourself without one yourself.
The only frustrating part would be an unwillingness to adapt. (lack of effort, stupidity, ignorance, ect...) Eve is meant to be challenging, and this would add challenging aspects to courier trips. As they stand now, its one of the most boring gameplay aspects in game. The root of the AFK disease is its so dull you don't want to sit through it, so click auto-pilot and do other things. The OP would make being a courier a much more legitimate and interesting career.
But wait, don't make eve more interesting. It might make people have to try harder and rage quit! Recruiting |
Lukas Rox
Aideron Technologies
30
|
Posted - 2013.09.26 10:06:00 -
[910] - Quote
First I wanted to say that this change will cause a massive inflation. All that "Yang" (PVPers) and Yin (Manufacturers) blah blah.
But after careful consideration, dividing empires with low sec borders will only cause one big change: Jita will loose it's "primary trade hub" status in favour of local hubs in each empire.
* T1 prices are unlike to experience any inflation at all, because: - local mineral suppliers will handle the demand - nullsec minerals will flow from neighboring nullsecs to local trade hubs
* T2 prices will see a minor inflation - currently Jita is the best market for t2 components - ships will be moving those across borders, some of them will be lost - manufacturers will add these losses to their cost
* Jump Freighters will become more common, a price spike will happen initially, then the supply is going to flood the market, thus prices will come back to (or below) their current level
* There will be more Jump Freighters in game - thus, there will be more Jump Freighter kills = FUN for PVPers. More work for Manufacturers. More ISK to change hands (which is good).
* Transport ships able to use cloaking device will see a similar price spike to Jump Freighters, but most likely less pronounced.
* Red Frog freight will be divided into 4 racial divisions
* Black Frog freight will earn much more money
* PVPers will have more targets to shoot = FUN for them. More ships lost = more work for manufacturers. More ISK to move around.
* It will be a bit harder for missioners to change faction they run missions for. Most likely ppl will be buying one PVE ship for every racial region, andthen use jump clones to move between them
* Less inter-racial migration means some parts of high-sec space might become crowded (Caldari Online anyone?)
* "Foreign" ice prices will go up
* People will switch to racial towers based on the empire they reside in.
I realize that above analysis of the impact is not very deep, but it seems that the 150% inflation or 50% players rage quitting is unlikely to happen. Blogging about EVE on http://pozniak.pl/ |
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS type X
57
|
Posted - 2013.09.26 10:22:00 -
[911] - Quote
Mr Barbeque wrote:Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Another "you can only agree with me post"
yeah for those not confident enough in their idea for counter arguments.
btw, if you make the game frustrating enough for we highsec carebears this game is likely to go belly up, so be careful what you ask CCP to do that might get large numbers of carebears to rage quit for keeps. Plenty have tried, and I fail to see a counter argument not defeated. Funny how confident you try to portray yourself without one yourself. The only frustrating part would be an unwillingness to adapt. (lack of effort, stupidity, ignorance, ect...) Eve is meant to be challenging, and this would add challenging aspects to courier trips. As they stand now, its one of the most boring gameplay aspects in game. The root of the AFK disease is its so dull you don't want to sit through it, so click auto-pilot and do other things. The OP would make being a courier a much more legitimate and interesting career. But wait, don't make eve more interesting. It might make people have to try harder and rage quit!
So, let me get this straight it should be challenging to do things in EVE, do I have that part right?
Then out of the deepest concern for your game playing experience I absolutely prohibit CCP from even considering this proposal. I would hate for freighters to be forced into easy-mode gate camps, giving you basically 'auto-pilot' ganking and take all your fun away.
I know you pew, pew types are too proud to say thanks, so I'll just say, "You're welcome!" Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really. |
Lukas Rox
Aideron Technologies
30
|
Posted - 2013.09.26 10:32:00 -
[912] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
So, let me get this straight it should be challenging to do things in EVE, do I have that part right?
Then out of the deepest concern for your game playing experience I absolutely prohibit CCP from even considering this proposal. I would hate for freighters to be forced into easy-mode gate camps, giving you basically 'auto-pilot' ganking and take all your fun away.
I know you pew, pew types are too proud to say thanks, so I'll just say, "You're welcome!".
I don't know about you, but if this goes through, I simply WON'T be flying my freighter cross-empires, period. Why risk the ship you don't want to loose? If this change goes live, all we have to do is forget about Jita (unless one is in Caldari space). You won't have to go there, because new markets will emerge for each empire (emerge or grow? because they already exist anyway). Blogging about EVE on http://pozniak.pl/ |
Sosiame
Alerion Corporation
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.26 12:15:00 -
[913] - Quote
+1 for the thread +1 for the effort |
Oswald Bolke
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
4
|
Posted - 2013.09.26 14:58:00 -
[914] - Quote
I feel like this isn't a good idea. why? it's another attempt at buffing pirates, which I feel if anything needs a nerf. if this happens so much for cross empire trade. every pirate and his sister will be sitting at gates between major trade hubs, forcing people to go around for miles
also, not once have I ever seen a pirate not shoot a ship, even if it was empty "oh you iteron is empty? well go on then"....said no pirate ever
all we will see if this happens is prices going up, less stuff being available in markets and pirates padding their killboards instead of "making more money" off of people. we add on even MORE risk for haulers and associated players while nothing of the sort for pirates is given. I would be open to this if pirates had some sort of nerf, like not being able to dock or faction police patrols randomly happening...but as this suggestion stands...unless some magic wormhole appears to jita, players would be forced to travel through magic pirate frollic space land to get their stuff sold...while Pirates can just sit in space and rack up the dough and kills.
It's about risk reward, and it's not fair to give more risk to one play style just so another can get a bigger reward off of haulers hard earned cash. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
470
|
Posted - 2013.09.26 17:53:00 -
[915] - Quote
no... just .... no
All this would cause it grouping of high sec players into smaller areas.
Jita would become the main gaming hub completely...
No point in leaving Caldari space when Jita is the major trade hub of the game.
If you break high sec up, you break the game, and it dies.
Good to see you think your ganks at low sec gate camps are more important than Eve as a whole... |
Delhaven
Arkhon Industries Solarmark Coalition
18
|
Posted - 2013.09.26 18:25:00 -
[916] - Quote
Read the first page, skipped most of the rest.
I really like this idea. Having high-sec "enclaves" with higher risk areas in between would make things a lot more interesting. Industrialists would end up thinking a lot more about what to do with their goods, which beats the "build in place, AFK to Jita, AFK back, rinse and repeat" way that it's done now.
It also won't force anyone to do anything: other people will always be willing to haul things if you aren't, it'll just cut into profitability. This will leave people with a choice: either play it safe by buying and selling in a local market with worse prices, or gambling for a higher reward by getting better prices elsewhere at the risk of getting blown up on route. And to me, that kind of risk/reward choice is the best part of what Eve is about.
Conflict is always a driver of innovation and industry, and this would work well to that end.
Random thought: I'm not sure how exactly, but I could see Deep Space Transports being modified to have a real role if this happened. |
Mr Barbeque
Mayhem and Ruin Point Blank Alliance
10
|
Posted - 2013.09.26 18:30:00 -
[917] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:So, let me get this straight it should be challenging to do things in EVE, do I have that part right?
Then out of the deepest concern for your game playing experience I absolutely prohibit CCP from even considering this proposal. I would hate for freighters to be forced into easy-mode gate camps, giving you basically 'auto-pilot' ganking and take all your fun away.
I know you pew, pew types are too proud to say thanks, so I'll just say, "You're welcome!". I still have yet to see a reasoned counter argument...
Read the OP, then some of the thread. It has been repeatedly made clear that this is not a change to funnel traffic through specific choke points. In fact, in the cartography discussed should have many different route possibilities and combinations as to avoid predictable insta-lock camps and such.
Freighters would not be forced into lowsec, nor does anyone expect them to be. They should not be flown there. There's a class for this called transport ships. Cloaky haulers can move your shinies, with reliable success. JF's can move large volume if you know how to cyno.
Pirates do not sit on gates all day. Not every jump in low is camped by a gang of pirates. A gate camp is also a large static target for other 'pirates' (aka NBSI players in low) to attack. The only more static camps are at the predictable entry and choke points, see cartography above.
Joe Risalo wrote:no... just .... no
All this would cause it grouping of high sec players into smaller areas.
Jita would become the main gaming hub completely...
No point in leaving Caldari space when Jita is the major trade hub of the game.
If you break high sec up, you break the game, and it dies.
Good to see you think your ganks at low sec gate camps are more important than Eve as a whole... I know its a threadnaught, but do read it. Every one of your points has been raised and addressed. It would not break eve, that's a fact. Recruiting |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
470
|
Posted - 2013.09.26 18:58:00 -
[918] - Quote
Mr Barbeque wrote:Maldiro Selkurk wrote:So, let me get this straight it should be challenging to do things in EVE, do I have that part right?
Then out of the deepest concern for your game playing experience I absolutely prohibit CCP from even considering this proposal. I would hate for freighters to be forced into easy-mode gate camps, giving you basically 'auto-pilot' ganking and take all your fun away.
I know you pew, pew types are too proud to say thanks, so I'll just say, "You're welcome!". I still have yet to see a reasoned counter argument... Read the OP, then some of the thread. It has been repeatedly made clear that this is not a change to funnel traffic through specific choke points. In fact, in the cartography discussed should have many different route possibilities and combinations as to avoid predictable insta-lock camps and such. Freighters would not be forced into lowsec, nor does anyone expect them to be. They should not be flown there. There's a class for this called transport ships. Cloaky haulers can move your shinies, with reliable success. JF's can move large volume if you know how to cyno. Pirates do not sit on gates all day. Not every jump in low is camped by a gang of pirates. A gate camp is also a large static target for other 'pirates' (aka NBSI players in low) to attack. The only more static camps are at the predictable entry and choke points, see cartography above. Joe Risalo wrote:no... just .... no
All this would cause it grouping of high sec players into smaller areas.
Jita would become the main gaming hub completely...
No point in leaving Caldari space when Jita is the major trade hub of the game.
If you break high sec up, you break the game, and it dies.
Good to see you think your ganks at low sec gate camps are more important than Eve as a whole... I know its a threadnaught, but do read it. Every one of your points has been raised and addressed. It would not break eve, that's a fact.
It may not "break" the game in your understanding of the word, but it would break the game. The best market in game is in Jita. Everyone would flock to this region.
All new characters would be created as caldari. What's the point of creating an Amarrian if you're just gonna move to caldari space and can cross train for anything?
There would be no point in having a high sec other than Caldari space..
IE... Game breaking |
CorsairV
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
4
|
Posted - 2013.09.26 18:59:00 -
[919] - Quote
I think when faction warfare systems are contested they should have reduced security. Would create new market fluctuations, ganking opportunities for neutrals, etc. |
Ordellus
ORI Ground Forces
19
|
Posted - 2013.09.26 21:28:00 -
[920] - Quote
This is just as silly as dividing low sec up into regions and intra spacing it with high sec space.
Forcing playstyles is a bad thing. |
|
Sera Kor-Azor
Amarrian Mission of the Sacred Word
1
|
Posted - 2013.09.26 21:53:00 -
[921] - Quote
Quote: It may not "break" the game in your understanding of the word, but it would break the game. The best market in game is in Jita. Everyone would flock to this region.
All new characters would be created as caldari. What's the point of creating an Amarrian if you're just gonna move to caldari space and can cross train for anything?
There would be no point in having a high sec other than Caldari space..
IE... Game breaking
Saying 'the best market is in Jita' is like saying "I can buy everything at Wal-Mart, so why would anyone need a mom & pop hardware store in their home town?
The super popularity of Jita was once another thread on it's own, since it was causing massive lag on the servers. The discussion was 'How do we solve the Jita problem?'
Sure, Jita is the best market in EVE....for now.....but only because people keep feeding the beast. There is nothing magical about Jita. In fact, Jita developed as a super hub only because the actions of the players, it had nothing to do with any decision by CCP. The original massive super trade hub was once in Yulai, in the Genesis constellation. The trade hub organically drifted to Jita mainly because of it's central location, and the popularity of choosing Caldari at the time, because they got better missions, the 'chosen race' of CCP. Today, Yulai is a ghost town, and the 'chosen race' is Amarr. This change hardly destroyed EVE.
If there was an area of low sec separating the four empires, then Amarr, Dodixie, Rens and Hek would all become the new 'mini-Jitas', regional super markets. It would be like splitting Jita up into five. You wouldn't need to go to Jita to buy or sell, because Amarr/ Rens / Dodixie would have exactly the same thing at a comparable price.
Instead of punishing anyone who didn't choose Caldari, in fact it would be the opposite...it would be a massive boost for local regional trade. Amarr, Gallente and Minmatar would no longer feel penalized for choosing a race so far away from the 'massive super trade hub' of Jita. Ask someone in Gallente Factional warfare how they feel about Jita being so close to their front lines.
Even if Jita still remained the undisputed king of trade hubs, being separated from JIta by a small area of low sec would hardly be a barrier to trade. It would just mean that it would be slightly more challenging to trade between regions, as well as more profitable. It's like the difference between taking a bus to the restaurant, or walking there. It's only a LITTLE more effort.
Can you imagine the first explorers or pioneers being offered a chance to exploit the riches of a new world, only to have someone say "but it's so far to go! We might die in the ocean! Six weeks on a ship is horrible! There's pirates! The food sucks!" Guess what? The people who said those things stayed in England where life was comfortable, and no one ever built statues of them.
The people that first subscribe to EVE don't think to themselves "I will make a fortune in imaginary currency trading imaginary goods in an imaginary market in a computer game." They watch YouTube videos of combat between spaceships and think 'that's cool!'. Making the easy ISK by AFK hauling through high sec is just a tedious activity that they become accustomed to, like a job that just pays the rent. Learning to fly a cloaky hauler through low sec to discover and trade with another nation is a little more like the EVE they envisioned, a dangerous universe separated by vast interstellar distances.
Marco Polo and the other early merchants could have stayed in Europe where it was reasonably safe. It was the potential profit of the spice trade which tempted him to venture to China.....in spite of the dangers. Those things he brought back with him were fascinating and valuable precisely because they were so hard to get. Nowadays, you can drive your gas-guzzling SUV to Wal-Mart and all the shelves are filled with plastic junk mass produced in China. Sure, the people that shop at Wal-Mart have a lot easier of a time getting stuff from China than Marco Polo did, but will we remember any of their names in five hundred years?
A ship is safe while docked in a harbour, but that's not what ships were designed for. For that matter, capsuleers were made immortal by being given clones, but not for the purpose of remaining completely safe in high sec at all times. Instead of being afraid of the water, learn how to swim!
You can remain within your own Faction of high sec space and do quite well for years if you choose. Each faction has several regions, with hundreds of agents, and it takes a long time to grind standings. Amarr, Dodixie, Rens and Hek are all robust markets in themselves, they simply don't have the high volume of trade than an over-hyped Jita does. I think of Jita exactly the same way I think of a Wal-Mart, it's a buyer's market to get things for cheap, not a sellers market to sell what you make at a good price. Stuff made in America might cost more to buy, but that money goes into the wallets of an American worker and not some Chinese prison-labour camp. Sadly, it's hard for people to overlook that they save themselves a few dimes by stabbing local labour in the back.
No one is forcing you to travel between regions, or to buy from Jita instead of a regional market to save a few ISK. In fact, by buying locally you save yourself ISK in the form of opportunity cost. It might be worth it to pay a few extra thousand for a module and get back faster to that million ISK an hour you make missioning or mining, rather than buying that module for a few thousand ISK cheaper price, but spending an hour making an unprofitable trip to Jita and back. |
Mr Barbeque
Mayhem and Ruin Point Blank Alliance
10
|
Posted - 2013.09.27 16:04:00 -
[922] - Quote
Ordellus wrote:This is just as silly as dividing low sec up into regions and intra spacing it with high sec space.
Forcing playstyles is a bad thing. Highsec to highsec wormholes, 'safe' international travel. The only thing that would stop people from finding and using these is a lack of will. What exactly is forced?
Joe Risalo wrote:It may not "break" the game in your understanding of the word, but it would break the game. The best market in game is in Jita. Everyone would flock to this region. Market saturation and over competition promote separation. People always have, and will continue to pay for convenience.
Joe Risalo wrote:All new characters would be created as caldari. What's the point of creating an Amarrian if you're just gonna move to caldari space and can cross train for anything? Of course every new player has in depth knowledge of Eve's markets, would never want to try something different, would never feel bored or adventurous, would never want to leave their insular area, or diversify in any way. You got me there. Recruiting |
Freako X
Doom Inc
99
|
Posted - 2013.09.27 16:19:00 -
[923] - Quote
Change is hard. +1 to the idea.
I also like the idea of faction consequences if you pirate in the empire. Ie. Gallente pirating will lower Gall faction but raise Cal. |
Tilly Delnero
Licorne Ventures Ltd.
41
|
Posted - 2013.09.27 19:15:00 -
[924] - Quote
Mr Barbeque wrote:Highsec to highsec wormholes, 'safe' international travel. The only thing that would stop people from finding and using these is a lack of will. What exactly is forced? Because of these pesky things called 'mass limits', freighters won't actually fit through a highsec-highsec wormhole. Not to mention the potentially ridiculous amount of time spent trying to find this 'perfectly safe' road to a specific constellation or region would further reduce any profits you might make.
This whole idea is based on so many fallacies and a complete lack of experience in the different aspects of gameplay it sets out to change, it's really quite amusing. |
Sera Kor-Azor
Amarrian Mission of the Sacred Word
3
|
Posted - 2013.09.27 23:21:00 -
[925] - Quote
Tilly Delnero wrote:Mr Barbeque wrote:Highsec to highsec wormholes, 'safe' international travel. The only thing that would stop people from finding and using these is a lack of will. What exactly is forced? Because of these pesky things called 'mass limits', freighters won't actually fit through a highsec-highsec wormhole. Not to mention the potentially ridiculous amount of time spent trying to find this 'perfectly safe' road to a specific constellation or region would further reduce any profits you might make. This whole idea is based on so many fallacies and a complete lack of experience in the different aspects of gameplay it sets out to change, it's really quite amusing.
When Freighters were first introduced, people were opposed to them as well. The ability to move such a large amount of goods from place to place was considered 'game breaking' as well. Now they are just accepted as a normal part of EVE. Before there were freighters, there were industrial ships. New players get not one, but two of these ships if they do the tutorials. They are often scoffed at, but they must be important since you aren't allowed to fly one as a trial account.
For those starting out in combat, there's the frigate. For those starting out in mining, there's the Venture. For those that want to start out in hauling, there's the industrial ship. Sadly, since the introduction of the Freighter, there aren't a lot of hauling opportunities left for newer players. Courier contracts typically demand a huge deposit, as well as an enormous cargo hold. That's in high sec.
Cloaky haulers have the ability to fly into low sec and null sec with fairly little risk. Despite this, there is no presently reason to ship goods through low-sec really, because of the proximity to high sec. Low sec is essentially a PVP arena for faction warfare and the occasional pirate battle. Who wins or loses in factional warfare really doesn't matter, it's like a football game.
In real life, war is all about economic consequences and supply lines. All wars are economic wars. An army travel on it's belly. If the enemy is winning, less food and fuel for you. When your side is winning, to the victor goes the spoils. When two countries have a hostile relationship, one of the first things that happens is an embargo against that country. Supply lines are cut off. Trade routes are choked. A few entrepreneurial types might manage to get around the embargo and smuggle goods in or out.
The best way to duplicate this in EVE is to separate the four empires with low sec space. Now suddenly, factional warfare matters. Low sec matters. Low sec systems between the empires are no longer empty space, they are now become hotbeds of PVP combat activity. It's not just 'pew pew' anymore, or flying around low sec for hours looking for a fight, simply to have a fight. It's now your military keeping the area safe from pirates and the enemy militia so that their merchants can transport goods from one empire to the next. Carebears and FW fighters are on the same team. Pirates have more incentives, but also more challenges.
If you can't fit a freighter into a high sec to high sec wormhole, then you can fly through with an Orca or even an industrial ship. What the jaded five-year old manufacturer characters perceive as a tedious extra minute or so scanning down a wormhole (that's how long it took me to do it) and cutting into their hourly profits becomes a new adventure and a rare and profitable opportunity for the newer player.
Not to mention the fact that the wormhole I found would have taken 22 jumps off a trip from Tash-Murkon to Rens, so that minute or two I 'lost' scanning down a HS to HS wormhole would have saved me hours of high sec hauling.
Also, I don't understand how the idea is full of fallacies. A fallacy is something that seems logical, when in fact it's not. An example would be the fallacy of the false dichotomy, saying there are only two choices when there are actually more. "You are either for us or against us, a friend or an enemy".
The only reason I can see to be against this is that you make a lot of money through high sec inter-regional trading hauling by freighter. Well, the people that made wooden wagons for a living didn't like the invention of the automobile either. |
Tilly Delnero
Licorne Ventures Ltd.
42
|
Posted - 2013.09.28 02:59:00 -
[926] - Quote
Sera Kor-Azor wrote:... The only reason I can see to be against this is that you make a lot of money through high sec inter-regional trading hauling by freighter. Well, the people that made wooden wagons for a living didn't like the invention of the automobile either. +1 for a well-reasoned and written argument.
Honestly I wish I could afford a freighter, but yeah I fully agree on the lack of new-player hauling opportunities. A new player can make money moving goods between systems (especially regional border systems due primarily to market data visibility limitations) at the moment, but that involves trading as well rather than simply hauling. There are quite a few low-volume courier contracts that new players could potentially perform but even those typically involve a high collateral so are out of reach of most. This border change idea wouldn't improve that situation however, since new players don't have access to blockade runners and would have to train even more skills and spend more time (exploration) to do the same task, not to mention making courier missions in systems near to border zones difficult or near-impossible to complete if the destination takes the player through a camped system.
I won't get into the EVE vs IRL war aspect, since it makes no sense to me. The reason no-man's land and DMZs exist in the real world is that it provides a buffer that makes borders easier to defend and police. In EVE, with the single-point entry of system gates that can be locked-down at any time (or just camped) and highsec system-wide cynosural jamming, the concept of a buffer zone just seems silly. Since the empires aren't actively opposed to civilian inter-empire trading (and as in the real world probably even require it to some extent, through lacking access to race-specific resources or technology for example), it again makes no real sense to institute such restrictions.
Some of the more obvious fallacies that keep recurring:
Transports will hire escorts for protection (suggesting the intention of more player interaction)
This is similar to the 'miners will hire protection in highsec if xxx is changed' argument, it simply doesn't work in the real world. Hiring escorts costs ISK, meaning fewer profits and less incentive to even get into hauling in the first place. Not to mention that in the case of adding lowsec buffer zones, blockade runners will become the new inter-regional transport method, and those are typically only useful solo (typically with a scout alt, due to the potential for another player to stab you in the back).
Wormholes will provide safe passage between empires, everyone should use them and is an idiot/lazy if they don't!
Mass limits aside, when you want/need to sell in or transport to a specific region or even empire, wormholes become unreliable and time-consuming unless you happen to be extremely lucky (it also involves needing to train up exploration skills, an otherwise useless skillset for a hauler character). Setting out to find a highsec-highsec wormhole leading from The Forge to say, Amarr or Molden Heath could potentially take hours. If used enough, it makes sense that they could also become natural suicide-gank spots, though this in itself is merely speculation on my part.
Making border crossing more dangerous will lead to a healthier economy.
It would lead to more expensive goods certainly, specifically ores and modules not normally obtainable in any quantity in a given empire. Healthier? I don't see how. Supply would drop, prices would rise and activities such as PvP (which has already become substantially more expensive since the mining bot bans) would become even more costly to maintain. There's also the increased vulnerability toward market manipulation - if a large entity (or multiple smaller entities) decided to close off specific border routes in order to drive up prices of say faction modules or PLEX, there's very little anyone besides another large entity could really do about it.
'For Factional Warfare', 'For the economy', 'For fun'
I may be jaded on this one, but this whole suggestion (the segregation of highsec empire) has been put forward under numerous guises by lazy gatecampers who don't like waiting for prey or expending effort for as long as I've been playing. The old forums seemed to see a new version of it I would probably say anually at most, sometimes more often depending on what else had been changed at the time. I'm not saying lazy gatecamping or griefing of new players (SOE arc with permacamped lowsec border zones?) really is the OP's intention, but it does seem eerily familiar. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
486
|
Posted - 2013.09.28 05:31:00 -
[927] - Quote
Tilly Delnero wrote:Sera Kor-Azor wrote:... The only reason I can see to be against this is that you make a lot of money through high sec inter-regional trading hauling by freighter. Well, the people that made wooden wagons for a living didn't like the invention of the automobile either. +1 for a well-reasoned and written argument. Honestly I wish I could afford a freighter, but yeah I fully agree on the lack of new-player hauling opportunities. A new player can make money moving goods between systems (especially regional border systems due primarily to market data visibility limitations) at the moment, but that involves trading as well rather than simply hauling. There are quite a few low-volume courier contracts that new players could potentially perform but even those typically involve a high collateral so are out of reach of most. This border change idea wouldn't improve that situation however, since new players don't have access to blockade runners and would have to train even more skills and spend more time (exploration) to do the same task, not to mention making courier missions in systems near to border zones difficult or near-impossible to complete if the destination takes the player through a camped system. I won't get into the EVE vs IRL war aspect, since it makes no sense to me. The reason no-man's land and DMZs exist in the real world is that it provides a buffer that makes borders easier to defend and police. In EVE, with the single-point entry of system gates that can be locked-down at any time (or just camped) and highsec system-wide cynosural jamming, the concept of a buffer zone just seems silly. Since the empires aren't actively opposed to civilian inter-empire trading (and as in the real world probably even require it to some extent, through lacking access to race-specific resources or technology for example), it again makes no real sense to institute such restrictions. Some of the more obvious fallacies that keep recurring: Transports will hire escorts for protection (suggesting the intention of more player interaction) This is similar to the 'miners will hire protection in highsec if xxx is changed' argument, it simply doesn't work in the real world. Hiring escorts costs ISK, meaning fewer profits and less incentive to even get into hauling in the first place. Not to mention that in the case of adding lowsec buffer zones, blockade runners will become the new inter-regional transport method, and those are typically only useful solo (typically with a scout alt, due to the potential for another player to stab you in the back). Wormholes will provide safe passage between empires, everyone should use them and is an idiot/lazy if they don't!Mass limits aside, when you want/need to sell in or transport to a specific region or even empire, wormholes become unreliable and time-consuming unless you happen to be extremely lucky (it also involves needing to train up exploration skills, an otherwise useless skillset for a hauler character). Setting out to find a highsec-highsec wormhole leading from The Forge to say, Amarr or Molden Heath could potentially take hours. If used enough, it makes sense that they could also become natural suicide-gank spots, though this in itself is merely speculation on my part. Making border crossing more dangerous will lead to a healthier economy.It would lead to more expensive goods certainly, specifically ores and modules not normally obtainable in any quantity in a given empire. Healthier? I don't see how. Supply would drop, prices would rise and activities such as PvP (which has already become substantially more expensive since the mining bot bans) would become even more costly to maintain. There's also the increased vulnerability toward market manipulation - if a large entity (or multiple smaller entities) decided to close off specific border routes in order to drive up prices of say faction modules or PLEX, there's very little anyone besides another large entity could really do about it. 'For Factional Warfare', 'For the economy', 'For fun'I may be jaded on this one, but this whole suggestion (the segregation of highsec empire) has been put forward under numerous guises by lazy gatecampers who don't like waiting for prey or expending effort for as long as I've been playing. The old forums seemed to see a new version of it I would probably say anually at most, sometimes more often depending on what else had been changed at the time. I'm not saying lazy gatecamping or griefing of new players (SOE arc with permacamped lowsec border zones?) really is the OP's intention, but it does seem eerily familiar. You're not jaded, you're right... Separating empires with low is nothing more that some BS to try and force people to take risks. Problem is, the people that agree with this have yet to realize what has always been the truth in Eve, and that is that if you try to force risks on people, they'll either quit the game, or find another way to avoid those risks.
This is exactly why I say it is game breaking, because a change like this will cause mass grouping(probably around Jita) and will lead in little to no point in have the other faction territories. This would eventually lead to massive onslaughts of ganks to try and force some kind of ajenda, but will ultimately lead to mass sub drops, and the eventual death of Eve and/or movement to a FTP and/or micro transaction model with little to no care, or support by CCP.
This is why CCP hasn't posted anything more than "we're here" on this thread. They know damn good and well that this kind of idiotic move would lead to Eve's death. |
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS type X
70
|
Posted - 2013.09.28 06:34:00 -
[928] - Quote
Mr Barbeque wrote: Read the OP, then some of the thread. It has been repeatedly made clear that this is not a change to funnel traffic through specific choke points. In fact, in the cartography discussed should have many different route possibilities and combinations as to avoid predictable insta-lock camps and such.
With the entire high sec economy wanting to do business across this new low sec divide any reasonable number of paths between the new high sec islands will all be packed with gankers.
Mr Barbeque wrote: Freighters would not be forced into lowsec, nor does anyone expect them to be. They should not be flown there. There's a class for this called transport ships. Cloaky haulers can move your shinies, with reliable success. JF's can move large volume if you know how to cyno.
You want me to move an entire Charon full of ore through this new divide, parsing it into ships with tiny little holds, which under the best of circumstances means i make like 8-10 trips across this low sec space that im sure would be a multi-jump gate camp hell?
Your understanding of the transportation of large volumes of product in high sec space in EVE is profoundly flawed.
Mr Barbeque wrote: Pirates do not sit on gates all day. Not every jump in low is camped by a gang of pirates. A gate camp is also a large static target for other 'pirates' (aka NBSI players in low) to attack. The only more static camps are at the predictable entry and choke points, see cartography above.
You are using the current lowsec system model that is by-passed by high-sec transportation as an example of what it would be like when major commerce is using this new lowsec divide. Your ability to see the ramifications of your suggestion is both sad and laughable at the same time. Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
371
|
Posted - 2013.09.28 11:43:00 -
[929] - Quote
So today I had to travel from Amarr to Dodixie.
To do it all in high sec requires 16 jump, setting the autopilot routefinder to shortest requires 14 jumps, with I think 2 of those in lowsec.
Thus there is absolutely no incentive to opt for the low sec route other than actively searching for pvp.
This just seems a bit lame to me.
A half-way solution might be to cut the lowsec journey in half and perhaps increase the hisec distance.
Then there is a trade-off in route selection.
Winter marauders - more replies than any other thread, for a ship that no-one flies :-)
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
875
|
Posted - 2013.09.28 15:57:00 -
[930] - Quote
holy **** 30k views. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Mr Barbeque
Mayhem and Ruin Point Blank Alliance
11
|
Posted - 2013.09.28 16:38:00 -
[931] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote: With the entire high sec economy wanting to do business across this new low sec divide any reasonable number of paths between the new high sec islands will all be packed with gankers.
These 'gankers' you speak of aren't all blue to each other, and sharks eat each other. Are scouts out of the question?
Prepare for the worst of course, but just assuming the worst is silly. Its like assuming you'll be suicided on every gate, every jump, every day.
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Mr Barbeque wrote: Freighters would not be forced into lowsec, nor does anyone expect them to be. They should not be flown there. There's a class for this called transport ships. Cloaky haulers can move your shinies, with reliable success. JF's can move large volume if you know how to cyno.
You want me to move an entire Charon full of ore through this new divide, parsing it into ships with tiny little holds, which under the best of circumstances means i make like 8-10 trips across this low sec space that im sure would be a multi-jump gate camp hell? Your understanding of the transportation of large volumes of product in high sec space in EVE is profoundly flawed. (JF = Jump Freighter) Smaller yes, such is the price you should pay for moving large quantities 'safely'. You assume much.
Maldiro Selkurk wrote: You are using the current lowsec system model that is by-passed by high-sec transportation as an example of what it would be like when major commerce is using this new lowsec divide. Your ability to see the ramifications of your suggestion is both sad and laughable at the same time.
I am a supporter, not the OP. And yes, i do formulate my views on the information and experience i have collected.
Are you arguing that all pirates, NBSI pilots, faction warfare pilots, and the walk-ons will all band together to sit on a gate? PL and razor will drop by to say, "Hi guys, that's a pretty gate your circle jerking on. Can we join?" My point is if you allow yourself to become a target, someone may very well act upon that. That goes for everyone, and a bunch of guys on a gate is a fun looking target for the well equipped.
I still have yet to see a reasoned counter argument from you. However I do see evidence of a lack of fully reading things you quote. And I love personal attacks, means I must be doing something right. Recruiting |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
488
|
Posted - 2013.09.28 17:03:00 -
[932] - Quote
Mr Barbeque wrote: My point is if you allow yourself to become a target, someone may very well act upon that. That goes for everyone.
I pulled out the only part of your arguement that fits.
Those that always avoid these risks will continue to avoid these risks...
This is why i continue to say that risk averse players will flock to Caldari Space. Why stay somewhere that costs more? And when you seperate the factions, it'll cost more and more just to buy a ship. Most of the items you find in other trade hubs has usually been subsidized by people transporting items from Jita, bringing costs down.
Secondly, I have yet to see a valid arguement on why this SHOULD be done... Yet you continue to say there is no argument as to why it shouldn't be done.
If there's no valid arguement as to why yes, and no valid arguement as to why no. Well, then it might as well stay the way it is now, as we already know it's working, so why take the risks to cut the factions if there's no valid reason why? |
Nav illus
Blackwater Swat. Against ALL Authorities
9
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 02:26:00 -
[933] - Quote
I approve of this idea. |
SGT FUNYOUN
Arachnea Phoenix Battalion Hoodlums Associates
78
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 02:47:00 -
[934] - Quote
If CCP makes it so that we can use jump drives from High Sec to High Sec, THEN YES... but unless that...
NO.
Now REDUCING, the amount of high sec in between each empire so as to bottle-neck travelers along specific routes I can see maybe.
Increase the number of low sec and null sec systems between high sec empires would make it harder to move freight from point a to point b and make more pilots brave crossing the sec barrier to make transit times faster, without breaking the marketeering mechanic of the game.
But unless you leave at least ONE "safe" corridor between each empire...
no. |
Sera Kor-Azor
Amarrian Mission of the Sacred Word
5
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 02:55:00 -
[935] - Quote
Sera Kor-Azor wrote:... The only reason I can see to be against this is that you make a lot of money through high sec inter-regional trading hauling by freighter. Well, the people that made wooden wagons for a living didn't like the invention of the automobile either. +1 for a well-reasoned and written argument.
"This border change idea wouldn't improve that situation however, since new players don't have access to blockade runners and would have to train even more skills and spend more time (exploration) to do the same task, not to mention making courier missions in systems near to border zones difficult or near-impossible to complete if the destination takes the player through a camped system."
At present, PVP is a profession because there are a lot of skills to learn. Mining and manufacturing are a profession for the same reason. Hauling as a 'profession' is comparably easy, you can train a high sec hauler in a matter of hours. To train to fly a blockade runner is easier than training to fly a freighter in high sec, and the ships are cheaper. Exploration and opening up new trade routes involves more skills than simply hauling a load down a safe, paved highway. There's more of a sense of accomplishment when there are obstacles to overcome.
"Since the empires aren't actively opposed to civilian inter-empire trading (and as in the real world probably even require it to some extent, through lacking access to race-specific resources or technology for example), it again makes no real sense to institute such restrictions."
There are open hostilities between Amarr and Minmatar, Caldari and Gallente. There is only peaceful trade between these regions because Concord maintains that peace. This could change at any moment. Each of the four empires has good reasons for a trade embargo against two other empires.
"Some of the more obvious fallacies that keep recurring:
Transports will hire escorts for protection (suggesting the intention of more player interaction)"
This is a little different than miners in high sec, who get ganked anyways. Cloaky haulers hardly ever get caught. Also, an alt as a scout would be more effective than a hired escort.
"Wormholes will provide safe passage between empires, everyone should use them and is an idiot/lazy if they don't!"
It's true that wormholes are unpredictable, just as the seas were for early explorers. Smooth seas do not make for skillful sailors. Scanning down the wormhole you want might take hours, but how long would hauling from Amarr to Rens take? Wormholes aren't the only option, there's also flying through low sec in a cloaky hauler.
"Making border crossing more dangerous will lead to a healthier economy."
I don't see how supply would drop. Everything in EVE is made by players with blueprints. Mining anomalies provide enough of the ores to make each region self-suffiicent. Every region has access to null-sec. Where is the shortage coming from?
Most of the people that live in high-sec make their money from missions. They buy their ships for that. Separating the four empires with low sec would have no effect on Factional mission runners whatsoever. The ISK for running missions will never dry up.
I don't see the increased vulnerability towards market manipulation. Each of the four empires has their own robust trade hub, with several smaller hubs. If they were separated with low sec then each of the larger hubs would each become equivalent to Jita. Prices might be a little higher, but all that would mean is mine a little more or run more missions. I don't know if it would make the economy healthier, but it can't keep growing forever. The world of EVE isn't completely about making and saving money.
'For Factional Warfare', 'For the economy', 'For fun'
I'm not saying lazy gatecamping or griefing of new players (SOE arc with permacamped lowsec border zones?) really is the OP's intention, but it does seem eerily familiar."
I'm not a pirate. I am a high-sec manufacturer and Trader. Let me give you some examples.
Have you ever been to Misaba? That's the low sec market hub for the CVA and Providence. Prices in Misaba are comparable to prices in Amarr. The only way to get goods into Misaba is with a cloaky hauler. The CVA have many enemies, including pirates. It's also a 'pipe', there is only one entry & exit gate for each system which could be easily camped but rarely is, this isn't true of most of low sec systems. Despite this, hardly any haulers lose ships flying to Misaba. Intel channels keep the haulers well informed of any gate camps. Open a map and see how many ships are lost in Misaba, compared to ships lost in Amarr or Jita.
In the real world, it's only logical to want to ship your goods in the safest, fastest way possible. Streets are well lit and paved for just this reason. In the 'world of adventure', like Star Wars, Mad Max, the 16th century, etc, there has to be some dangerous obstacle to overcome to make the story exciting and the character heroic. The problem here is that you don't see the 'logic' in something which makes the game more challenging for you. Why should you have to train up skills that you don't have to train now? Why should something that is easy and safe be made more challenging and risky? Well, the element of a game entails that there are risks as well as rewards, obstacles as well as strategies. High sec is a safe nest, but there isn't much incentive to leave the nest. A low sec barrier between Empires would change that.
"We go to the moon not because it is easy, but because it is hard." -John F. Kennedy
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
876
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 02:56:00 -
[936] - Quote
SGT FUNYOUN wrote:If CCP makes it so that we can use jump drives from High Sec to High Sec, THEN YES... but unless that...
NO.
Now REDUCING, the amount of high sec in between each empire so as to bottle-neck travelers along specific routes I can see maybe.
Increase the number of low sec and null sec systems between high sec empires would make it harder to move freight from point a to point b and make more pilots brave crossing the sec barrier to make transit times faster, without breaking the marketeering mechanic of the game.
But unless you leave at least ONE "safe" corridor between each empire...
no.
1. have you even flown a jump freighter
2. It is already like that.
3. It is already like that and people just use the one route. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Sera Kor-Azor
Amarrian Mission of the Sacred Word
5
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 04:39:00 -
[937] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote: You're not jaded, you're right... Separating empires with low is nothing more that some BS to try and force people to take risks. Problem is, the people that agree with this have yet to realize what has always been the truth in Eve, and that is that if you try to force risks on people, they'll either quit the game, or find another way to avoid those risks.
This is exactly why I say it is game breaking, because a change like this will cause mass grouping(probably around Jita) and will lead in little to no point in have the other faction territories.
This is why CCP hasn't posted anything more than "we're here" on this thread. They know damn good and well that this kind of idiotic move would lead to Eve's death.
1) 'Forcing risks on people'. The only people that this affects are high-sec inter-regional haulers. Nobody is forcing you to fly a hauler from Amarr to Jita. Even as it is, a hauler is still at risk of getting ganked even in high sec. 2) "If you try to force risks on people, they will either quit the game, or find ways to avoid those risks." EVE already states that when you undock, even in high sec, you are agreeing to non-consentual PVP. The only way to avoid losing your ship is to remain docked. The whole of each high sec Empire is a large area where players can avoid risk for as long as they like. If you insist on quitting because EVE is unsafe, that's up to you. If you don't want to play chess because you might lose, that's your decision as well. 3) Mass grouping around Jita: I still don't understand why you think this will happen. Each trade hub is like an empty jar, you will only find in it what people put inside it. If a low sec barrier diminishes trade between Empires, then people will stop hauling their goods to and from Jita and buy and sell from their local market instead. The city of Timbuktu in Africa was once the largest trade hub in the world. The city itself didn't become wealthier when bandits started attacking the merchant caravans.
"This would eventually lead to massive onslaughts of ganks"
Player pirates aren't like Sansha incursions. There aren't massive amounts of player pirates. In fact, there wouldn't be enough pirates to cover all the systems in low sec. If you go to low-sec now, you will see that it is mostly (99%) empty. Most of the low-sec residents are Faction war fighters, who are likely your best customers.
"to try and force some kind of agenda, "
What kind of an agenda would pirates have? The only thing they want to do is blow up your ship and steal your loot, not convert your children to their religion.
"but will ultimately lead to mass sub drops, and the eventual death of Eve and/or movement to a FTP and/or micro transaction model with little to no care, or support by CCP."
Do you really think so? An aspect of the game which is so routine that some people do it AFK is changed so that it becomes slightly more challenging, and the AFK haulers will rage quit over it? Are you saying that the only reason they play EVE is to make easy game money through dull and routine activity, with absolutely no risk to themselves? One would wonder what makes other games so popular then, since they usually involve putting yourself at some risk or overcoming some obstacle in order to obtain a reward. Why did people keep playing Space Invaders when their ship always got blown up in the end? Why do people keep playing baseball if their team sometimes loses?
In their ads and lore, EVE portrays itself as a hostile universe full of risks and dangers. Currently, this is hardly true. The high-sec Empire areas serve well as a kiddie pool for newer players to start out in, so they can develop their skills and explore their interests. Once they hit their adolescence though, the 'kids' are expected to venture into the risker areas of the game, not live in the safety of their parent's basements until they are fifty. No one is forcing these people to become heroes, but it doesn't happen living a life of predictable safety.
No one is forcing the risk-adverse to venture forth from the shallow end of EVE, but unless you enter deeper waters you will never learn to swim. All that separating the four Empires with low-sec is doing is taking the water wings off and telling you that if you want to swim the length of the pool, you have to start training some new skills. If you want to be a better athlete, set the jump bar higher. If you want to remain safe forever, then there should be limitations to your freedoms and expectations. If you want to make more money, then you should have to take more risks. That's what adventure is all about. |
Sera Kor-Azor
Amarrian Mission of the Sacred Word
5
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 06:06:00 -
[938] - Quote
"I pulled out the only part of your arguement that fits.
Those that always avoid these risks will continue to avoid these risks..."
So what? You can be completely safe if you never undock. You can be reasonably safe if you stay within your own Empire, which is large enough to provide you with all the minerals, missions, and factory slots you want. You can do your trading in Amarr, Dodixie, Jita, Hek and Rens, as well as the numerous other regions and trade hubs within each empire.
"This is why i continue to say that risk averse players will flock to Caldari Space. Why stay somewhere that costs more?"
Why would the risk averse players flock to Caldari space? This hasn't been explained to me yet.
Caldari space is already the smallest and most densely crowded of the four empires. Amarr is the largest and least densely populated, which means better mining. Minmatar and Gallente space? They have their perks too. New players don't sign up with the knowledge that Jita is a super-hub for trade, or that trade between empires should be through safe or dangerous space. New players choose their race because they think the ships or characters look 'cool', or the storyline is interesting.
As I have said, Jita is like Wal-Mart. Everyone shops there only because you can buy anything from there. Wal-mart is a buyer's market, where buyers can buy things cheaply. It's not a place where miners and manufacturers can sell their goods at a fair price. If everyone stopped shopping at Wal-Mart, they would be out of business in a month. If a low-sec barrier made it more difficult to travel between Empires, everyone would dump their deadspace and faction mods in their local trade hubs instead of flying to Jita. Caldari would shop at Jita, Amarrians at Amarr, Minmatar from Rens, Gallente from Dodixie.
"And when you seperate the factions, it'll cost more and more just to buy a ship."
Really? Why?
Ships are made with blueprints, and can be made at any factory. The price of minerals mined in high sec wouldn't be affected by a low-sec barrier. The only reason to ship things to Jita is because things sell faster there, which means you have to trade in volume. The only reason things sell faster there is because everyone goes there instead of buying from their local market. The only reason things sell faster in Jita is because they are slightly cheaper. If it became more difficult to get to Jita, people would just start selling these things at the local market, which would become just as competitive as Jita.
"Most of the items you find in other trade hubs has usually been subsidized by people transporting items from Jita, bringing costs down."
Hmm, yeah. I would like to see some proof of this. Why would someone that makes ships in Penigram, with some 20 stations only a jump away from Amarr system, need to sell their Amarrian ships in Jita? How many Gallente faction war fighters do you think buy their ships and mods from Jita, or Minmatar for that matter?
"Secondly, I have yet to see a valid arguement on why this SHOULD be done... Yet you continue to say there is no argument as to why it shouldn't be done."
What are you considering as a valid argument?
I have suggested:
1) Realism 2) Immersion 3) Risk vs. Reward 4) Challenge 5) Relieving the lag on Jita's servers 6) Making low-sec matter 7) Making Faction war matter 8) Turning hauling into a career 9) Providing more lucrative opportunities for younger pilots 10) Increasing interest through more PvP 11) Increasing economic opportunities for traders, miners and manufacturers replacing ships lost in PvP 12) Developing regional trade hubs to become larger, more robust trade hubs.
None of these are valid reasons?
"If there's no valid arguement as to why yes, and no valid arguement as to why no. Well, then it might as well stay the way it is now, as we already know it's working, so why take the risks to cut the factions if there's no valid reason why?"
I think that valid arguments have been proposed for both sides of the argument. Your argument seems to be "If it's not broke, don't fix it." The thing is, it only really works for people that think EVE is about being able to make a lot of money without taking risks. That's not what games are about. There needs to be some risks, and some rewards, in order to make it more challenging.
High sec doesn't seem to be 'broke', because the risk adverse are well sheltered there. There are no incentives to leave the shallow pond. No need to grow and evolve. No need to leave the comfort zone.
Low-sec is 'broke' because it is the worst of two worlds, it has none of the freedoms of null sec, but few of the protections of high sec. Faction war was meant to change that, but it never really did. The problem with Faction war is there are no consequences for your faction if your side is losing. CCP tried to fix that in the latest patch, but it only means FW corps can't dock in an enemy controlled system. For most Empire dwellers, Faction war is just a PVP arena, an optional football game with no consequence to the citizens of Empire.
However, if the prices of things went up in Amarr because the Minmatar militia choked off trade routes to Jita, now suddenly things matter. FW fighters matter. Industrialists who can fill demand matter. 'Blockade runners' become a ship whose purpose is now actually suited to their names. Those that fly those cloaky haulers become well paid heroes, like the Ice truckers that haul goods to remote Arctic locations along frozen rivers.
Also, if we try it and the result is a disaster, then CCP could revert to the current system just by loading a back-up. "Oops, the low-sec barrier around Empires people were wrong, this sucks, let's revert back to the old system." Then we will all know for sure.
Sorry if the war is inconvenient for you. |
Sera Kor-Azor
Amarrian Mission of the Sacred Word
5
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 07:14:00 -
[939] - Quote
SGT FUNYOUN wrote:If CCP makes it so that we can use jump drives from High Sec to High Sec, THEN YES... but unless that...
NO.
Now REDUCING, the amount of high sec in between each empire so as to bottle-neck travelers along specific routes I can see maybe.
Increase the number of low sec and null sec systems between high sec empires would make it harder to move freight from point a to point b and make more pilots brave crossing the sec barrier to make transit times faster, without breaking the marketeering mechanic of the game.
But unless you leave at least ONE "safe" corridor between each empire...
no.
I'm sorry if I am misunderstanding you here, but you seem to be saying "If it makes things easier for me, then I agree with it. If it makes things harder for me, then no."
Jump drives from high sec to high sec? So in other words just make it easier and shorter for you to haul. Reducing the amount of high sec? So make the distance shorter for you. 'Without breaking the marketeering mechanic of the game?' So in other words, not making any ripples in your pond. Would you like us to roll the donuts into your mouth for you, too?
Look folks, separating the four Empires with low-sec doesn't mean that everyone will suddenly boycott their local Trade hubs. It means the market will have to readjust, and quite possibly Jita may no longer be the central super trade hub. This is essentially like a market bubble in the real world, eventually it pops. Some people might make money, some people might lose money, just like every patch speculation.
Yes, the object of a low-sec barrier is to make it slightly more challenging to haul things from one Empire to the next. The object of 'pushing yourself' in sports, or school, or anything is to make it slightly more challenging than before, so you can become better and achieve greater goals. You don't want to stay in Pee-wee League forever. Yes, in order to fly a cloaky hauler you will have to train Industrial to V, Transport ships to 1, and fit a covops cloaking device. You might have to train a scout alt. You might have to learn to align, and burn back to gate. So what? How long does it take to train a miner to refine and fly a Hulk? How long does it take to train a Trader? It used to take three or more days to train a hauler, now it takes three hours. Why shouldn't there be increasing levels of difficulty for something that could become an EVE career?
When you can do this, and traverse the low sec barrier, you can now charge a huge markup on the 'rare, exotic goods' that you brought back across the danger zone from far-away exotic Jita. If you want to play it completely safe, you can still fly your freighters full of goods to Level 4 mission hubs and haul ore within the confines of your Empire. The only reason prices would possibly go up is because the 'carebear' miners, traders and industrialists are charging more money and making more money. If ships become more expensive as a result, well then that just means there will be less pirates in fancy ships to gank your hauler. If you make your money running missions, it just means you will have to run a few more missions to buy that missioning ship you rarely lose anyways. Maybe even buy some ships and modules from the LP store, and re-sell them if you like.
A low-sec barrier around the Empires is not the automatic gank-fest for pirates that it sounds like. Low sec is huge, and there just aren't enough Pirates to fill each and every system. It's like a cat with a million mouse holes, or a whack-a-mole game the size of a city block. Cloaky ships are hard to spot and hard to catch. Opening up a map will tell you how many ships have been destroyed in what system in the last hour. Just avoid those systems. Not every low-sec system is an Insta-death gate camp like Amamake or Old Man Star. Hockey players still score goals, even with a skillful goalie on net. It's possible to get through a gate camp and live, with your ship and cargo intact. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
500
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 12:00:00 -
[940] - Quote
Sera Kor-Azor wrote:
1) Realism 2) Immersion 3) Risk vs. Reward 4) Challenge 5) Relieving the lag on Jita's servers 6) Making low-sec matter 7) Making Faction war matter 8) Turning hauling into a career 9) Providing more lucrative opportunities for younger pilots 10) Increasing interest through more PvP 11) Increasing economic opportunities for traders, miners and manufacturers replacing ships lost in PvP 12) Developing regional trade hubs to become larger, more robust trade hubs.
None of these are valid reasons?
Sorry if the war is inconvenient for you.
1) not realism - this isn't RL and nothing in RL applies here. 2) emmersion for who? For you? All I see it as is an inconvenience to anyone who doesn't play your way. 3) what risk vs reward? There is no reward... Even if you are that hero jump freighter or blockade runner pilot, wtf is the point? As you have stated, the players would just begin to flock to their local markets instead of Jita, so why would anyone do trans-regional shipping at all? 4) again, what challenge? The risk averse will stay risk averse 5) once you cut the high secs, all those people in Jita will still be in Jita... So how does this help again? 6) this does not make low sec matter, this makes jump freighters and t2 haulers matter. 7) this does not make factional warfare matter.. At best it gives them targets that aren't even factional warfare targets, yet they lose standing for hitting non-opposition. 8) hauling is already a career. There are character and even corps dedicated to hauling. However, much like mining, once you've gotten to a certain point, it's best a career done with an alt. 9) this does not provide more lucrative opportunities for new players. It does, however, enforce the elitists of the game that can already use t2 haulers, and thus increasing the SP and skill requirement to become an inter-regional trader. 10) if anything this would decrease interest through non-consentual pvp. 11) ok, assuming this makes the number of people dieing in low sec go up for some reason, then I'll give this one to you, but again, it's based solely on more people dieing, which probably won't happen. 12) I'll give you this one free and clear.. It would probably help all regional trade hubs out a bit, however, that doesn't make this a valid arguement.
Quote:I think that valid arguments have been proposed for both sides of the argument. Your argument seems to be "If it's not broke, don't fix it." The thing is, it only really works for people that think EVE is about being able to make a lot of money without taking risks. That's not what games are about. There needs to be some risks, and some rewards, in order to make it more challenging. Yes, that is my arguement, just like when any high sec player proposes a change to better high sec in some way, 90% of the thread will be filled with that very comment. There are risks in high sec... You go fly from Jita to amarr or dodixie 100 times in a freighter full of goods and see if you don't get a little spooked from time to time, if not blown up.
Quote:High sec doesn't seem to be 'broke', because the risk adverse are well sheltered there. There are no incentives to leave the shallow pond. No need to grow and evolve. No need to leave the comfort zone.
Low-sec is 'broke' because it is the worst of two worlds, it has none of the freedoms of null sec, but few of the protections of high sec. Faction war was meant to change that, but it never really did. The problem with Faction war is there are no consequences for your faction if your side is losing. CCP tried to fix that in the latest patch, but it only means FW corps can't dock in an enemy controlled system. For most Empire dwellers, Faction war is just a PVP arena, an optional football game with no consequence to the citizens of Empire. We shouldn't be forced to leave high sec through needs, however the fact that there is no incentive to leave has a lot less to do with high sec, and a whole lot more to do with the rest of it.
Quote:Also, if we try it and the result is a disaster, then CCP could revert to the current system just by loading a back-up. "Oops, the low-sec barrier around Empires people were wrong, this sucks, let's revert back to the old system." Then we will all know for sure.
Do you know how much coding and effort it would take for CCP to do this? They would have to create new systems, with new gates and everything because it would not be fair to just turn a bunch of high sec systems into low sec. The amount of effort required to put into this is insane, and that's just the effort required to know which way the damn gates should face. So why the hell would CCP go through all that just for an idea that may or may not work and can be reverted later. This isn't a damage bonus on a ship, it's a complete overhaul of the game pretty much. |
|
Martin Lockheart
Lockheart Trading Company
1
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 18:25:00 -
[941] - Quote
So, I know I'm WAY down here at the bottom of the thread, and chances are no one will see this... but I fully support this idea.
The creator makes many excellent points, and the only counterarguments I'm seeing are "Well, I want it easy..." The problem with that mindset, of course, is that this is Eve.
I only read a couple of pages through the thread, so perhaps this point has been made already, but I would like to open up another benefit to this: These changes would open up the doorway to use wormholes to create trade routes.
This is something I've been thinking about a lot lately, and there isn't an incredibly viable market for this as it stands. Why go to the trouble of scanning down wormholes (or living in them) to find links to other high-sec. systems when you can just autopilot there? With low-sec. between the empires, wormholes would be a beautiful option for finding links between the regions.
I imagine explorers seeking out wormholes, finding the connections inside, looking for lucrative links to other high-sec. zones. Wormhole dwellers could become tradesmen, using high-sec. statics and normal connections to conduct inter-regional trade from their base. Other wormhole citizens could offer their services and escort people through their wormholes for various prices.
These are just a few thoughts I have on this, but I think the opportunity to use wormholes as a means for trade as a result of the low-sec. changes would be fantastic. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
501
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 18:34:00 -
[942] - Quote
Martin Lockheart wrote:So, I know I'm WAY down here at the bottom of the thread, and chances are no one will see this... but I fully support this idea.
The creator makes many excellent points, and the only counterarguments I'm seeing are "Well, I want it easy..." The problem with that mindset, of course, is that this is Eve.
I only read a couple of pages through the thread, so perhaps this point has been made already, but I would like to open up another benefit to this: These changes would open up the doorway to use wormholes to create trade routes.
This is something I've been thinking about a lot lately, and there isn't an incredibly viable market for this as it stands. Why go to the trouble of scanning down wormholes (or living in them) to find links to other high-sec. systems when you can just autopilot there? With low-sec. between the empires, wormholes would be a beautiful option for finding links between the regions.
I imagine explorers seeking out wormholes, finding the connections inside, looking for lucrative links to other high-sec. zones. Wormhole dwellers could become tradesmen, using high-sec. statics and normal connections to conduct inter-regional trade from their base. Other wormhole citizens could offer their services and escort people through their wormholes for various prices.
These are just a few thoughts I have on this, but I think the opportunity to use wormholes as a means for trade as a result of the low-sec. changes would be fantastic.
No, those that tried to transport through Wh space would actually be seeing less reward for higher risks than someone that just uses the mwd/cloak trick on a t1 indy...
Again, there is no incentive to take risks like this or crossing low sec if the payout isn't good enough... |
Martin Lockheart
Lockheart Trading Company
1
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 18:58:00 -
[943] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:Martin Lockheart wrote:So, I know I'm WAY down here at the bottom of the thread, and chances are no one will see this... but I fully support this idea.
The creator makes many excellent points, and the only counterarguments I'm seeing are "Well, I want it easy..." The problem with that mindset, of course, is that this is Eve.
I only read a couple of pages through the thread, so perhaps this point has been made already, but I would like to open up another benefit to this: These changes would open up the doorway to use wormholes to create trade routes.
This is something I've been thinking about a lot lately, and there isn't an incredibly viable market for this as it stands. Why go to the trouble of scanning down wormholes (or living in them) to find links to other high-sec. systems when you can just autopilot there? With low-sec. between the empires, wormholes would be a beautiful option for finding links between the regions.
I imagine explorers seeking out wormholes, finding the connections inside, looking for lucrative links to other high-sec. zones. Wormhole dwellers could become tradesmen, using high-sec. statics and normal connections to conduct inter-regional trade from their base. Other wormhole citizens could offer their services and escort people through their wormholes for various prices.
These are just a few thoughts I have on this, but I think the opportunity to use wormholes as a means for trade as a result of the low-sec. changes would be fantastic. No, those that tried to transport through Wh space would actually be seeing less reward for higher risks than someone that just uses the mwd/cloak trick on a t1 indy... Again, there is no incentive to take risks like this or crossing low sec if the payout isn't good enough...
With the separation of Empires by low-sec., empire-based markets will be created, resulting in great price fluctuations from one empire to another. In addition to space-specific items being valuable in other space, this would cause potential profits to be incredibly high. You assume that payout will not be good enough, but with the separation between empires as well as the effects of human nature, the payout will become good enough.
And again, depending on what was done and in what ships, the risk may not be terribly high. You get a scanning ship on the other side (which most people will do for low-sec. anyway if they're carrying anything of value) and you can get a good view of what's going on, which can easily result in having one potentially dangerous jump rather than many through low.
And again, you can have people living in the wormholes who do different things, as previously stated, etc., etc.
|
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
501
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 19:22:00 -
[944] - Quote
Martin Lockheart wrote:Joe Risalo wrote:Martin Lockheart wrote:So, I know I'm WAY down here at the bottom of the thread, and chances are no one will see this... but I fully support this idea.
The creator makes many excellent points, and the only counterarguments I'm seeing are "Well, I want it easy..." The problem with that mindset, of course, is that this is Eve.
I only read a couple of pages through the thread, so perhaps this point has been made already, but I would like to open up another benefit to this: These changes would open up the doorway to use wormholes to create trade routes.
This is something I've been thinking about a lot lately, and there isn't an incredibly viable market for this as it stands. Why go to the trouble of scanning down wormholes (or living in them) to find links to other high-sec. systems when you can just autopilot there? With low-sec. between the empires, wormholes would be a beautiful option for finding links between the regions.
I imagine explorers seeking out wormholes, finding the connections inside, looking for lucrative links to other high-sec. zones. Wormhole dwellers could become tradesmen, using high-sec. statics and normal connections to conduct inter-regional trade from their base. Other wormhole citizens could offer their services and escort people through their wormholes for various prices.
These are just a few thoughts I have on this, but I think the opportunity to use wormholes as a means for trade as a result of the low-sec. changes would be fantastic. No, those that tried to transport through Wh space would actually be seeing less reward for higher risks than someone that just uses the mwd/cloak trick on a t1 indy... Again, there is no incentive to take risks like this or crossing low sec if the payout isn't good enough... With the separation of Empires by low-sec., empire-based markets will be created, resulting in great price fluctuations from one empire to another. In addition to space-specific items being valuable in other space, this would cause potential profits to be incredibly high. You assume that payout will not be good enough, but with the separation between empires as well as the effects of human nature, the payout will become good enough. And again, depending on what was done and in what ships, the risk may not be terribly high. You get a scanning ship on the other side (which most people will do for low-sec. anyway if they're carrying anything of value) and you can get a good view of what's going on, which can easily result in having one potentially dangerous jump rather than many through low. And again, you can have people living in the wormholes who do different things, as previously stated, etc., etc.
pretty much the only thing that you can't get in every empire space is the different types of ice. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
878
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 19:30:00 -
[945] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:
pretty much the only thing that you can't get in every empire space is the different types of ice.
Small inequalities between production in different empires of different items that can be found everywhere will create exploitable price differences.
Not to mention that some minerals are less common than others in each empire, and there will be differences in the prices of all items due to this. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
501
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 19:35:00 -
[946] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Joe Risalo wrote:
pretty much the only thing that you can't get in every empire space is the different types of ice.
Small inequalities between production in different empires of different items that can be found everywhere will create exploitable price differences. Not to mention that some minerals are less common than others in each empire, and there will be differences in the prices of all items due to this.
/agreed
However, this is a bad thing...
The reason I say this is because CCP has already taken measures to make ships more costly to better fit their capabilities after rebalance... Just look at the costs of t1 bs's now...
Do you honestly think increased costs of ships will help bring more players into pvp?
If you think yes, you should probably get some sleep (not speaking to you directly) |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
878
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 19:40:00 -
[947] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:
/agreed
However, this is a bad thing...
The reason I say this is because CCP has already taken measures to make ships more costly to better fit their capabilities after rebalance... Just look at the costs of t1 bs's now...
Do you honestly think increased costs of ships will help bring more players into pvp?
If you think yes, you should probably get some sleep (not speaking to you directly)
Wherever prices rise due to shortage prices will increase due to excess.
Also I really don't think the gaps will be big enough to really change anything. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
501
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 19:42:00 -
[948] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Joe Risalo wrote:
/agreed
However, this is a bad thing...
The reason I say this is because CCP has already taken measures to make ships more costly to better fit their capabilities after rebalance... Just look at the costs of t1 bs's now...
Do you honestly think increased costs of ships will help bring more players into pvp?
If you think yes, you should probably get some sleep (not speaking to you directly)
Wherever prices rise due to shortage prices will increase due to excess. Also I really don't think the gaps will be big enough to really change anything.
Then why do it?
This is one of several times I have heard this doesn't make much, if any difference...
So why do it if nothing will change?
Edit... again, this is only making the gap bigger for new players to get into the transport industry. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
878
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 19:47:00 -
[949] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:
Then why do it?
This is one of several times I have heard this doesn't make much, if any difference...
So why do it if nothing will change?
Edit... again, this is only making the gap bigger for new players to get into the transport industry.
A two week old player in a badger could move across low sec with a scout, know how to scan a wormhole, or use a frigate to move modules.
Also things will change, prices gaps would increase, which means more money to be made, im not sure where the disconnect is in understanding this. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Liam Inkuras
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
451
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 19:53:00 -
[950] - Quote
My third visit to this thread, glad to see its still going strong. Keep at it Ted! I wear my goggles at night.
Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone |
|
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
501
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 19:54:00 -
[951] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Joe Risalo wrote:
Then why do it?
This is one of several times I have heard this doesn't make much, if any difference...
So why do it if nothing will change?
Edit... again, this is only making the gap bigger for new players to get into the transport industry.
A two week old player in a badger could move across low sec with a scout, know how to scan a wormhole, or use a frigate to move modules. Also things will change, prices gaps would increase, which means more money to be made, im not sure where the disconnect is in understanding this.
lol, you JUST said that it probably wouldn't make a difference, and now you're saying price gaps would increase, thus confirming what I stated a few minutes ago.
Prices will go up and players will be less likely to get involved in pvp...
I can tell you though, the disconnect isn't on this end... |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
878
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 19:57:00 -
[952] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:
lol, you JUST said that it probably wouldn't make a difference, and now you're saying price gaps would increase, thus confirming what I stated a few minutes ago.
Prices will go up and players will be less likely to get involved in pvp...
I can tell you though, the disconnect isn't on this end...
A difference for who?
Price gaps increase, some things are cheaper and some things are more expensive, this is acceptable for consumers of ships.
Price gaps increase, therefore there are opportunities for traders to buy something in one spot where it is cheap and therefore better for the local consumers, and move it to somewhere it is more expensive, then to the exact opposite thing on the way back.
Im not sure how that could not be intuitive. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
501
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 20:06:00 -
[953] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Joe Risalo wrote:
lol, you JUST said that it probably wouldn't make a difference, and now you're saying price gaps would increase, thus confirming what I stated a few minutes ago.
Prices will go up and players will be less likely to get involved in pvp...
I can tell you though, the disconnect isn't on this end...
A difference for who? Price gaps increase, some things are cheaper and some things are more expensive, this is acceptable for consumers of ships. Price gaps increase, therefore there are opportunities for traders to buy something in one spot where it is cheap and therefore better for the local consumers, and move it to somewhere it is more expensive, then to the exact opposite thing on the way back. Im not sure how that could not be intuitive.
oh well... We can argue about this all day long, but the one thing I notice is that this has been a topic for years and CCP hasn't done so, and has actually done more to support cross-factional trade than to hender it... Concord changes, removal of capitals from high sec and introduction of freighters, JF, and indy rebalance. Not to mention the safety button, changes to the map to allow you to display systems by kill volume, avoidance list of auto-pilot, auto-pilot into stations, warp to 0 when not in auto-pilot.
Point is, they've done so many things to make trade life easier, why would they go and throw that all away for this?
People use the term "don't fix what isn't broken" because you're more likely to break something that wasn't broken before... |
Sera Kor-Azor
Amarrian Mission of the Sacred Word
5
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 22:35:00 -
[954] - Quote
1) not realism - this isn't RL and nothing in RL applies here.
It's true that EVE is not real life. That doesn't mean it shouldn't emulate real life models. The player-driven market system for example, or the lack of a race of green skinned bug-eyed monsters make EVE seem more realistic.
In the real world, the age of exploration was a few brave men and their crews risking their lives taking ships to unexplored regions in search of riches. Marco Polo and Christopher Columbus weren't passengers on a pleasure cruise sipping cocktails.
Have you heard of Joseph Campbell's Monomyth? Every story in the world starts off with the hero reluctant to leave his safe and comfortable home, until he receives the call to adventure and must face great danger. He meets the evil and struggles with it, and he is rewarded with great riches and/or magic. The Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, it does not matter, they are all the same story with different scenery and characters. The problem with EVE is that Bilbo Baggins is still smoking his pipe in the shire, and Luke Skywalker is still helping his Uncle Owen on their moisture farm.
2) Immersion for who? For you? All I see it as is an inconvenience to anyone who doesn't play your way.
I'm a high sec industrialist and trader.
3) what risk vs reward? There is no reward... Even if you are that hero jump freighter or blockade runner pilot, wtf is the point? As you have stated, the players would just begin to flock to their local markets instead of Jita, so why would anyone do trans-regional shipping at all?
There will always be some things that are only available in certain regions. Skillbooks or modules that drop from missions only available in one space for example, or tea and spices from China.
4) The risk adverse will stay risk adverse.
Just as most of the hobbits stayed in the comfort of the shire, but we aren't interested in hearing their stories.
5) once you cut the high secs, all those people in Jita will still be in Jita... So how does this help again?
You have yet to convince me of this.
6) this does not make low sec matter, this makes jump freighters and t2 haulers matter.
Yet the mere idea of a low sec barrier has you concerned. If low sec won't matter, then why be worried about it?
7) this does not make factional warfare matter.. At best it gives them targets that aren't even factional warfare targets, yet they lose standing for hitting non-opposition.
You seem to think a Faction's militia would be attacking traders from their own faction. Why?
8) hauling is already a career. There are character and even corps dedicated to hauling. However, much like mining, once you've gotten to a certain point, it's best a career done with an alt.
Hauling alt =/= Hauling as a career. Mining is dull, but it takes years to train for. Why shouldn't hauling and trading be more challenging and exciting?
9) this does not provide more lucrative opportunities for new players. It does, however, enforce the elitists of the game that can already use t2 haulers, and thus increasing the SP and skill requirement to become an inter-regional trader.
Those that can fly T2 haulers are hardly 'elitists'. It takes a few weeks to train, and costs much less than a freighter.
10) if anything this would decrease interest through non-consentual pvp.
As I stated, when you undock even in high sec, you are agreeing to non-consentual PVP. No one is forcing you to do inter-regional hauling. No one is forcing you to fly through a system without checking the map first.
11) ok, assuming this makes the number of people dieing in low sec go up for some reason, then I'll give this one to you, but again, it's based solely on more people dieing, which probably won't happen.
So why the concern?
12) I'll give you this one free and clear.. It would probably help all regional trade hubs out a bit, however, that doesn't make this a valid arguement.
You say you agree with my statement, but that doesn't mean it's a valid argument. Can you clarify why not?
"There are risks in high sec... You go fly from Jita to amarr or dodixie 100 times in a freighter full of goods and see if you don't get a little spooked from time to time, if not blown up."
So how does high sec protect you? Why even call it high sec?
Do you know how much coding and effort it would take for CCP to do this? They would have to create new systems, with new gates and everything because it would not be fair to just turn a bunch of high sec systems into low sec. The amount of effort required to put into this is insane, and that's just the effort required to know which way the damn gates should face.
Yeah, I guess life isn't fair and neither is EVE.
So why the hell would CCP go through all that just for an idea that may or may not work and can be reverted later. This isn't a damage bonus on a ship, it's a complete overhaul of the game pretty much.
For the same reason Bilbo Baggins left the shire and Luke Skywalker started training as a Jedi I suppose. The story doesn't really go anywhere without the 'call to adventure'.
|
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
501
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 23:04:00 -
[955] - Quote
Sera Kor-Azor wrote: 1) not realism - this isn't RL and nothing in RL applies here.
It's true that EVE is not real life. That doesn't mean it shouldn't emulate real life models. The player-driven market system for example, or the lack of a race of green skinned bug-eyed monsters make EVE seem more realistic.
In the real world, the age of exploration was a few brave men and their crews risking their lives taking ships to unexplored regions in search of riches. Marco Polo and Christopher Columbus weren't passengers on a pleasure cruise sipping cocktails.
Have you heard of Joseph Campbell's Monomyth? Every story in the world starts off with the hero reluctant to leave his safe and comfortable home, until he receives the call to adventure and must face great danger. He meets the evil and struggles with it, and he is rewarded with great riches and/or magic. The Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, it does not matter, they are all the same story with different scenery and characters. The problem with EVE is that Bilbo Baggins is still smoking his pipe in the shire, and Luke Skywalker is still helping his Uncle Owen on their moisture farm.
2) Immersion for who? For you? All I see it as is an inconvenience to anyone who doesn't play your way.
I'm a high sec industrialist and trader.
3) what risk vs reward? There is no reward... Even if you are that hero jump freighter or blockade runner pilot, wtf is the point? As you have stated, the players would just begin to flock to their local markets instead of Jita, so why would anyone do trans-regional shipping at all?
There will always be some things that are only available in certain regions. Skillbooks or modules that drop from missions only available in one space for example, or tea and spices from China.
4) The risk adverse will stay risk adverse.
Just as most of the hobbits stayed in the comfort of the shire, but we aren't interested in hearing their stories.
5) once you cut the high secs, all those people in Jita will still be in Jita... So how does this help again?
You have yet to convince me of this.
6) this does not make low sec matter, this makes jump freighters and t2 haulers matter.
Yet the mere idea of a low sec barrier has you concerned. If low sec won't matter, then why be worried about it?
7) this does not make factional warfare matter.. At best it gives them targets that aren't even factional warfare targets, yet they lose standing for hitting non-opposition.
You seem to think a Faction's militia would be attacking traders from their own faction. Why?
8) hauling is already a career. There are character and even corps dedicated to hauling. However, much like mining, once you've gotten to a certain point, it's best a career done with an alt.
Hauling alt =/= Hauling as a career. Mining is dull, but it takes years to train for. Why shouldn't hauling and trading be more challenging and exciting?
9) this does not provide more lucrative opportunities for new players. It does, however, enforce the elitists of the game that can already use t2 haulers, and thus increasing the SP and skill requirement to become an inter-regional trader.
Those that can fly T2 haulers are hardly 'elitists'. It takes a few weeks to train, and costs much less than a freighter.
10) if anything this would decrease interest through non-consentual pvp.
As I stated, when you undock even in high sec, you are agreeing to non-consentual PVP. No one is forcing you to do inter-regional hauling. No one is forcing you to fly through a system without checking the map first.
11) ok, assuming this makes the number of people dieing in low sec go up for some reason, then I'll give this one to you, but again, it's based solely on more people dieing, which probably won't happen.
So why the concern?
12) I'll give you this one free and clear.. It would probably help all regional trade hubs out a bit, however, that doesn't make this a valid arguement.
You say you agree with my statement, but that doesn't mean it's a valid argument. Can you clarify why not?
"There are risks in high sec... You go fly from Jita to amarr or dodixie 100 times in a freighter full of goods and see if you don't get a little spooked from time to time, if not blown up."
So how does high sec protect you? Why even call it high sec?
Do you know how much coding and effort it would take for CCP to do this? They would have to create new systems, with new gates and everything because it would not be fair to just turn a bunch of high sec systems into low sec. The amount of effort required to put into this is insane, and that's just the effort required to know which way the damn gates should face.
Yeah, I guess life isn't fair and neither is EVE.
So why the hell would CCP go through all that just for an idea that may or may not work and can be reverted later. This isn't a damage bonus on a ship, it's a complete overhaul of the game pretty much.
For the same reason Bilbo Baggins left the shire and Luke Skywalker started training as a Jedi I suppose. The story doesn't really go anywhere without the 'call to adventure'.
Again, nothing you have said suggest why it SHOULD be changed.. I may not have presented a reason why it shouldn't be done, but the. Again, this is like a court. Innocent until proven guilty. Right now it's already one way, and it's up to you to present an unquestionable reason why it should change. All I need is plausible deniability. So basically, I can confuse to say that is not a valid reason why it should change...
Find me hard proof of why it should change...
The burden is on you. |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
4132
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 23:47:00 -
[956] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Also things will change, prices gaps would increase, which means more money to be made, im not sure where the disconnect is in understanding this.
You are hoping that the price gaps will encourage traders to cross lowsec boundaries, rather than encouraging manufacturers to fill the demand by simply supplying those items from local manufacturing.
Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
Sera Kor-Azor
Amarrian Mission of the Sacred Word
5
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 23:53:00 -
[957] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:
oh well... We can argue about this all day long, but the one thing I notice is that this has been a topic for years and CCP hasn't done so, and has actually done more to support cross-factional trade than to hender it... Concord changes, removal of capitals from high sec and introduction of freighters, JF, and indy rebalance. Not to mention the safety button, changes to the map to allow you to display systems by kill volume, avoidance list of auto-pilot, auto-pilot into stations, warp to 0 when not in auto-pilot.
Point is, they've done so many things to make trade life easier, why would they go and throw that all away for this?
People use the term "don't fix what isn't broken" because you're more likely to break something that wasn't broken before...
Ever notice how they don't put seat belts or airbags on a golf cart?
It's true that CCP has added many features to make cross-factional trade, and flying in general safer. However, what is the use of having these safety features if there isn't an element of danger to begin with? What is the point of having medical clones or ship insurance, if the intention is to be able to travel in complete safety through High-sec at all times? Why not just make it illegal to sell weapons or ammunition in high sec, or remove the ability to declare wars?
I think reading into what CCPs intention probably was behind their safety features is an 'appeal to authority' argument. It's obvious that they need a safe 'newbie zone' so the newer players don't get ravaged by the older players. They have done a lot to ensure that the newer players are reasonably safe, have room to grow, and have a large area to explore and do missions in.
The problem....as I see it....comes from the gap between the safe zone and the adventure zone. There is not enough incentive to ever leave the sheltered area of home. It's like Smaug's treasure horde, with no dragon, or like Star Wars with no evil empire.
Null sec was meant to be that adventurous danger zone, but once a null sec system gets settled it becomes like a player run high sec. Low sec was the next 'danger zone', but it became more like a sparsely populated thunderdome sort of arena that could easily be avoided. The only incentive to go to low sec currently is to seek out PvP.
With all the safety features now available to you, the only excuse you have for losing a ship is human error. You can check the map ahead of time to see how many ships are lost. If you try to jump into low-sec, you will get a warning. So where is the incentive to leave the comfort of home? Why not tell Gandalf the Wizard to stuff it, and throw his own damn ring into Sauron's pit? "Don't go to Mordor, there's shadow riders out there! Leave that stuff to big men with swords! Why should I leave the safety of the shire?"
If there was a low-sec barrier around each empire, you will still have that big pond for the little minnows to keep safe in. The only difference is that when you become a bigger fish, you will want to move into the deeper waters with all the other big fish. It's true that the deeper waters are more dangerous, but you can't stay in the safe and shallow waters forever. A bigger fish has a bigger appetite, and it can only find the food it needs in the deeper waters. Mama bird will kick you out of the nest, and so on.
As I said, a barrier of low sec around the Empires reflects the way things are in real life. Christopher Columbus was safer in Spain, Leif the Lucky was safer in Norway, both of these men went into the dangerous ocean in search of riches. Even today, there are low-security areas of the city and high-security areas. You may not choose to live in the low-sec areas, but that's where all the stories on Detective shows happen. If everything is peace and harmony all the time, there is no story, there is no adventure.
|
Sera Kor-Azor
Amarrian Mission of the Sacred Word
5
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 00:29:00 -
[958] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:
Again, nothing you have said suggest why it SHOULD be changed.. I may not have presented a reason why it shouldn't be done, but the. Again, this is like a court. Innocent until proven guilty. Right now it's already one way, and it's up to you to present an unquestionable reason why it should change. All I need is plausible deniability. So basically, I can confuse to say that is not a valid reason why it should change...
Find me hard proof of why it should change...
The burden is on you.
This is the reason,
The low sec barrier fulfils the 'Call to adventure' part of Joseph Campbell's heroic cycle:
"For the same reason Bilbo Baggins left the shire and Luke Skywalker started training as a Jedi I suppose. The story doesn't really go anywhere without the danger element."
That's the reason. Joseph Campbell. The Heroic cycle. Look it up.
Additionally:
-Smooth seas do not make skillful sailors. -No one would really care if Christopher Columbus took a mule cart to Madrid. -It's only a game if there are obstacles to overcome, risks to balance rewards. -The first objective of nations at war is to choke off trade routes of the enemy.
I've mentioned these before. The 'hard proof' exists in examples from each of our own lives, as well as all of human nature, human history, biology, evolution, fiction and mythology.
You don't get better at something until things get harder and you adapt, and you don't appreciate something that took no effort for you to get.
There's also the inflationary ISK problem. High sec traders, industrialists, miners and missioners keep making ISK with very little risk to themselves. The ISK from missions isn't tied to anything, it's doled out by NPCs and will never dry up. Mission runners seldom lose their ships, so they don't contribute to the market the way that PvP players do. The PvP players lose a lot of ships, but there aren't as many ways to earn the money. You have to balance the ISK sinks with the ISK faucets.
I really think you are deliberately ignoring all of the things I have presented as valid reasons. Just saying 'but I don't like them' isn't really a rebuttal, it's more like a complaint. King George and King Louis didn't like the revolution either, but they happened anyways.
It's not about you individually, or the trans-faction haulers, or the low-sec Pirates. It's about game balance. It's about making EVE a richer environment for the EVE community as a whole, not saying "But I make a lot of money for zero risk, so I like it the way it is." |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
501
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 01:04:00 -
[959] - Quote
Sera Kor-Azor wrote:Joe Risalo wrote:
oh well... We can argue about this all day long, but the one thing I notice is that this has been a topic for years and CCP hasn't done so, and has actually done more to support cross-factional trade than to hender it... Concord changes, removal of capitals from high sec and introduction of freighters, JF, and indy rebalance. Not to mention the safety button, changes to the map to allow you to display systems by kill volume, avoidance list of auto-pilot, auto-pilot into stations, warp to 0 when not in auto-pilot.
Point is, they've done so many things to make trade life easier, why would they go and throw that all away for this?
People use the term "don't fix what isn't broken" because you're more likely to break something that wasn't broken before...
Ever notice how they don't put seat belts or airbags on a golf cart? It's true that CCP has added many features to make cross-factional trade, and flying in general safer. However, what is the use of having these safety features if there isn't an element of danger to begin with? What is the point of having medical clones or ship insurance, if the intention is to be able to travel in complete safety through High-sec at all times? Why not just make it illegal to sell weapons or ammunition in high sec, or remove the ability to declare wars? I think reading into what CCPs intention probably was behind their safety features is an 'appeal to authority' argument. It's obvious that they need a safe 'newbie zone' so the newer players don't get ravaged by the older players. They have done a lot to ensure that the newer players are reasonably safe, have room to grow, and have a large area to explore and do missions in. The problem....as I see it....comes from the gap between the safe zone and the adventure zone. There is not enough incentive to ever leave the sheltered area of home. It's like Smaug's treasure horde, with no dragon, or like Star Wars with no evil empire. Null sec was meant to be that adventurous danger zone, but once a null sec system gets settled it becomes like a player run high sec. Low sec was the next 'danger zone', but it became more like a sparsely populated thunderdome sort of arena that could easily be avoided. The only incentive to go to low sec currently is to seek out PvP. With all the safety features now available to you, the only excuse you have for losing a ship is human error. You can check the map ahead of time to see how many ships are lost. If you try to jump into low-sec, you will get a warning. So where is the incentive to leave the comfort of home? Why not tell Gandalf the Wizard to stuff it, and throw his own damn ring into Sauron's pit? "Don't go to Mordor, there's shadow riders out there! Leave that stuff to big men with swords! Why should I leave the safety of the shire?" If there was a low-sec barrier around each empire, you will still have that big pond for the little minnows to keep safe in. The only difference is that when you become a bigger fish, you will want to move into the deeper waters with all the other big fish. It's true that the deeper waters are more dangerous, but you can't stay in the safe and shallow waters forever. A bigger fish has a bigger appetite, and it can only find the food it needs in the deeper waters. Mama bird will kick you out of the nest, and so on.
Wait wait wait.... I'm going to quote you real quick on another comment you made....
Quote:2) Immersion for who? For you? All I see it as is an inconvenience to anyone who doesn't play your way. I'm a high sec industrialist and trader.
That is a direct quote for the comment you made just 2-3 comments above this one... Soo, which is it??? Are you a little fish that has yet to move out of the pond into open waters? Or do you take advantage of the safety and security that high sec provides?
Ya know, for a high sec industrialist and trader, you sure sound like a low/null fight pusher....
Quote:As I said, a barrier of low sec around the Empires reflects the way things are in real life. Christopher Columbus was safer in Spain, Leif the Lucky was safer in Norway, both of these men went into the dangerous ocean in search of riches. Even today, there are low-security areas of the city and high-security areas. You may not choose to live in the low-sec areas, but that's where all the stories on Detective shows happen. If everything is peace and harmony all the time, there is no story, there is no adventure.
Hurray for real life!!!! Here's the problem.... In real life we don't have spaceships that do universal space travel. in real life we don't have a massive populous of people spread across the universe. in real life we don't have people that are basically immortal. and most importantly, in real life we don't have jump gates to bridge civilization together in the blink of an Eye.
I can tell you though, if we did have jump gates, odds are there would not be a boundry between one gate and another. All traffic would funnel through that gate.
The point behind a demilitarized zone is to create a buffer so that you have time to respond to a threat and/or dispatch any possible threat before it's too late.
If everything at a demilitarized zone were forced to funnel through a very narrow channel in order to cross (I.E. a jump gate), then odds are there wouldn't be a demilitarized zone, but instead an engagement zone where once something crosses this line, you kill it. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
501
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 01:24:00 -
[960] - Quote
Sera Kor-Azor wrote: You want hard proof? An axiom is an indisputable fact. 'Water is wet' is axiomatic.
Here is another pair of Axioms:
"You don't get better at something until things get harder and you adapt."
Also:
"You don't appreciate something that took no effort for you to get."
Unless you can disprove these two axioms, would you consider that a low-sec barrier around the Empires would make trans-Factional trade more or less challenging? Require more or less skill? Require more or less effort? Add more or less interest?
I feel as though I have proven my point. Now the burden of proof is on you to prove yours.
Lol, you missed the point where I said things are already the way I want them.. So, if you want them to change, YOU have the burden of proof... All I need is pausible deniability.
Also, an Axiom would say that something is true without question. So,
"water is wet" is an axiom.
"You don't get better at something until things get harder and you adapt." This is not true. I can be given all the information I will ever need for my job and it will make things easy. However, as I apply that knowledge and memorize everything, I am getting better at my job. That said, things haven't gotten harder, only require a different solution, which i have at my fingertips.
"You don't appreciate something that took no effort for you to get." Uhh, I beg to differ. If i walked in and bought a ticket for tonight's powerball and won... I would have put no effort into that, and I would be very appreciative of it.
Quote:There's also the inflationary ISK problem. High sec traders, industrialists, miners and missioners keep making ISK with very little risk to themselves. The ISK from missions isn't tied to anything, it's doled out by NPCs and will never dry up. Mission runners seldom lose their ships, so they don't contribute to the market the way that PvP players do. The PvP players lose a lot of ships, which is the basis of the EVE economy, but there aren't as many ways for the PvP pilots to earn their money.
Ahh, I see now... You sit in high sec and produce ships and/or trade goods for ship production, so you stand to profit from seperation. It all makes sense to me now.
Quote:So, reason two: Game balance.
You have to balance the ISK sinks with the ISK faucets.
I really think you are deliberately ignoring all of the things I have presented, dismissing them as valid reasons. Just saying 'but I don't like them' isn't really a rebuttal, it's more like a complaint. King George and King Louis didn't like the revolution either, but they happened anyways.
It's not about you individually, or the trans-faction haulers, or the low-sec Pirates. It's about game balance. It's about making EVE a richer environment for the EVE community as a whole, not saying "But I make a lot of pretend space money for zero risk, so don't change it, I like it the way it is." lol, no it's not about that either... It's about what you, an industrialist, stand to profit off of the seperation.
You know damn good and well that the seperation would drive up regional prices, and you having the skills and probably a jump freighter to counter the effects of the split.
also, what you seem to fail to realize is that splitting the regions does not create more isk faucets.. It simply increases the amount of isk changing hands.
And while we're talking, can you stop throwing out a bunch of crap about movies and unrelated IRL history that pertains nothing to assist your cause? Really all it does is force me to have to read through a bunch of garbage to get to the garbage that is on topic.
|
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
879
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 02:14:00 -
[961] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote: You are hoping that the price gaps will encourage traders to cross lowsec boundaries, rather than encouraging manufacturers to fill the demand by simply supplying those items from local manufacturing.
Yea that will happen, but either way the market will be more vulnerable to fluctuations that allow trade because it isn't super centralized. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Sera Kor-Azor
Amarrian Mission of the Sacred Word
5
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 09:29:00 -
[962] - Quote
* |
Sera Kor-Azor
Amarrian Mission of the Sacred Word
5
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 09:31:00 -
[963] - Quote
Quote:2) Immersion for who? For you? All I see it as is an inconvenience to anyone who doesn't play your way. I'm a high sec industrialist and trader.
"That is a direct quote for the comment you made just 2-3 comments above this one... Soo, which is it??? Are you a little fish that has yet to move out of the pond into open waters? Or do you take advantage of the safety and security that high sec provides?
Ya know, for a high sec industrialist and trader, you sure sound like a low/null fight pusher...."
Yes, I am a little fish that has yet to move out of the pond and into the open waters.
The reason I like this idea is because it adds an element of realism to the game.
Quote:As I said, a barrier of low sec around the Empires reflects the way things are in real life. Christopher Columbus was safer in Spain, Leif the Lucky was safer in Norway, both of these men went into the dangerous ocean in search of riches. Even today, there are low-security areas of the city and high-security areas. You may not choose to live in the low-sec areas, but that's where all the stories on Detective shows happen. If everything is peace and harmony all the time, there is no story, there is no adventure.
Hurray for real life!!!! Here's the problem.... 1) In real life we don't have spaceships that do universal space travel.
In real life we DO ( did) have sailing ships that explored, traded, did battle, and traveled to undiscovered continents. They aren't really conceptually that different from space faring craft.
2) in real life we don't have a massive populous of people spread across the universe.
In real life we DO (did) have a massive populous of people colonizing new continents. Instead of vast stretches of space, there were vast expanses of ocean. Again, if you are honest and use your imagination, you can make the comparison.
3) in real life we don't have people that are basically immortal.
Yet you have to consider what the original point is of CCP deciding to make people immortal with clones to begin with. If you plan to remain safe for your entire EVE career, does it matter that you have a clone?
4) and most importantly, in real life we don't have jump gates to bridge civilization together in the blink of an Eye.
I don't see why this is the most important thing here. It's an effective plot device, like warp speed is in Star Trek, to eliminate the light years of dead space between solar systems. It also offers choke points for strategic game play purposes (i.e. Jump gates are for gate camps). The real life comparison to jump gates would be straits, narrow channels of water such as the strait of Gibraltar or Cape Hope which act as choke points that limit a ship's ability to move.
I can tell you though, if we did have jump gates, odds are there would not be a boundry between one gate and another. All traffic would funnel through that gate.
The thing is, we DO have jump gates in EVE. Perhaps you mean if we did NOT have jump gates? But then you say all traffic would pass through that non-existent gate, so your sentence is confusing to me.
The point behind a demilitarized zone is to create a buffer so that you have time to respond to a threat and/or dispatch any possible threat before it's too late.
Are you saying the high-sec areas between the rival factions (Amarr vs. Minmatar, Cal vs. Gal) are the demilitarized zones? Shouldn't they be patrolled by the Factional Navy then, instead of Concord? It seems like Concord is only concerned with combat between pilots that don't pay them their war dec bribe, not Factional warfare.
If everything at a demilitarized zone were forced to funnel through a very narrow channel in order to cross (I.E. a jump gate), then odds are there wouldn't be a demilitarized zone, but instead an engagement zone where once something crosses this line, you kill it.
You've lost me again here. Is the area between rival factions a demilitarized zone, or isn't it? If so, how does merely having a jump gate or funnel area now make the demilitarized zone not a demilitarized zone anymore? Doesn't every solar system in EVE have a jump gate? |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
506
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 09:59:00 -
[964] - Quote
Sera Kor-Azor wrote:
The thing is, we DO have jump gates in EVE. Perhaps you mean if we did NOT have jump gates? But then you say all traffic would pass through that non-existent gate, so your sentence is confusing to me.
I was speaking of, if we had jump gates in real life.
[qutoe]Are you saying the high-sec areas between the rival factions (Amarr vs. Minmatar, Cal vs. Gal) are the demilitarized zones? Shouldn't they be patrolled by the Factional Navy then, instead of Concord? It seems like Concord is only concerned with combat between pilots that don't pay them their war dec bribe, not Factional warfare. [/quote]
Ok, right here shows you're new and probalby shouldn't comment on topics to which you have no knowledge. First, there is no high sec between the factions, however, if you belong to the opposing faction and jump through a border gate, you have just crossd the demilitarized zone.
The part that shows your lack of knowledge is the fact that these border gates ARE secured by that faction's Navy. Just go to a border gate some time. On one side is one faction's navy ships, and on the other side is another faction's navy.
Quote:You've lost me again here. Is the area between rival factions a demilitarized zone, or isn't it? If so, how does merely having a jump gate or funnel area now make the demilitarized zone not a demilitarized zone anymore? Doesn't every solar system in EVE have a jump gate?
Ok, i was speaking real life vs Eve life.
A better example would be the US and Mexico border. Picture it much much more secure, to the point that you cannot cross unless you go through a gate. Now, imagine the US and Mexico are extremely hostile with each other.
This is a better example, as there is no demilitarized zone.
The only thing seperating the two countries would essentially be an impassable line... In Eve this would be considered the boundaries of a system.. You cannot simply cross into another system.
The gate to which people would be able to cross at on that border would force a funnel that could be heavily secured on both sides.. In Eve this would be a jump gate.
Now, there would be no middle zone between the two countries, however, if you cross that line you will be destroyed. In Eve this is like a opposition target jumping through the gate into your system. |
Sera Kor-Azor
Amarrian Mission of the Sacred Word
5
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 10:42:00 -
[965] - Quote
"Lol, you missed the point where I said things are already the way I want them.. "
why?
So, if you want them to change, YOU have the burden of proof... All I need is plausible deniability.
Also, an Axiom would say that something is true without question. So,
"water is wet" is an axiom.
"You don't get better at something until things get harder and you adapt."
This is not true. I can be given all the information I will ever need for my job and it will make things easy. However, as I apply that knowledge and memorize everything, I am getting better at my job. That said, things haven't gotten harder, only require a different solution, which i have at my fingertips.
I see.
How did you learn to walk? Did you just watch other people do it, intellectually absorb the general concept, and sprang like a jungle cat to your muscularly developed legs? Are people born with the ability to play guitar, or high jump, or water ski, or hit a bullseye? How does evolution work? Why do athletes bother to practice? Why are some people better at some things than other people? Is it all intellectual ability and genetics?
'All the information you will ever need for your job'. That sounds like a pretty easy job.
If you are applying all the knowledge you memorized, you really aren't getting better....you are stagnating. Maybe you are getting faster at doing the same thing, but that's not really getting better. If you are an expert at fixing a car engine let's say, and you do the same routine repairs every day such as changing the oil....you are not improving. The only time you improve is when you are faced with a challenge, then learn something new to overcome that challenge.
"You don't appreciate something that took no effort for you to get."
Uhh, I beg to differ. If i walked in and bought a ticket for tonight's powerball and won... I would have put no effort into that, and I would be very appreciative of it.
Powerball is some sort of a lottery I guess?
Have you heard the stories of those lottery winners? Some of them are people of limited means, working for a fixed wage. They suddenly win a few million dollars in the lottery, and to them it seems like a limitless supply of money. They end up spending it on frivolous things, and spend it all within six months to a year. After that, they are often much worse off than they before, because they are deeply in debt. Why did this happen? They were delighted to win the money, but they did not appreciate the money because they did not earn it. Easy come, easy go.
Appreciate is not the same thing as enjoy. Appreciate means to understand the true value of something. You can be a self-centred prick who enjoys having a pretty girlfriend around, or you can be someone who appreciates the love of a beautiful woman.
Ahh, I see now... You sit in high sec and produce ships and/or trade goods for ship production, so you stand to profit from seperation. It all makes sense to me now.
*Wink* Yes, us high sec industrialists will likely make a fortune if this low-sec barrier idea goes through.
lol, no it's not about that either... It's about what you, an industrialist, stand to profit off of the seperation.
The latin phrase for this is 'argumentam ad homenium', or 'argument to the person'. You've switched from talking about the topic itself, and are now focusing the discussion on me. You are also assuming my motives, a strawman argument.
Enough about me though, tell us about you. How do you make your ISK in EVE, and how would this low-sec barrier cut into your profits? If you told us that, we might be able to understand your perspective a little more.
You know damn good and well that the seperation would drive up regional prices, and you having the skills and probably a jump freighter to counter the effects of the split.
I don't think it would drive up regional prices. Some of the goods that have to be imported might be more expensive, but most stuff can be made locally with local resources. If anything, it would decrease the prices and expand the market menu in the smaller 'rural' trade hubs. The prices in local main trade hubs would remain competitive. Also, I have neither the skills nor a jump freighter.
also, what you seem to fail to realize is that splitting the regions does not create more isk faucets.. It simply increases the amount of isk changing hands.
You like to make a lot of assumptions about what other people are thinking. That's called a 'strawman'. You inform people of what they are thinking, then tell them why they are wrong.
I never said that splitting the regions creates more ISK faucets. I did point out that high sec mission runners are insulated from the effects of the market. The amount of NPC agents will not be affected, nor will the payout. Also, 'increasing the amount of ISK changing hands'. Isn't this also known as commerce?
"And while we're talking, can you stop throwing out a bunch of crap about movies and unrelated IRL history that pertains nothing to assist your cause? Really all it does is force me to have to read through a bunch of garbage to get to the garbage that is on topic."
Sorry, no. Why should I? The whole of human history supports my premise that the Factions should be separated by a low sec barrier. Every story ever told or written by humans supports the idea of a low-sec barrier, and EVE is one of those fictional stories too. Human history did not stop when we humans from Earth jumped through the EVE gate. Human nature did not change. EVE also has a backstory, and the four factions of EVE behave in the same way humans on Earth did. I'm standing on firm ground here.
The only thing you are saying is 'I don't want it changed', for the reason that YOU like it fine the way it is. |
Sera Kor-Azor
Amarrian Mission of the Sacred Word
5
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 11:31:00 -
[966] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:Sera Kor-Azor wrote:
The thing is, we DO have jump gates in EVE. Perhaps you mean if we did NOT have jump gates? But then you say all traffic would pass through that non-existent gate, so your sentence is confusing to me.
I was speaking of, if we had jump gates in real life.The 'jump gates' we have in real life are any strait, or gully, or alley, or road, or path, or any other narrow pass that you have to travel through which can be camped out by the enemy. That's the game mechanics part of it. It's not important that they connect one solar system to the next. Ok, right here shows you're new and probalby shouldn't comment on topics to which you have no knowledge.Ah, ok. So another attack against my person instead of addressing the actual topic? "First, there is no high sec between the factions," What? So you mean there's ALREADY a low-sec barrier between all the factions? However, if you belong to the opposing faction and jump through a border gate, you have just crossd the demilitarized zone.De-militarized means no military, but I am following you so far... The part that shows your lack of knowledge is the fact that these border gates ARE secured by that faction's Navy.Oh ok, so a demilitarized zone with a military in it? "Just go to a border gate some time. On one side is one faction's navy ships, and on the other side is another faction's navy."Ok, but only in low sec right? There is no high sec between the Factions? Quote:You've lost me again here. Is the area between rival factions a demilitarized zone, or isn't it? If so, how does merely having a jump gate or funnel area now make the demilitarized zone not a demilitarized zone anymore? Doesn't every solar system in EVE have a jump gate? Ok, i was speaking real life vs Eve life. A better example would be the US and Mexico border. Picture it much much more secure, to the point that you cannot cross unless you go through a gate. Now, imagine the US and Mexico are extremely hostile with each other. This is a better example, as there is no demilitarized zone. The only thing seperating the two countries would essentially be an impassable line... In Eve this would be considered the boundaries of a system.. You cannot simply cross into another system. The gate to which people would be able to cross at on that border would force a funnel that could be heavily secured on both sides.. In Eve this would be a jump gate. Now, there would be no middle zone between the two countries, however, if you cross that line you will be destroyed. In Eve this is like a opposition target jumping through the gate into your system. Edit... In order to properly quote someone, it is fairly simple. I will use the work dead in replace of the word quote so that i can properly show you how to quote someone. [dead] place the quote here [/dead] That is literally all you have to do
I'm afraid you've lost me again here.
Let's consider the border between Canada and the United States instead. It's the world's largest unsecured border. For thousands of kilometers, it's just wilderness. Nobody. That is 'Low security'. You can walk across the border from Canada to the U.S., and if you got caught you might be in trouble, but the chances of getting caught are slim. In fact, a lot of people called '********* pirates' carry backpacks full of ********* from Canada into the United States. It's nearly impossible to catch them in the Rocky mountains.
The U.S. / Mexico border is what I would call 'high security'. Guard towers, barbed wire, it's hard to sneak across the border into the United States from Mexico. Lots of guards, lots of cameras. However guess what? All that stuff costs money. All that stuff costs human resources. There aren't enough guards and cameras and Police to make the whole country high sec. A prison would be high sec. However, there's always criminal gangs, drug smugglers, mafia that manage to get around the high security.
Now a border is just one line, on a flat surface across a finite distance. It's not possible to put the same kind of border across Canada as it is across Mexico. There's not enough resources.
So now considering that space is infinite, the distances vast, the population comparatively sparse, why should the borders between the factional empires be so closely guarded by CONCORD? Does the U.S. Coast guard patrol the entire Pacific Ocean? Does the U.S. Navy? Does the United Nations? |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
509
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 13:46:00 -
[967] - Quote
Sera Kor-Azor wrote: I'm afraid you've lost me again here.
Let's consider the border between Canada and the United States instead. It's the world's largest unsecured border. For thousands of kilometers, it's just wilderness. Nobody. That is 'Low security'. You can walk across the border from Canada to the U.S., and if you got caught you might be in trouble, but the chances of getting caught are slim. In fact, a lot of people called '********* pirates' carry backpacks full of ********* from Canada into the United States. It's nearly impossible to catch them in the Rocky mountains.
The U.S. / Mexico border is what I would call 'high security'. Guard towers, barbed wire, it's hard to sneak across the border into the United States from Mexico. Lots of guards, lots of cameras. However guess what? All that stuff costs money. All that stuff costs human resources. There aren't enough guards and cameras and Police to make the whole country high sec. A prison would be high sec. However, there's always criminal gangs, drug smugglers, mafia that manage to get around the high security.
Now a border is just one line, on a flat surface across a finite distance. It's not possible to put the same kind of border across Canada as it is across Mexico. There's not enough resources.
So now considering that space is infinite, the distances vast, the population comparatively sparse, why should the borders between the factional empires be so closely guarded by CONCORD? Does the U.S. Coast guard patrol the entire Pacific Ocean? Does the U.S. Navy? Does the United Nations?
Bad comparison... the Ocean is more like the borders that factions have with low sec.
Also, the faction Navy's secure their border gates with other factions, Concord does not do this. Concord is merely a police force, and CCP made changes not too far back to make it appear as such.. Meaning they gave the Navys of the factions more of a security/defense profile.
Again though, there is no real world scenario that equates to Eve borders. That is why I had to make up a funnel situation with the US/Mexico border.
Basically, the only way the Factions can respond to a threat is when the threat enters their territory.. Having a demilitarized zone between them and another faction would not do anything to aid them in security, as they have no idea what would be in that system, as they can't monitor from the other side of the gate... Even if they were inside the low sec system, they would not be able to engage anything without cause all out war between the factions.
So, they're stuck in their high sec system, securing their border from the inside, and any threat that comes in, is dispatched.
There's no point in creating a buffer zone when it does nothing to aid in defense.
This would be kinda like a line of foot solders placing a wall in front of another wall... You can't defend or attack in between the two walls, so why bother putting the second wall up... Just kill anything that comes over the first wall. |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
527
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 14:28:00 -
[968] - Quote
Janna Sway wrote:The separation of the empires creates a very unfriendly game atmosphere overall, and that not only for new players with low skill points, but for everybody. The districts between empires would be utterly infested with pirates - which by itself is a disgusting idea to support alltogether.
There are such things as anti-pirate corps, I used to be in a coalition of them.
Janna Sway wrote: I just wonder how low-SP players, who start running the Epic arc missions (The Blood-Stained Stars) are supposed to travel through the four empires, while year-old and advanced pirates camp the gates between empires. Or how friends from all four empires, who just find themselves online at a particular moment can just find together to have good time for an hour or two.
Why with a frigate, running camps isn't a dark art, many of us do it all of the time. I started flying around low inside my first month playing. After a week I figured out how to navigate (relatively) safely
Janna Sway wrote: EVE Online is a MMO game and it seeks to bring people together, and not to separate them. EVE Online seeks to unite players from all over the world from all four empires and desires to create a good and healthy community. Is the separation of the empires contributing to this mindset somehow? - Of course not. The contrary is the case.
Why would it be so divisive? Big haulers need escorts (yes it can be done), pirates want to kill the haulers or their escorts...or both. It would lead to an increase in player interface, if you want to get things done you can no longer log in 4 accounts and haul everything yourself. Its easy to multibox like that when you are in hi sec, running through low is quite another matter all together.
Janna Sway wrote: The idea of separating the empires is not new. CCP had this idea already and it was reality in the game. CCP replaced this nonsensical idea through that what we have today. And nobody with common sense will turn back to the vomit of the past that he left behind.
I am utterly disgusted by piracy, isolation, separation, and darkness and seek light, peace, joy, righteousness, and unity.
Like I said I spent my first year or so in a corp that spent most of its time chasing pirates around low sec. |
Martin Lockheart
Lockheart Trading Company
1
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 17:04:00 -
[969] - Quote
Joe Risalo, you continue to simply spin your opinions as to why things should not change. You merely twist points, find simple holes in the use of words (as the English language is full of) and redirect arguments with pointless rhetoric. Few things you have said thus far have been beneficial to the conversation. You're being a worthless distraction, not providing critical thinking for improvement, but merely hypercritical argumentation.
By all means, do your thing. No one can, and no one will stop you - but if you're going to be here, you might as well try to be useful rather than wasting time turning people's words against them for the sake of doing so. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
509
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 19:01:00 -
[970] - Quote
Martin Lockheart wrote:Joe Risalo, you continue to simply spin your opinions as to why things should not change. You merely twist points, find simple holes in the use of words (as the English language is full of) and redirect arguments with pointless rhetoric. Few things you have said thus far have been beneficial to the conversation. You're being a worthless distraction, not providing critical thinking for improvement, but merely hypercritical argumentation.
By all means, do your thing. No one can, and no one will stop you - but if you're going to be here, you might as well try to be useful rather than wasting time turning people's words against them for the sake of doing so.
LOL...
Well, again I will say that things are already the way I want them.
It's up to those who wish it to change to come up with a valid argument to make it change.
Many times, I and other people have OP'd threads and people have come in and said "no" simply because this isn't real life, don't fix what isn't broken, or change for the sake of change is not a reason to change.
This thread falls under all 3.
The only people who agree with the topic of this thread are the people that would get the possitive end of the stick.
I have yet to read a valid excuse to why this MUST happen. |
|
Lateris
40
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 19:02:00 -
[971] - Quote
Trajan Al'Thor wrote:I want this.
same
.:=[ObscuriLateris.com--áMining Corp]=:. .:=[ObscuriSoft.com- Soft Development]=:. |
STush T
Capital Sin
3
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 21:11:00 -
[972] - Quote
Maybe no low sec between allies, amarr and caldari, minmatar and galente. but i think there should definitely be at least low sec between enemies. Possibly even null sec.
An idea might be to have concord do regular patrols through the no-mans land, responding to any hostile action in the system that the fleet is in. If you get left behind (concord jumps to next system) then your easy pickings.
Also have the concord patrol be cut off from reinforcements, meaning its possible to destroy the patrol and get to the traders who are using it for protection. So if there are enough freighters in the fleet (assuming each is worth at least 1b) then it would be profitable to engage the patrol. Could keep this number low so that there is always demand for more protection and always people trying to make the trip on there own. But it would provide a safe way for new players to travel across (since they are valueless) and give the committed trader a way to continue his lifestyle, albeit at a more difficult level. You still would have an area for the afk trader to autopilot between allies, but the more ambitious traders could trade between enemies.
I think this would add great depth to the game and give long flights some more interest rather then just the time sink that they are now. |
STush T
Capital Sin
3
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 21:35:00 -
[973] - Quote
"Many times, I and other people have OP'd threads and people have come in and said "no" simply because this isn't real life, don't fix what isn't broken, or change for the sake of change is not a reason to change."
This would be change to add depth, long flights would actually mean something other then time spent
This would be change not because its more like real life, but because its more story and life in the game
This would be change because currently IT IS BROKEN, born and raised in amarr, but can autopilot from the throne worlds to minmatar's capital?!?
This would not be change for the sake of change, this would be change to make the game more playable. It would add life to a boring profession, make another profession the way it should be, and create new professions. For those that would not want to partake, let them stick to one empire. There is still afk isk to be made, just now there would be the option to make more isk, doing the same thing, but now not afk.
This would be a hindrance to me as i am largely a mission runner, however anything that makes more option, adds depth, and helps break down monotony of a game while still allowing those who want the monotony to have it, is to me, a great change.
You could say that all of the expansions (or most, i dont know) were not changes that HAD to happen, or you could say that for the life of this game to continue they did have to happen. How many people would still be playing a game that was released in 2003 and had not changed at all?
ultimately, I like the game the way it is, but i think this would make it better. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
509
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 21:38:00 -
[974] - Quote
STush T wrote:"Many times, I and other people have OP'd threads and people have come in and said "no" simply because this isn't real life, don't fix what isn't broken, or change for the sake of change is not a reason to change."
This would be change to add depth, long flights would actually mean something other then time spent
This would be change not because its more like real life, but because its more story and life in the game
This would be change because currently IT IS BROKEN, born and raised in amarr, but can autopilot from the throne worlds to minmatar's capital?!?
This would not be change for the sake of change, this would be change to make the game more playable. It would add life to a boring profession, make another profession the way it should be, and create new professions. For those that would not want to partake, let them stick to one empire. There is still afk isk to be made, just now there would be the option to make more isk, doing the same thing, but now not afk.
This would be a hindrance to me as i am largely a mission runner, however anything that makes more option, adds depth, and helps break down monotony of a game while still allowing those who want the monotony to have it, is to me, a great change.
You could say that all of the expansions (or most, i dont know) were not changes that HAD to happen, or you could say that for the life of this game to continue they did have to happen. How many people would still be playing a game that was released in 2003 and had not changed at all?
ultimately, I like the game the way it is, but i think this would make it better.
As capsuleers, we are not tied to any specific faction. Not Even our birth race matters. We are contractors to whom ever and whatever we wish. |
STush T
Capital Sin
3
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 23:47:00 -
[975] - Quote
Except in character creation it asks us what empire, what family in that empire, and what empire specific school, so seems to me to be important. Also, Beginning standings indicate that your clearly from one faction or the others. Our very looks indicate which empire and family we're from, sooo
I agree that in practicality it doesnt really matter, but still, its there. One more thing, What does this have to do with low/null sec separating the empires? |
Aron Binchiette
Segmentum Solar Nulli Secunda
1
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 00:48:00 -
[976] - Quote
I support a divided eve |
Gingar Bread
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 07:12:00 -
[977] - Quote
i see this thread is still alive....
let me reiterate my answer: -NO- |
STush T
Capital Sin
4
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 22:57:00 -
[978] - Quote
Gingar Bread wrote:i see this thread is still alive....
let me reiterate my answer: -NO-
Oh, silly us. Should have known better then to defy your wishes.
It is a shame this got forgotten so fast by csm |
Jean-Paul Hutchinson
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2013.10.02 10:27:00 -
[979] - Quote
Great Idea, It would be interesting to see what would happen to high sec incursions.
Good Luck, Commander Ted |
Henri Dulan
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.02 12:35:00 -
[980] - Quote
I think this would make empire, which is a large part of EVE a lot more interesting. I'm not an industrial player but I can't ever imagine doing logistics in empire being fun, or challenging as long as you don't overload your ships iskwise.
Also the concept of what seems to be open/supersafe/non-existent? borders between 4 empires of whom half don't even like eachother never really seemed logical to me in the first place. |
|
Endo Saissore
The Scope Gallente Federation
21
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 02:37:00 -
[981] - Quote
I think this is a fantastic idea! Especially for those looking to make isk with hauling goods. First there would need to be some changes to NPC rats.
Firstly CCP would need to make rats spawn only in certain empires. Guristas in Caldari space, Serpentis in Gallente space etc. So the only way to gain Meta 2-4 gear would be in those specific Empires, or to have someone ship these items across dangerous space lanes.
For example, my Nemesis fit requires Meta 4 torpedo launchers to work, but I live in Gallente space. I need to hope some brave haulers have shipped these launchers across pirate infested areas or I'll have to make the trek myself.
As an industrialist I can see that there is a need for autocannons in Amarr space. So I fit up a cheap hauler (maybe warp stab it) and dive into Minmatar space. Then I raise the prices in Amarr because of the danger I went through. This is how I envisioned playing the markets when I first heard of Eve.
This brings up engaging gameplay as a market manipulator. I believe this is much better than, "Buy in Jita, autopilot to Rens"
Now I have to figure out how much profit do I need if I have to pay a corp member to bring a sacrificial griffin to jam would be pirates (not saying thats a great strategy, but you get the idea)
|
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
530
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 08:40:00 -
[982] - Quote
Endo Saissore wrote:I think this is a fantastic idea! Especially for those looking to make isk with hauling goods. First there would need to be some changes to NPC rats.
Firstly CCP would need to make rats spawn only in certain empires. Guristas in Caldari space, Serpentis in Gallente space etc. So the only way to gain Meta 2-4 gear would be in those specific Empires, or to have someone ship these items across dangerous space lanes.
For example, my Nemesis fit requires Meta 4 torpedo launchers to work, but I live in Gallente space. I need to hope some brave haulers have shipped these launchers across pirate infested areas or I'll have to make the trek myself.
As an industrialist I can see that there is a need for autocannons in Amarr space. So I fit up a cheap hauler (maybe warp stab it) and dive into Minmatar space. Then I raise the prices in Amarr because of the danger I went through. This is how I envisioned playing the markets when I first heard of Eve.
This brings up engaging gameplay as a market manipulator. I believe this is much better than, "Buy in Jita, autopilot to Rens"
Now I have to figure out how much profit do I need if I have to pay a corp member to bring a sacrificial griffin to jam would be pirates (not saying thats a great strategy, but you get the idea)
This guy gets it.
|
Sera Kor-Azor
Amarrian Mission of the Sacred Word
8
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 01:21:00 -
[983] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:Martin Lockheart wrote:Joe Risalo, you continue to simply spin your opinions as to why things should not change. You merely twist points, find simple holes in the use of words (as the English language is full of) and redirect arguments with pointless rhetoric. Few things you have said thus far have been beneficial to the conversation. You're being a worthless distraction, not providing critical thinking for improvement, but merely hypercritical argumentation.
By all means, do your thing. No one can, and no one will stop you - but if you're going to be here, you might as well try to be useful rather than wasting time turning people's words against them for the sake of doing so. LOL... Well, again I will say that things are already the way I want them. It's up to those who wish it to change to come up with a valid argument to make it change. Many times, I and other people have OP'd threads and people have come in and said "no" simply because this isn't real life, don't fix what isn't broken, or change for the sake of change is not a reason to change. This thread falls under all 3. The only people who agree with the topic of this thread are the people that would get the possitive end of the stick. I have yet to read a valid excuse to why this MUST happen.
I agree with Martin Lockhart. All you do is to twist words and meanings around on themselves here.
The only reason you say you have yet to read a valid excuse is because you refuse to accept anything other than your viewpoint as valid. It's like the Catholic priests who refused to look through Galileo's telescope, saying that there was no such thing as the planet Saturn because the official church doctrine states there are only five planets, and no more. Therefore, whatever they saw in the telescope must be some kind of a trick.
I asked you why you were so opposed to the idea. You seem to have no answer, other than "It's fine the way it is."
As for the other things you said:
"Bad comparison... the Ocean is more like the borders that factions have with low sec."
A bad comparison? Hrm. An Ocean is an immense body of water, difficult to monitor and police because of it's vast size. Outer space is also a vast and immense expanse, difficult to monitor and police because of it's vast size. Cities, by comparison, are easier to Police and monitor, because of their small size.
So can you explain how the Ocean (a vast expanse) is more like the borders (an imaginary line) that factions have along low-sec? This makes absolutely no sense to me.
"Again though, there is no real world scenario that equates to Eve borders. That is why I had to make up a funnel situation with the US/Mexico border."
How can you say this? A border is a political boundary, an imaginary territory line. It's the same thing, wherever or when-ever it is. You keep insisting that the game of EVE is some kind of unique and isolated aberration, comparable with nothing at all, with no relationship to anything other than itself. What nonsense!
"Basically, the only way the Factions can respond to a threat is when the threat enters their territory.. Having a demilitarized zone between them and another faction would not do anything to aid them in security, as they have no idea what would be in that system, as they can't monitor from the other side of the gate... Even if they were inside the low sec system, they would not be able to engage anything without cause all out war between the factions."
This is unintelligible gibberish to me. I have no idea what you mean here. What does 'without cause all out war between the factions' mean?
"There's no point in creating a buffer zone when it does nothing to aid in defense."
We aren't thinking from the perspective of the NPC Faction militia or the NPC Concord police here. We aren't thinking 'why would anyone deliberately create a low-sec buffer zone, if it only makes our faction less secure'? We aren't trying to think of ways to make high sec even safer for the greater comfort of the risk adverse.
We aren't voting to take a safe and functional highway system which exists in a real world community, and deliberately destroy lights, smash bridges, and create potholes so that the commuters find it more 'interesting' and 'challenging' to get to work. EVE is not the real world, it is a game. It is supposed to be a dark, dangerous, and adventurous universe. High sec between the four Factions is illogical in such a world as this. We are saying that EVE needs more wilderness zones and less civilized safe urban zones.
The low-sec buffer zone between the four factions would just be a 'natural' frontier or badlands area that would appear on it's own if NPC Concord or NPC Faction militia ran out of financial resources or manpower to secure it.
There's no need to explain how CONCORD is an uber-powered Police force, or how an imaginary demilitarized zone keeps all the NPC Navy rats from one faction from killing all the NPC rats from another faction. It's not relevant. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
533
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 02:25:00 -
[984] - Quote
LOL, wow.... Just....WOW
Might take me a second to break this down....
Sera Kor-Azor wrote: I agree with Martin Lockhart. All you do is to twist words and meanings around on themselves here.
That I do
Quote:The only reason you say you have yet to read a valid excuse is because you refuse to accept anything other than your viewpoint as valid. It's like the Catholic priests who refused to look through Galileo's telescope, saying that there was no such thing as the planet Saturn because the official church doctrine states there are only five planets, and no more. Therefore, whatever they saw in the telescope must be some kind of a trick. again.. Bad comparison The comparison you just tried to use represents facts. Nothing expressed on this thread represents a fact. Neither for or against comments can factually state how things will change.
Quote:I asked you why you were so opposed to the idea. You seem to have no answer, other than "It's fine the way it is."
As for the other things you said:
"Bad comparison... the Ocean is more like the borders that factions have with low sec."
A bad comparison? Hrm. An Ocean is an immense body of water, difficult to monitor and police because of it's vast size. Outer space is also a vast and immense expanse, difficult to monitor and police because of it's vast size. Cities, by comparison, are easier to Police and monitor, because of their small size.
So can you explain how the Ocean (a vast expanse) is more like the borders (an imaginary line) that factions have along low-sec? This makes absolutely no sense to me.
You just answered your own question... "Ocean (a vast expanse) is more like the borders (an imaginary line) that factions have along low-sec?"
"Ocean is an immense body of water, difficult to monitor and police because of it's vast size"
Have you ever heard of international waters? There is an imaginary line that dictates this
However, that's beside the point. Around the world their are countries that are hostile with each other, yet their borders touch. As is the case in Eve.
Lets say this, Earth is the Eve universe. Their are areas where anything can happen.. International waters (null sec) their are areas where people can get away with more than other places (low sec) Then their are areas where it is highly policed (high sec) Their are imaginary borders that dictate these zones (edge of a system) Some of these lines touch different parts... a highly policed area may touch a not so policed area, or it may touch a highly policed area, but one that would be hostile to the other.. (I.E. Lebanon and Israel) To the people living in these areas, they could consider themselves in high sec, yet, their is literally an imaginary line/impassible wall between them.
Quote: How can you say this? A border is a political boundary, an imaginary territory line. It's the same thing, wherever or when-ever it is. You keep insisting that the game of EVE is some kind of unique and isolated aberration, comparable with nothing at all, with no relationship to anything other than itself. What nonsense!
Seriously? You're going to sit here and tell me, a video game in space with ships and jump gates where you can't straight fly from one place to the next without funneling though those gates, can be equated to real life?
Anyway, I was saying borders in Eve can't be equated to borders IRL BECAUSE in Eve you can not just fly across that border. You MUST funnel through a choke point. If we could funnel everything through a choke point IRL the way it is in Eve, there would be no Demilitarized zone, or international waters because we would simply attack anything that came through that choke point that wasn't supposed to.
Why would we need a huge buffer zone?
Quote:This is unintelligible gibberish to me. I have no idea what you mean here. What does 'without cause all out war between the factions' mean?
We aren't thinking from the perspective of the NPC Faction militia or the NPC Concord police here. We aren't thinking 'why would anyone deliberately create a low-sec buffer zone, if it only makes our faction less secure'? We aren't trying to think of ways to make high sec even safer for the greater comfort of the risk adverse. We aren't voting to take a safe and functional highway system which exists in a real world community, and deliberately destroy lights, smash bridges, and create potholes so that the commuters find it more 'interesting' and 'challenging' to get to work. EVE is not the real world, it is a game. It is supposed to be a dark, dangerous, and adventurous universe. High sec between the four Factions is illogical in such a world as this. We are saying that EVE needs more wilderness zones and less civilized safe urban zones.
There is no high sec between the factions.. There is nothingness and a Jump gate to get across that nothingness.
Null sec, low sec, and WH space are already in game to create the dark, dangerous, and adventurous universe. And no, you're not saying less safe and more danger zones, you're saying break the safe zone with danger zones. You're not making it more entertaining for high sec players, you're making it more annoying.
I'm still looking for someone to Express a NEED for why they should be seperated. You said it yourself, that it's not RL, so if it seems illogical to you, well, it's a game where we're flying spaceships light years. It's.
Just because some of you guys think it would be cool to split the factions isn't a reason why CCP should.
it's working as intended... If you don't like it.. GTFO...
I don't have to express why it NEEDS to stay how it is, because it's already that way. CCP NEEDS a reason to change it.... Why would they change it if it's not a necessity? |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
886
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 02:57:00 -
[985] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:
I don't have to express why it NEEDS to stay how it is, because it's already that way. CCP NEEDS a reason to change it.... Why would they change it if it's not a necessity?
Why do they need to change it to change it?
You say CCP needs to do things to do things but this makes no sense. CCP doesn't need to do anything.
Over the 50 something pages of this thread it has been explained over and over and over again why this SHOULD happen, but not for some reason we have to need it? Illogical. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Anomaly One
State War Academy Caldari State
17
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 03:02:00 -
[986] - Quote
Great idea should have been like this since the beginning, more ransoms more pirates more smart gameplay more fights, hiring security etc. what's not to like, so simple and brings so much +1 |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
533
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 03:28:00 -
[987] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Joe Risalo wrote:
I don't have to express why it NEEDS to stay how it is, because it's already that way. CCP NEEDS a reason to change it.... Why would they change it if it's not a necessity?
Why do they need to change it to change it? You say CCP needs to do things to do things but this makes no sense. CCP doesn't need to do anything. Over the 50 something pages of this thread it has been explained over and over and over again why this SHOULD happen, but not for some reason we have to need it? Illogical.
What????
AGAIN
You saying why it SHOULD happen is not the same as saying why it NEEDS to happen.
This fixes no aspect of the game, it doesn't present balance, it doesn't increase subscriptions, it doesn't do anything but help those people that want more shinies to pop.
See, y'all keep throwing out all these BS examples of how it would make life in Eve better (for you), yet you continuously fail to express any reason why it HAS to happen. What in the game is so broken that this would be worth CCPs time and money to make this change?
So again. WHY DO WE NEEDS THIS?!?!?!?! WHY DO WE NEEDS THIS?!?!?!?! WHY DO WE NEEDS THIS?!?!?!?! WHY DO WE NEEDS THIS?!?!?!?!
And remember, because it's fun, because it's cool, because it brings challenge, because it make sense (which it doesn't) Are not reasons why a massive change, that will take time and money, needs to happen.
|
Endo Saissore
The Scope Gallente Federation
29
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 04:48:00 -
[988] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:Commander Ted wrote:Joe Risalo wrote:
I don't have to express why it NEEDS to stay how it is, because it's already that way. CCP NEEDS a reason to change it.... Why would they change it if it's not a necessity?
Why do they need to change it to change it? You say CCP needs to do things to do things but this makes no sense. CCP doesn't need to do anything. Over the 50 something pages of this thread it has been explained over and over and over again why this SHOULD happen, but not for some reason we have to need it? Illogical. What???? AGAIN You saying why it SHOULD happen is not the same as saying why it NEEDS to happen. This fixes no aspect of the game, it doesn't present balance, it doesn't increase subscriptions, it doesn't do anything but help those people that want more shinies to pop. See, y'all keep throwing out all these BS examples of how it would make life in Eve better (for you), yet you continuously fail to express any reason why it HAS to happen. What in the game is so broken that this would be worth CCPs time and money to make this change? So again. WHY DO WE NEED THIS?!?!?!?! WHY DO WE NEED THIS?!?!?!?! WHY DO WE NEED THIS?!?!?!?! WHY DO WE NEED THIS?!?!?!?! And remember, because it's fun, because it's cool, because it brings challenge, because it make sense (which it doesn't) Are not reasons why a massive change, that will take time and money, needs to happen.
I'm sorry... then why are you playing eve? Aren't you playing eve because its fun? Because its cool? Because it brings a challenge? That's why I'm playing. So if theres a change we can implement that makes Eve more fun, cooler, and an creates an interesting challenge then that should be enough.
Technically we don't need this. We also didn't NEED presets for probes or NAVY BATTLECRUISERS. We also didn't NEED a revamp in crimewatch, or in the bounty systems. We didn't NEED graphical overhauls. But it made the game better. What other reasons do you need you psycho?
I swear its like I'm taking crazy pills. |
Max Zerg
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 07:50:00 -
[989] - Quote
Hi, folx
There is one more aspect you are missing in this interesting discussion Right now EVE Online is a world of thousands beggars Imagine the separation of faction space SHALL make EVE Universe the world dominated by newbies desperately begging for 10M+ for losses of their brand new frigates/dessies/cruisers etc. This would simply ruin public and help channels tranforming them ino walls of spam like Jita local read by noone. Sure, the low-sec border areas should be camped 23.5/7 and sure unaware newbs and more clever twinks pretending they lost their ships shold annoy way more then do now. Even now public channels are alot of spam and scam. More newbs ship kills shall imcrease begging dramatically That's my point. Thanks |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
530
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 08:16:00 -
[990] - Quote
Max Zerg wrote:Hi, folx
There is one more aspect you are missing in this interesting discussion Right now EVE Online is a world of thousands beggars Imagine the separation of faction space SHALL make EVE Universe the world dominated by newbies desperately begging for 10M+ for losses of their brand new frigates/dessies/cruisers etc. This would simply ruin public and help channels tranforming them ino walls of spam like Jita local read by noone. Sure, the low-sec border areas should be camped 23.5/7 and sure unaware newbs and more clever twinks pretending they lost their ships shold annoy way more then do now. Even now public channels are alot of spam and scam. More newbs ship kills shall imcrease begging dramatically That's my point. Thanks
It looks like engrish, but makes no sense.
|
|
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
530
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 08:17:00 -
[991] - Quote
Stupid forums |
Rammix
TheMurk
81
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 09:36:00 -
[992] - Quote
I strongly disagree with the idea of the OP. If in short - it's just sh**. It would divide one highsec "mega-region" into four pieces for almost all traders, carebears (there are TONNS of those) and newbies. Instead of that "mega-region" you woud get 80%+ of highsec dwellers tend to live in their regions of origin. You would just make _many_ people ragequit.
Your idea is so ridiculously sh**ty that I can't even find words to explain.
p.s. Changable security status (like 0.5 +/- 0.1, from 0.5 to either 0.6 or 0.4) could be a good idea. But not that bullshit in the OP of this thread. OpenSUSE 12.2, wine 1.5 |
Rammix
TheMurk
81
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 09:55:00 -
[993] - Quote
Let's use some logic. Lowsec - is a location where empires don't have much interest, it's out of the main trade routes. In other words, lowsec is a periphery to all of 4 factions. So systems inside the highsec in the centre of the populated universe just can't be lowsec. It would be absolutely unrealistic. Also, you should remember that officially the empires are in state of peace, not war, so there just can't even be lawless war lines.
Putting lowsec systems in the centre of empire space, on actively used trade routes - is a complete nonsense.
p.s. I request "DISLIKE" button on this forum, next to "like", with separate counting. OpenSUSE 12.2, wine 1.5 |
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS
413
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 09:58:00 -
[994] - Quote
The idea is not bad. But the biggest - of this idea is actually that lowsec suxs and the existence of jump freighters. So adding quite a bit of low security area which has no point to exist.
I have written few thoughts on how to improve lowsec. If something like that is done to lowsec than your idea would be the most welcomed one.
And yeah Jump freighters should not be allowed to jump in and from highsec and low security space. BALEX is recruiting -----> tinyurl.com/oscmmlv |
Rammix
TheMurk
81
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 10:09:00 -
[995] - Quote
Zloco Crendraven wrote: And yeah Jump freighters should not be allowed to jump in and from highsec and low security space.
Jump freighters can jump out but not into highsec. It is good as it is. BTW, covert cynos should be allowed in highsec - for more interesting wardec pvp. It would bring more surprise to fights. It suits especially well with the central theme of Rubicon: capsuleers gaining more power. OpenSUSE 12.2, wine 1.5 |
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS
413
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 10:14:00 -
[996] - Quote
Rammix wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote: And yeah Jump freighters should not be allowed to jump in and from highsec and low security space.
Jump freighters can jump out but not into highsec. It is good as it is. BTW, covert cynos should be allowed in highsec - for more interesting wardec pvp. It would bring more surprise to fights. It suits especially well with the central theme of Rubicon.
Yeah, i know that JF can jump out of highsec and that is a really bad, bad idea. As i said i would extend it to lowsec also. Piracy can't exist when nullsec alliances just jump over you. Hauling to distant corners of 0.0 is just too easy. BALEX is recruiting -----> tinyurl.com/oscmmlv |
Rammix
TheMurk
81
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 10:35:00 -
[997] - Quote
Zloco Crendraven wrote:Rammix wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote: And yeah Jump freighters should not be allowed to jump in and from highsec and low security space.
Jump freighters can jump out but not into highsec. It is good as it is. BTW, covert cynos should be allowed in highsec - for more interesting wardec pvp. It would bring more surprise to fights. It suits especially well with the central theme of Rubicon. Yeah, i know that JF can jump out of highsec and that is a really bad, bad idea. As i said i would extend it to lowsec also. Piracy can't exist when nullsec alliances just jump over you. Hauling to distant corners of 0.0 is just too easy. I think forcing haulers to pass through lowsec gates is not a good way to boost lowsec pvp and piracy. There is much much better way - encourage people to live in lowsec, like with some good ore, profitable ratting etc. Instead of forcing people to do what you want, it is better to make things so that they do it out of their free will. Instead of forcing people from highsec - lure them to lowsec with some "tasty" stuff.
I think few hundreds of mission runners / ratters etc are more fun than several occasional jump freighters. OpenSUSE 12.2, wine 1.5 |
Gorr Shakor
Shakor Freight and Mining Service
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 10:45:00 -
[998] - Quote
Zloco Crendraven wrote:Rammix wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote: And yeah Jump freighters should not be allowed to jump in and from highsec and low security space.
Jump freighters can jump out but not into highsec. It is good as it is. BTW, covert cynos should be allowed in highsec - for more interesting wardec pvp. It would bring more surprise to fights. It suits especially well with the central theme of Rubicon. Yeah, i know that JF can jump out of highsec and that is a really bad, bad idea. As i said i would extend it to lowsec also. Piracy can't exist when nullsec alliances just jump over you. Hauling to distant corners of 0.0 is just too easy. What difference would that make? Right now you undock, wait out the few seconds timer and jump. As soon as we are not allowed to jump JFs FROM highsec, simply jump to LS, hold cloak while you wait out the session timer, drop gate cloak and jum p. The chance of getting caught is minuscule. |
Henri Dulan
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 10:51:00 -
[999] - Quote
Rammix wrote:Let's use some logic. Lowsec - is a location where empires don't have much interest, it's out of the main trade routes. In other words, lowsec is a periphery to all of 4 factions. So systems inside the highsec in the centre of the populated universe just can't be lowsec. It would be absolutely unrealistic. Also, you should remember that officially the empires are in state of peace, not war, so there just can't even be lawless war lines.
Putting lowsec systems in the centre of empire space, on actively used trade routes - is a complete nonsense.
p.s. I request "DISLIKE" button on this forum, next to "like", with separate counting.
Your post is very logical from the perspective that highsec is as it currently is one ball of "green/blue" safety no risk but suicide gankers. Which I believe to be very boring. But I'm not sure if you (want to) understand the concept.
As you describe it it sounds like and effectively is like a single empire. And even though maybe at peace diplomatically if I understand correct at least half of the factions are still by far more enemies than friends. By far more divided than united.
When you change the perspective from a single populated sector / core / empire to FOUR cores / populated sectors / safe havens / empires to represent the four factions whom are definitely NOT united as one. Then it suddenly DOES make a lot of sense that indeed the four centres of the four empires will have highly secured cores/centres I fully agree with you there, but that they also ALL have their own peripheries since it's not that far fetched to assume that every faction can only guarantee full security in so much space and that the centres will be prioritized in this as to the borders..
I don't think even though this is probably just my opinion that if you look at it this way. That it would be weird or unnatural to NOT have the trade routes "fully secured" along the whole routes. Securing space takes a lot of effort/isk/military power which are all limited. Trade doesn't stop, people doing it will just have to wise up.
Same goes for the newbies and carebears. Smart carebears will have and find ways around it. Will have to take at least some risk to get their rewards.. And newbies might take a few losses at first. But losing stuff and overcoming drawbacks is definitely a part of EVE. the players that quit after losing their first t1 frigate or cruiser probably weren't going to keep on playing anyways.
I could be wrong, but I actually believe the more limited or confined people will feel in the then smaller parts of highsec, the more they will be stimulated to actually go and try something more exciting than just running missions.
Tbh I'm not even sure if it's a good idea since probably gate camping will be too easy for large groups and they might have to change some more things to make it work. But I guess it's a really big change to suggest so that would not be so weird then. And with things like more empire to empire wormholes it doesn't have to be too hard on newer logistics players (basic scanning skills barely take any skill training), but to me four factions: four empires makes a lot more sense and sounds a lot more interesting than four factions: one empire.. |
Rammix
TheMurk
81
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 11:30:00 -
[1000] - Quote
Henri Dulan wrote: When you change the perspective from a single populated sector / core / empire to FOUR cores / populated sectors / safe havens / empires to represent the four factions whom are definitely NOT united as one. Then it suddenly DOES make a lot of sense that indeed the four centres of the four empires will have highly secured cores/centres I fully agree with you there, but that they also ALL have their own peripheries since it's not that far fetched to assume that every faction can only guarantee full security in so much space and that the centres will be prioritized in this as to the borders..
Periphery is not a political thing. It's a less populated, less used, less needed parts of a territory. Central highsec cannot be called periphery because there is huge traffic of trade and travel, systems have multiple stations, many gates. The centre of highsec is highly populated and is a core of infrastructure. Such dense areas cannot be treated like abandoned lawless space, it just doesn't make sense at all.
Henri Dulan wrote: Same goes for the newbies and carebears. Smart carebears will have and find ways around it. Will have to take at least some risk to get their rewards.. And newbies might take a few losses at first. But losing stuff and overcoming drawbacks is definitely a part of EVE. the players that quit after losing their first t1 frigate or cruiser probably weren't going to keep on playing anyways.
Just what the heck for?? There is NO real reason to forcefully put lowsec in the heart of the empire space.
Henri Dulan wrote: Tbh I'm not even sure if it's a good idea since probably gate camping will be too easy for large groups and they might have to change some more things to make it work. But I guess it's a really big change to suggest so that would not be so weird then. And with things like more empire to empire wormholes it doesn't have to be too hard on newer logistics players (basic scanning skills barely take any skill training), but to me four factions: four empires makes a lot more sense and sounds a lot more interesting than four factions: one empire..
Do you actually know what is a wormhole and how people behave there? Putting your trade (trade needs stability and minimal risks) into wormholes which need lots of scanning - is suicidal, because wormhole people will glaadly kill you and take your stuff. Even more gladly and happily than lowsec campers. You want to make carebears who by all means avoid lowsec go into the unknown which they don't know how to deal with, etc.
The idea from the OP is an utter bullshit. You're just wishing to make universe of Eve look the way you want it to, ignoring objective factors and trying to "bend" the reality of other people to suit your own image of it.
ps. seems you're the TS and made this post from your alt. And liked it by the main character. OpenSUSE 12.2, wine 1.5 |
|
Atlantis Fuanan
Uncharted Skies Cerberus Unleashed
26
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 11:38:00 -
[1001] - Quote
Tbh, i like this idea, while it cannot really be explained (atleast i can't come up with a explanation) it would force the traveling to be somehow interesting. |
Henri Dulan
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 12:09:00 -
[1002] - Quote
@Rammix
Yes I'm an alt. This is a forum I'm free to do so. But sorry if this disappoints you. I do not know the topic starter nor am I him?! ( LOL )
I just like his idea.
Without being a flaming baby I'll just say, that you obviously didn't READ or (TRY TO) UNDERSTAND my post. Which I even pretty politely asked imo, but anyways. I'll try one more time.
This whole topic is suggesting CHANGE.
So you would have to look at the situation from a DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE as I wrote in my previous post.
I tried to suggest or offer you a different perspective on which you could then form your own opinion. I never even asked you to agree.
The different perspective was the concept of 4 factions 4 empires. You still look at it the way it is now. 1 empire. Ignoring the whole IDEA of the change the topic is TRYING to suggest. Good or bad. You didn't even try to see it the way I wrote it.
Periphery is not a political thing. And I NEVER SAID OR SUGGESTED that.
I suggested if you look at empires IN GENERAL, they usually are CENTRALISED. Without a centre there is no periphery. If FOUR empires have FOUR cores, the routes BETWEEN them could very plausibly be peripheries as they are between large, non-dense countries. I don't think space which consists of near infinite times nothing compared to something/matter by definition even in EVE would be densely populated... Nor is every system in hisec equally densely populated. There are definitely (some) lowsec systems that are busier than (some) hisec systems.
With wormholes I meant DIRECT wormholes btw, not so much risk in those... (as in the opening post) CCP obviously has the ability to create more of those if that would be good for gameplay / the working of the game.
It's ok if you don't like the idea, but don't respond from your own perspective misunderstanding mine after I just explained it and how it is different.
Finally
Rammix wrote:You're just wishing to make universe of Eve look the way you want it to, ignoring objective factors and trying to "bend" the reality of other people to suit your own image of it.
ps. seems you're the TS and made this post from your alt. And liked it by the main character.
I'm open to suggestions and discussions.. YOU are the one that doesn't seem to respect or even try to understand my view. I'm only trying to discuss stuff and say how I see it. I'm not shooting your opinion down or childishly calling me the topic starters alt. Since that's kind of lame..
Don't twist my words, and don't participate in a discussion if you don't want to listen to the others. It's not constructive. |
Rammix
TheMurk
83
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 13:17:00 -
[1003] - Quote
Henri Dulan wrote: The different perspective was the concept of 4 factions 4 empires. You still look at it the way it is now. 1 empire. Ignoring the whole IDEA of the change the topic is TRYING to suggest. Good or bad. You didn't even try to see it the way I wrote it.
It's just pointless. No practical need, no real meaning, no real use. Nothing good in a change just for changing. There are plenty of sayings for such things: "don't fix what's not broken", "don't touch what is resting" etc. Also I could mention Ockham's Razor, as it has somewhat similar meaning.
Henri Dulan wrote: I suggested if you look at empires IN GENERAL, they usually are CENTRALISED. Without a centre there is no periphery. If FOUR empires have FOUR cores, the routes BETWEEN them could very plausibly be peripheries as they are between large, non-dense countries.
Actually they ARE dense. "Periphery" is not only a "geographical" border, it's a not-needed or even deserted _secondary_ area. Btw often countries (IRL) tightly neighbouring each other don't have any periphery between them: politically they're different states but socially they form dense entity with multiple social and economic interconnections - just like 4 factions of EVE. They're too interconnected with trade, social things and travel (if we mention only capsuleers without "normal humans") to allow some lower security systems inbetween them. And, security is maintained not by factions but by CONCORD, which is meant to preserve order in the core of the empire space as a whole. That is why, I repeat, the idea from the OP is totally meaningless. Why to discuss nonsense, it should be declined and forgotten.
Henri Dulan wrote: With wormholes I meant DIRECT wormholes btw, not so much risk in those... (as in the opening post)
Unpractical. Trade needs stability and wormholes are random and everytime they need to be scanned, plus only limited amount of mass can pass through one.
Henri Dulan wrote: It's ok if you don't like the idea, but don't respond from your own perspective misunderstanding mine after I just explained it and how it is different.
I understand well enough. I just think it's useless, no need in it, no point. Even more, it won't make gameplay better, on the contrary it will make it worse for many people.
Henri Dulan wrote: YOU are the one that doesn't seem to respect or even try to understand my view. I'm only trying to discuss stuff and say how I see it.
Oh, I understood the thought, I assure you. But the OP's idea is nonsense, that's all why I'm arguing. And 150+ likes on the OP kind of make me nervous, what if some guy in ccp says "hey it's an interesting idea". I so much dislike this idea that even possibility that someone from ccp could support it makes me feel uneasy. OpenSUSE 12.2, wine 1.5 |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
535
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 13:35:00 -
[1004] - Quote
Rammix wrote:Oh, I understood the thought, I assure you. But the OP's idea is nonsense, that's all why I'm arguing. And 150+ likes on the OP kind of make me nervous, what if some guy in ccp says "hey it's an interesting idea". I so much dislike this idea that even possibility that someone from ccp could support it makes me feel uneasy.
It's funny how the coin has turned, as you (Rammix) and myself are shooting an idea down, much as we've seen ideas we like shot down in the same way with all the same reasons we're giving from the very same people that are defending this idea.
That said....
I highly doubt CCP is looking at this thread with serious consideration.
1) It's costly on their part to do this 2) it's time consuming for them to do 3) It's already working the way it is 4) Potential loss of subs 5) Potential to completely F up the markets in Eve
6) Extremely biased towards a small group of people (a lot more high sec players than low sec gankers)
This is what I'm getting at when I say that for CCP to change something so game changing, you'll have to give them an unquestionable NEED to do so.
This isn't an unbalanced ship, it's not a glitch, it's not some game breaking mechanic. It is the way it was intended to be.
So again, if you want CCP to take the risks, costs, and time to make a change like this, then you'll have to give them an unquestionable reason why it has to change. |
Jai Valentine
Gendry's Leech Eternal Pretorian Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 13:38:00 -
[1005] - Quote
Just no. I do not like this idea. |
Claire Raynor
NovaGear Limitless Inc.
185
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 14:12:00 -
[1006] - Quote
I've been a long time fan of this Idea and the idea of making more practically seperated areas of so called Hi-Sec. I've got my Orien island and I'm happy there and like it for what it is. Would be nice to have some more of that sort of thing and some larger islands of this Hi-Sec also.
I just see doing this as making small, but well defined and potentially more stable, local economic environments :- this would offer more opportunities to those industrialists who would take the extra risk of crossing lo-sec.
For Example. If I notice an opportunity somewhere in HighSec - to exploit an apparent local demand for something that isn't in supply. . . Then everyone in hi-sec will have no issue in also feeding that demand. There is no obstacle to differenciate between players, because there is no risk. If the area or demand was seperated by lo-sec. . . . Then currently hardly any hi-sec people step up to the challenge of supplying that demand. Currently the hi-sec islands are so small that the demand isn't that great and you easily saturate the small markets. Because less people will be prepared to supply these types of demand then trading gains immediatly some more game play, (as a by-product so do pirates), but being as the most demand is for consumables, (faction cap and ammo), a blockade runner is a strong option, etc, etc.
I see no reason why this** would take away from High-sec only traders as they will be able to do as they do currently - it just gives us some new communities with a different set of logistical problems to play with in terms of supplying them.
** I don't advocate a full seperation of empire now - as this would hurt people who don't want to change. But adding new areas of high sec island would potentially add to the game - at least the above.
Honestly - Orien is fun. Cost of living is higher. Demand outstrips supply - to the point where Rens is the only option because the local trade hub will never have everything you want - so you have to make the trip to Rens anyway - and if you are doing this you might as well buy it all cheaper at Rens. . .But Ammo is an option still. If more traders were selling stuff at Orien then they might be able to sell more stuff for more because people might say, "I'll just buy it all here because Rens is an hour's round trip - so that's worth the extra I pay". And why do they do that? Because Null sec is 3 jumps away from the Orien Island, PI and Exploration pays mega bucks and an hour's worth of sites might make you much more than you would save on the time taken to fly to Rens. Currently the Island isn't big enough to have sufficient population to support a full market.
So I'd just love to see - maybe just as an experiment - if CCP made a couple of 10 system islands. Just new ones. Don't have to go there if you don't want to. Make then on-the-way to Null. And just see what happens. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
535
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 14:57:00 -
[1007] - Quote
Claire Raynor wrote:** I don't advocate a full seperation of empire now - as this would hurt people who don't want to change. But adding new areas of high sec island would potentially add to the game - at least the above.
See, that I have no problem with.
I don't mind creating more and larger high sec Islands, and introducing even more null and low sec, as long as it's not at the cost of high sec as it is.
For all I care you can create a 5 system high sec island 20 jumps away from any faction high sec and I would be fine with that... |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
535
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 15:01:00 -
[1008] - Quote
P.S.
Why has no one mentioned pirate factions having high sec Islands?
I mean, you would think the pirates would be able to lock down a secure spot for themselves, seperate for anyone else.
THAT would be the type of place where people would want to take the risks to get there and trade there. |
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS
415
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 15:02:00 -
[1009] - Quote
Gorr Shakor wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote:Rammix wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote: And yeah Jump freighters should not be allowed to jump in and from highsec and low security space.
Jump freighters can jump out but not into highsec. It is good as it is. BTW, covert cynos should be allowed in highsec - for more interesting wardec pvp. It would bring more surprise to fights. It suits especially well with the central theme of Rubicon. Yeah, i know that JF can jump out of highsec and that is a really bad, bad idea. As i said i would extend it to lowsec also. Piracy can't exist when nullsec alliances just jump over you. Hauling to distant corners of 0.0 is just too easy. What difference would that make? Right now you undock, wait out the few seconds timer and jump. As soon as we are not allowed to jump JFs FROM highsec, simply jump to LS, hold cloak while you wait out the session timer, drop gate cloak and jum p. The chance of getting caught is minuscule.
Youb bviously didn't read the post. The idea would be to forbid jumping in and out of lowsec also. BALEX is recruiting -----> tinyurl.com/oscmmlv |
Claire Raynor
NovaGear Limitless Inc.
185
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 15:35:00 -
[1010] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:P.S.
Why has no one mentioned pirate factions having high sec Islands?
I mean, you would think the pirates would be able to lock down a secure spot for themselves, seperate for anyone else.
THAT would be the type of place where people would want to take the risks to get there and trade there.
Exactly - but my experiances with Orien make me think we'd need a decent sized area to hold enough interest to maintain a large enough population to allow a large enough local economy to develop a fully functional local market enough to make interesting things happen. Wow I used "enough" enough times in that sentance!!! |
|
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
536
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 15:42:00 -
[1011] - Quote
Claire Raynor wrote:Joe Risalo wrote:P.S.
Why has no one mentioned pirate factions having high sec Islands?
I mean, you would think the pirates would be able to lock down a secure spot for themselves, seperate for anyone else.
THAT would be the type of place where people would want to take the risks to get there and trade there. Exactly - but my experiances with Orien make me think we'd need a decent sized area to hold enough interest to maintain a large enough population to allow a large enough local economy to develop a fully functional local market enough to make interesting things happen. Wow I used "enough" enough times in that sentance!!!
Oh, of course... it would have to be at least a 20 system area or so..
That said though, it's not so much how big it is, but rather what is available there.
It would have to have enough agents and interesting enough ores to make people want to take the risks to get there.
It's gotta be more than just a bunch of systems with planets and stations. |
Dream Kim
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 16:31:00 -
[1012] - Quote
I agree with this.
I am actually in the process of writing an essay suggesting some changes to the game, and this is included in it. |
Red Teufel
Mafia Redux Phobia.
226
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 16:58:00 -
[1013] - Quote
EvE should be more spread out then this anyways. Highsec should not be one giant cluster in the middle. Empires should be spread out a bit. FW should have an effect on highsec. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
536
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 17:34:00 -
[1014] - Quote
Red Teufel wrote:EvE should be more spread out then this anyways. Highsec should not be one giant cluster in the middle. Empires should be spread out a bit. FW should have an effect on highsec.
Humanity has a natural instinct to cluster.
|
Matthew Charbonneaux
Coalescent Dynamics
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 18:12:00 -
[1015] - Quote
If this happened, As long as at least one highsec route existed between allies (Amarr/Cald, Gal/Min), I could see it. Make it longer to get to, sure, but between allies, there is generally more security if known to be dangerous territory. This would impart two things, one make crossing to "hostile territory" more dangerous; and add some realism.
Between traditional enemies (Cld/Gal, Min/Amarr) there should definitely be no mans lands. Pretty much battle-lines. After all, isn't EVE changing, and the Empires slowly starting to decay and collapse? Empires would start consolidating under those circumstances. you know, protecting important assets.
On the JF issue, well, there's lowsecs all over through out highsec, pockets and such, just aim for those, and you by pass the issue of the borderlands. |
Mr Barbeque
Mayhem and Ruin Point Blank Alliance
11
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 18:48:00 -
[1016] - Quote
"Many people will rage quit." Fair point worth consideration. I believe for every account that rage unsubs because life just got harder would be replaced by people seeing those succeeding in a more tumultuous environment, and wishing in on that more dynamic experience. No stats, simply my opinion.
Trade does not require stable and safe routes. Many examples are present, one very apparent is today's black markets. ********* is illegal in the US, therefore does not have stable routes by which to come from. Shipments can be confiscated, "employees" arrested or otherwise removed from your workforce/distribution network, ect. Yet it is so readily available to any who seek it. Its increased difficulty to acquire bottlenecks supply, increasing the profit gained from supplying the unbalanced demand. Making it an attractive option to those willing to run the risk for that reward.
Destabilizing the markets is the point, as static gameplay is boring. Recruiting |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
536
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 19:03:00 -
[1017] - Quote
Mr Barbeque wrote:"Many people will rage quit." Fair point worth consideration. I believe for every account that rage unsubs because life just got harder would be replaced by people seeing those succeeding in a more tumultuous environment, and wishing in on that more dynamic experience. No stats, simply my opinion.
In my opinion it is more likely that CCP would bring in more subs if they made things in Eve safer. Would draw more of a crowd from other "safe" style MMOs, and provides a bigger crowd.
Again though, as you said, that's just my opinion.
Quote: Trade does not require stable and safe routes. Many examples are present, one very apparent is today's black markets. ********* is illegal in the US, therefore does not have stable routes by which to come from. Shipments can be confiscated, "employees" arrested or otherwise removed from your workforce/distribution network, ect. Yet it is so readily available to any who seek it. Its increased difficulty to acquire bottlenecks supply, increasing the profit gained from supplying the unbalanced demand. Making it an attractive option to those willing to run the risk for that reward.
Actually, what you just used as an example is more of an example of a criminal travelling through high sec, than a trader travelling through low sec. In your example, Concord would be the attacking force, as they are the fuzz.
IMO I still strongly feel that doing this would not bring anyone to take risks, and would instead split players apart, thus seeing less player driven combat in high sec. I've actually done this myself. We war decced a target, and he moved 25 jumps away out of caldari and into gallente. I chased him down and destroyed a hulk, orca, and pod.
If high sec would have been split, he either would never have undocked during the dec, or he would possibly have made it across low sec, and i probably wouldn't have chased him down.
So there's an example of how the current design helps to increase high sec combat, force more market transactions, and drain some isk out of the economy..
Edit... the more people move around, the more potential for action there is in high sec. If you split the factions, there's bound to be less travel, thus less action. |
Rammix
TheMurk
84
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 03:14:00 -
[1018] - Quote
Matthew Charbonneaux wrote:If this happened, As long as at least one highsec route existed between allies (Amarr/Cald, Gal/Min), I could see it. Make it longer to get to, sure, but between allies, there is generally more security if known to be dangerous territory. This would impart two things, one make crossing to "hostile territory" more dangerous; and add some realism. No, it absolutely is not realism. There are no declared wars between factions, and there CAN'T be war zones between them. All systems of so called faction warfare are less needed systems where concord has less control - and concord has less control there because that systems are somewhat distant from central routes and play no sensible role in politics. Every system in the core of empire space was disputed long ago and what could be divided (because needed) between factions - was divided between them long time ago. So bordelines in the centre are NOT disputed, there is no conflict for them and there is NO reason to make factions start all-in wars again.
Matthew Charbonneaux wrote:Between traditional enemies (Cld/Gal, Min/Amarr) there should definitely be no mans lands. Answered to this nonsense, read above.
Mr Barbeque wrote:Destabilizing the markets is the point, as static gameplay is boring. Eve is a sandbox. CCP doesn't and shouldn't mess with it like "with god's hand", unless it is absolutely objectively needed. Eve universe should evolve on itself, with some impact from player actions in-game; relying on the basis it's built on.
In short, don't touch the basis when you can avoid it. OpenSUSE 12.2, wine 1.5 |
Rammix
TheMurk
84
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 03:23:00 -
[1019] - Quote
Zloco Crendraven wrote:It is not boosting pvp in lowsec. Ganking a freighter is not pvp. It is about hauling with JF being to easy just beacuse they can jump over lowsec. In turn ofc will aid to the cause of piracy which is a + effect. It is easy, but risky. And JFs cost much - means additional risk.
I would suggest another trick instead of forbidding jumps - I would forbid normal cynos closer than 30km near lowsec-highsec gates. It would be enough. Such range can't disrupt hotdrops for pvp, but effectively rises risks for JF. And if you can't prevent a JF from warping from station to gate - it is your problem but not a broken gameplay.
Red Teufel wrote:EvE should be more spread out then this anyways. Highsec should not be one giant cluster in the middle. Empires should be spread out a bit. FW should have an effect on highsec. Just changeable (by players) security status of 0.5 systems: 0.4-0.6 based on player activity and/or actions. Any change made by players must be temporary and it should take much less time for systems to return to their original state than it would take for players to change that state. In other words, if it takes 24 hours to change the SS, it should take only, say, 6 hours for the system to drop all changes. And it should be based on actions of all players, not just FW - because it's not about factions but about capsuleer impact on the universe. OpenSUSE 12.2, wine 1.5 |
Rammix
TheMurk
84
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 03:36:00 -
[1020] - Quote
Rammix wrote:forbid normal cynos closer than 30km near lowsec-highsec gates have to quote myself to make an offtopic BTW, ccp are going to introduce portable short-range cynos. Maybe I even guessed its range right. Of course if they allow it in lowsec (I think they should). OpenSUSE 12.2, wine 1.5 |
|
Obsidiana
White-Noise
221
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 04:17:00 -
[1021] - Quote
Lowsec is broken. This won't fix it. It just will mean more people in Caldari space... oh wait.... that already is how it is.
Fact is New Eden is a much smaller place if you go through lowsec. Those systems are gate camped, so most people don't use them.
I would like to see new mission hubs, with multiple good agents, surrounded by lowsec. The mission runners would have to sell loot for cheap (lowering ISK for them). Traders would love the opportunity to get below market priced items. Pirates would love the nice fat industrial ships. These constellations would be great places to sell items at a premium (be it player made T2 stuff or loot from a kill). |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
531
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 08:39:00 -
[1022] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:Mr Barbeque wrote:"Many people will rage quit." Fair point worth consideration. I believe for every account that rage unsubs because life just got harder would be replaced by people seeing those succeeding in a more tumultuous environment, and wishing in on that more dynamic experience. No stats, simply my opinion.
In my opinion it is more likely that CCP would bring in more subs if they made things in Eve safer. Would draw more of a crowd from other "safe" style MMOs, and provides a bigger crowd.
**** them. There are too many pussies in eve already. |
Gorr Shakor
Shakor Freight and Mining Service
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 08:48:00 -
[1023] - Quote
Zloco Crendraven wrote:Gorr Shakor wrote: What difference would that make? Right now you undock, wait out the few seconds timer and jump. As soon as we are not allowed to jump JFs FROM highsec, simply jump to LS, hold cloak while you wait out the session timer, drop gate cloak and jum p. The chance of getting caught is minuscule.
You obviously didn't read the post. The idea would be to forbid jumping in and out of lowsec also.
Right, I obviously did not. However, what you are saying is 'make JFs 0.0 only'. Following that logic, all jump capable ships should be 0.0 only. Is this what you are saying? |
Randy Wray
The humbleless Crew
61
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 15:54:00 -
[1024] - Quote
It might be a little late but, both as a trader and a pvper, I fully endorse this idea. It would vastly improve my game. Solo Pvper in all areas of space including wormhole space. Check out my youtube channel @-áhttp://www.youtube.com/channel/UCd6M3xV43Af-3E1ds0tTyew/feed for mostly small scale pvp in lowsec/nullsec |
Mr Barbeque
Mayhem and Ruin Point Blank Alliance
11
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 17:40:00 -
[1025] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:Actually, what you just used as an example is more of an example of a criminal travelling through high sec, than a trader travelling through low sec. In your example, Concord would be the attacking force, as they are the fuzz.
Yes it is closer to that in comparison, however my point was to show how trade does not require stability. All trade requires is incentive. Dangerous trade routes would mean some people may refuse to take said risk, resulting in more dynamic competition and more opportunities for those willing to accept the challenge.
Joe Risalo wrote:IMO I still strongly feel that doing this would not bring anyone to take risks, and would instead split players apart, thus seeing less player driven combat in high sec. I've actually done this myself. We war decced a target, and he moved 25 jumps away out of caldari and into gallente. I chased him down and destroyed a hulk, orca, and pod.
If high sec would have been split, he either would never have undocked during the dec, or he would possibly have made it across low sec, and i probably wouldn't have chased him down.
So there's an example of how the current design helps to increase high sec combat, force more market transactions, and drain some isk out of the economy..
Edit... the more people move around, the more potential for action there is in high sec. If you split the factions, there's bound to be less travel, thus less action. I'm sorry you wouldn't feel comfortable crossing lowsec to chase your target, but if you believe yourself superior to them (as you decced them i assume so) and they made it, why couldn't you?
Destabilization encourages diversification. Perhaps caldari space would be the most popular, market saturation and an over abundance of competition would result in less profit. Thus incentivizing the movement and diversification of players.
Joe Risalo wrote:In my opinion it is more likely that CCP would bring in more subs if they made things in Eve safer. Would draw more of a crowd from other "safe" style MMOs, and provides a bigger crowd. Those "safe" style mmo's are a dime a dozen, eve's HTFU and otherwise harsh environment has always been a theme that sets it apart. "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon Recruiting |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
538
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 20:57:00 -
[1026] - Quote
Mr Barbeque wrote:Joe Risalo wrote:Actually, what you just used as an example is more of an example of a criminal travelling through high sec, than a trader travelling through low sec. In your example, Concord would be the attacking force, as they are the fuzz.
Yes it is closer to that in comparison, however my point was to show how trade does not require stability. All trade requires is incentive. Dangerous trade routes would mean some people may refuse to take said risk, resulting in more dynamic competition and more opportunities for those willing to accept the challenge. Joe Risalo wrote:IMO I still strongly feel that doing this would not bring anyone to take risks, and would instead split players apart, thus seeing less player driven combat in high sec. I've actually done this myself. We war decced a target, and he moved 25 jumps away out of caldari and into gallente. I chased him down and destroyed a hulk, orca, and pod.
If high sec would have been split, he either would never have undocked during the dec, or he would possibly have made it across low sec, and i probably wouldn't have chased him down.
So there's an example of how the current design helps to increase high sec combat, force more market transactions, and drain some isk out of the economy..
Edit... the more people move around, the more potential for action there is in high sec. If you split the factions, there's bound to be less travel, thus less action. I'm sorry you wouldn't feel comfortable crossing lowsec to chase your target, but if you believe yourself superior to them (as you decced them i assume so) and they made it, why couldn't you? Destabilization encourages diversification. Perhaps caldari space would be the most popular, market saturation and an over abundance of competition would result in less profit. Thus incentivizing the movement and diversification of players. Joe Risalo wrote:In my opinion it is more likely that CCP would bring in more subs if they made things in Eve safer. Would draw more of a crowd from other "safe" style MMOs, and provides a bigger crowd. Those "safe" style mmo's are a dime a dozen, eve's HTFU and otherwise harsh environment has always been a theme that sets it apart. "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
I agree with everything you said, but that doesn't make the game better to a large portion of players.. I would say that, at best, players are split 50-50 on this.If not 50-50, then there are probably more people against this, as there is a huge number of high sec players, and even low-null-wh players with high sec alts.
P.S> The forums are a very small portion of the Eve crowd that is vocal, and is thus not a representation of how the majority feels. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
888
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 01:23:00 -
[1027] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote: P.S> The forums are a very small portion of the Eve crowd that is vocal, and is thus not a representation of how the majority feels.
Irrelevant, it is still a statistical sample that probably with how the population feels, unless you can actually prove forum users are somehow different than other players. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
1169
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 01:37:00 -
[1028] - Quote
Gorr Shakor wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote:Gorr Shakor wrote: What difference would that make? Right now you undock, wait out the few seconds timer and jump. As soon as we are not allowed to jump JFs FROM highsec, simply jump to LS, hold cloak while you wait out the session timer, drop gate cloak and jum p. The chance of getting caught is minuscule.
You obviously didn't read the post. The idea would be to forbid jumping in and out of lowsec also. Right, I obviously did not. However, what you are saying is 'make JFs 0.0 only'. Following that logic, all jump capable ships should be 0.0 only. Is this what you are saying?
That would be ********....
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
539
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 01:52:00 -
[1029] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Joe Risalo wrote: P.S> The forums are a very small portion of the Eve crowd that is vocal, and is thus not a representation of how the majority feels.
Irrelevant, it is still a statistical sample that probably with how the population feels, unless you can actually prove forum users are somehow different than other players.
From my experience, most forum posters are pvp and low/null bears. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
888
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 01:53:00 -
[1030] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote: From my experience, most forum posters are pvp and low/null bears.
Most players are pvp players. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Regina Gerze
The Trinity Conglomerate
1
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 01:56:00 -
[1031] - Quote
Honestly, this is an AWFUL idea, absolutely horrid and everyone will hate it if CCP goes with it...the same this happened in MechWarrior Online, stop crying for things then cry when you get them. Am I jaded, cynical, being an idiot or all three? xD |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
888
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 02:01:00 -
[1032] - Quote
Regina Gerze wrote:Honestly, this is an AWFUL idea, absolutely horrid and everyone will hate it if CCP goes with it...the same this happened in MechWarrior Online, stop crying for things then cry when you get them. Am I jaded, cynical, being an idiot or all three? xD what does this have to do with mechwarrior and who is crying https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Regina Gerze
The Trinity Conglomerate
1
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 02:06:00 -
[1033] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Regina Gerze wrote:Honestly, this is an AWFUL idea, absolutely horrid and everyone will hate it if CCP goes with it...the same this happened in MechWarrior Online, stop crying for things then cry when you get them. Am I jaded, cynical, being an idiot or all three? xD what does this have to do with mechwarrior and who is crying
Eh, I don't know...but it looks to be going the way of MechWarrior, the way of stupidity. You know what? I agree, but only if they add in a collectable animal or something I honestly need to take my medication so, night O-O |
Anomaly One
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
14
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 02:13:00 -
[1034] - Quote
Regina Gerze wrote:Commander Ted wrote:Regina Gerze wrote:Honestly, this is an AWFUL idea, absolutely horrid and everyone will hate it if CCP goes with it...the same this happened in MechWarrior Online, stop crying for things then cry when you get them. Am I jaded, cynical, being an idiot or all three? xD what does this have to do with mechwarrior and who is crying Eh, I don't know...but it looks to be going the way of MechWarrior, the way of stupidity. You know what? I agree, but only if they add in a collectable animal or something I honestly need to take my medication so, night O-O
wtf just happened |
Regina Gerze
The Trinity Conglomerate
1
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 02:18:00 -
[1035] - Quote
Anomaly One wrote:Regina Gerze wrote:Commander Ted wrote:Regina Gerze wrote:Honestly, this is an AWFUL idea, absolutely horrid and everyone will hate it if CCP goes with it...the same this happened in MechWarrior Online, stop crying for things then cry when you get them. Am I jaded, cynical, being an idiot or all three? xD what does this have to do with mechwarrior and who is crying Eh, I don't know...but it looks to be going the way of MechWarrior, the way of stupidity. You know what? I agree, but only if they add in a collectable animal or something I honestly need to take my medication so, night O-O wtf just happened
|
Matthias Thullmann
Dynatron Inc. The Volition Cult
12
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 03:05:00 -
[1036] - Quote
I should start a new thread "Separate the four empires space with nullsec". |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
539
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 03:12:00 -
[1037] - Quote
Matthias Thullmann wrote:I should start a new thread "Separate the four empires space with nullsec".
Maybe we should separate the nulls with high "It would create more dynamic gameplay" |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
889
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 03:34:00 -
[1038] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote: Maybe we should separate the nulls with high "It would create more dynamic gameplay"
Everything would be exactly the same for everyone. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
539
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 03:53:00 -
[1039] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Joe Risalo wrote: Maybe we should separate the nulls with high "It would create more dynamic gameplay"
Everything would be exactly the same for everyone.
Sure it would.... |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
1169
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 03:55:00 -
[1040] - Quote
Regina Gerze wrote:Anomaly One wrote:Regina Gerze wrote:Commander Ted wrote:Regina Gerze wrote:Honestly, this is an AWFUL idea, absolutely horrid and everyone will hate it if CCP goes with it...the same this happened in MechWarrior Online, stop crying for things then cry when you get them. Am I jaded, cynical, being an idiot or all three? xD what does this have to do with mechwarrior and who is crying Eh, I don't know...but it looks to be going the way of MechWarrior, the way of stupidity. You know what? I agree, but only if they add in a collectable animal or something I honestly need to take my medication so, night O-O wtf just happened
Look she wants a cat...and to pose with horses...btf out of me what just happened. Just pretend it didn't happen. These are not the droids you are looking for.... Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
|
Fey Ivory
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
103
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 06:55:00 -
[1041] - Quote
Commander Ted
though im not alien to the idea, i as i we mentioned in other threads, would more of like to see some kind of ability to temporailiy switch sysems to low, along the shipping lanes, maybe by pirates handing in pirate LP points or something, and it show on the star map that "system X" is under pirate attack and is now a 0.4 system with all its rules...
but if things get as you want Ted, and the four empires were to be separated with low, a few things would happen, first of all, there be a more direct trading hub in all four empires, wich is in a sense good... two those that can, will just set up jump clones and have their own base with ships in all four empires, and then they will just jump with clones between their bases and use each trade hub in each empire, what you look for wont happen, people that dont want to pvp wont pvp, its as simple as that, no matter what you do, they will find ways to avoid it, im sorry |
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS
426
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 08:40:00 -
[1042] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Gorr Shakor wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote:Gorr Shakor wrote: What difference would that make? Right now you undock, wait out the few seconds timer and jump. As soon as we are not allowed to jump JFs FROM highsec, simply jump to LS, hold cloak while you wait out the session timer, drop gate cloak and jum p. The chance of getting caught is minuscule.
You obviously didn't read the post. The idea would be to forbid jumping in and out of lowsec also. Right, I obviously did not. However, what you are saying is 'make JFs 0.0 only'. Following that logic, all jump capable ships should be 0.0 only. Is this what you are saying? That would be ********....
I am not saying that...i am saying only Jump freighters. Do you even read posts before shooting nonsense on forums.
BALEX is recruiting -----> tinyurl.com/oscmmlv |
boardin
Rockhounds Mining and Salvage Corporation
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 08:40:00 -
[1043] - Quote
Anomaly One wrote:Regina Gerze wrote:Commander Ted wrote:Regina Gerze wrote:Honestly, this is an AWFUL idea, absolutely horrid and everyone will hate it if CCP goes with it...the same this happened in MechWarrior Online, stop crying for things then cry when you get them. Am I jaded, cynical, being an idiot or all three? xD what does this have to do with mechwarrior and who is crying Eh, I don't know...but it looks to be going the way of MechWarrior, the way of stupidity. You know what? I agree, but only if they add in a collectable animal or something I honestly need to take my medication so, night O-O wtf just happened
LOL ... I needed to read this, thanks |
Gorr Shakor
Shakor Freight and Mining Service
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 16:27:00 -
[1044] - Quote
Zloco Crendraven wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Gorr Shakor wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote:Gorr Shakor wrote: What difference would that make? Right now you undock, wait out the few seconds timer and jump. As soon as we are not allowed to jump JFs FROM highsec, simply jump to LS, hold cloak while you wait out the session timer, drop gate cloak and jum p. The chance of getting caught is minuscule.
You obviously didn't read the post. The idea would be to forbid jumping in and out of lowsec also. Right, I obviously did not. However, what you are saying is 'make JFs 0.0 only'. Following that logic, all jump capable ships should be 0.0 only. Is this what you are saying? That would be ********.... I am not saying that...i am saying only Jump freighters. Do you even read posts before shooting nonsense on forums. Banning Jump Freighters from highsec/lowsec can have only one incentive - to make logistics harder. However, what would stop people to load-up industrials, chuck them into Carriers and jump them into lowsec instead? To maintain the objective, one would also have to ban carriers from lowsec. Or change their Ship Maintenance Bay to not be able to accommodate anything with a cargo bay large enough to (ab-)use this. And good luck with that..
It really seems to me that some people who do not have JFs at their disposal are trying to deny this to the rest as well. Not saying it's necessarily you, I am just getting that overall vibe.
Also, if you'd like, try to entertain the concept of NOT using subtle personal attacks against people whose opinion differs from yours. You'd be less likely to come across as a c-word.
I apologize for this slightly off-topic spin-off and to actually contribute to it, my opinion as a highsec dweller - yes, by all means, do it! |
Arya Regnar
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
296
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 19:29:00 -
[1045] - Quote
This thread still around? I still think this is stupid, if this ever happened I'd probably just get 4 of each ship that I use.
EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
890
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 20:18:00 -
[1046] - Quote
Arya Regnar wrote:This thread still around? I still think this is stupid, if this ever happened I'd probably just get 4 of each ship that I use.
Yea that is kind of the point, this only affects the people who want it to affect them. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Matthew Charbonneaux
Coalescent Dynamics
5
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 21:52:00 -
[1047] - Quote
Rammix wrote: There are no declared wars between factions, and there CAN'T be war zones between them. All systems of so called faction warfare are less needed systems where concord has less control - and concord has less control there because that systems are somewhat distant from central routes and play no sensible role in politics. Every system in the core of empire space was disputed long ago and what could be divided (because needed) between factions - was divided between them long time ago. So bordelines in the centre are NOT disputed, there is no conflict for them and there is NO reason to make factions start all-in wars again.
On your next log in, please watch the lovely intro video... might explain something of where I came from... Besides, the game evolves, they are already making changes where players will be taking traditionally empire controlled assets (POCO's?), whats not to say that they are stable with the other issues developing? Maybe look into the ongoing lore, not just the ancient history. |
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS type X
74
|
Posted - 2013.10.09 18:12:00 -
[1048] - Quote
Mr Barbeque wrote:Maldiro Selkurk wrote: With the entire high sec economy wanting to do business across this new low sec divide any reasonable number of paths between the new high sec islands will all be packed with gankers.
These 'gankers' you speak of aren't all blue to each other, and sharks eat each other. Are scouts out of the question? Prepare for the worst of course, but just assuming the worst is silly. Its like assuming you'll be suicided on every gate, every jump, every day. Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Mr Barbeque wrote: Freighters would not be forced into lowsec, nor does anyone expect them to be. They should not be flown there. There's a class for this called transport ships. Cloaky haulers can move your shinies, with reliable success. JF's can move large volume if you know how to cyno.
You want me to move an entire Charon full of ore through this new divide, parsing it into ships with tiny little holds, which under the best of circumstances means i make like 8-10 trips across this low sec space that im sure would be a multi-jump gate camp hell? Your understanding of the transportation of large volumes of product in high sec space in EVE is profoundly flawed. (JF = Jump Freighter) Smaller yes, such is the price you should pay for moving large quantities 'safely'. You assume much. Maldiro Selkurk wrote: You are using the current lowsec system model that is by-passed by high-sec transportation as an example of what it would be like when major commerce is using this new lowsec divide. Your ability to see the ramifications of your suggestion is both sad and laughable at the same time.
I am a supporter, not the OP. And yes, i do formulate my views on the information and experience i have collected. Are you arguing that all pirates, NBSI pilots, faction warfare pilots, and the walk-ons will all band together to sit on a gate? PL and razor will drop by to say, "Hi guys, that's a pretty gate your circle jerking on. Can we join?" My point is if you allow yourself to become a target, someone may very well act upon that. That goes for everyone, and a bunch of guys on a gate is a fun looking target for the well equipped. I still have yet to see a reasoned counter argument from you. However I do see evidence of a lack of fully reading things you quote. And I love personal attacks, means I must be doing something right. Edit: Tilly Delnero: thank you for being an adult, its very refreshing. I will put more time into digesting your post and writing a response when I have more to give.
1. What da f*** do i care if all the pirates arent blue to each other all i care about is what is going to happen when they see my charon without CONCORD protecting it.
2. A charon holds more than twice what the Rhea holds so to get from Rens to Amarr with my ore you want me to jump freighter that distance 4 times (twice for each half load), you have ZERO idea of the economics of high sec transport or about the low profit margins of highsec mining.
Also, if we're all going to be Jump Freighting our ass pass your new low sec gank fest what is the point of adding it?
3. You don't see a reasoned argument because having blinders on is much easier when you're being beaten in said argument. Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really. |
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS type X
74
|
Posted - 2013.10.09 18:38:00 -
[1049] - Quote
Mr Barbeque wrote:"Many people will rage quit." Fair point worth consideration. I believe for every account that rage unsubs because life just got harder would be replaced by people seeing those succeeding in a more tumultuous environment, and wishing in on that more dynamic experience. No stats, simply my opinion.
Trade does not require stable and safe routes. Many examples are present, one very apparent is today's black markets. ********* is illegal in the US, therefore does not have stable routes by which to come from. Shipments can be confiscated, "employees" arrested or otherwise removed from your workforce/distribution network, ect. Yet it is so readily available to any who seek it. Its increased difficulty to acquire bottlenecks supply, increasing the profit gained from supplying the unbalanced demand. Making it an attractive option to those willing to run the risk for that reward.
Destabilizing the markets is the point, as static gameplay is boring.
Again, using poor examples to support your idea.
Yes black markets exist everywhere and your example of im, guessing Mary Jane, is a perfect example of why this idea sucks. Easy to move a few hundred kilos of something into and around the U.S. but try and sneak a 2400km space ship across our border or move it from city to city without attacking attention...seriously did you even think before you posted this?
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really. |
Mr Barbeque
Mayhem and Ruin Point Blank Alliance
11
|
Posted - 2013.10.11 17:32:00 -
[1050] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote: 1. What da f*** do i care if all the pirates arent blue to each other all i care about is what is going to happen when they see my charon without CONCORD protecting it.
2. A charon holds more than twice what the Rhea holds so to get from Rens to Amarr with my ore you want me to jump freighter that distance 4 times (twice for each half load), you have ZERO idea of the economics of high sec transport or about the low profit margins of highsec mining.
Also, if we're all going to be Jump Freighting our ass pass your new low sec gank fest what is the point of adding it?
3. You don't see a reasoned argument because having blinders on is much easier when you're being beaten in said argument.
1. The point is to illustrate how these gates wouldn't be perma-camped. Your response is it wont make your freighter safe. Yes, you undocked, you are no longer safe.
2. Thats your choice of investment. You would still be able to compete locally, saving those JF trips for what would be worth it. What is it that forces you to freight that cargo across empires? Could it be your choice of where to aquire these goods? Your choice of what goods to invest in?
2.5 The proposition isn't about ganking freighters.
3. Show how you've trumped the supporting arguments in any way shape or form.
Maldiro Selkurk wrote: Again, using poor examples to support your idea.
Yes black markets exist everywhere and your example of im, guessing Mary Jane, is a perfect example of why this idea sucks. Easy to move a few hundred kilos of something into and around the U.S. but try and sneak a 2400km space ship across our border or move it from city to city without attracting attention...seriously did you even think before you posted this?
You attempt to argue against me by using the example of a space ship in the context of real life. Then proceed to attack me personally for poorly thinking. Sounds like projection. What makes it a bad example of how trade does not need stability to exist?
Maldiro Selkurk wrote: I mine ore and run the same missions everyday, it is basically static. I cannot speak for all highsec players but there are definitely a significant amount of us that basically do the same thing every game day.
You find it boring, I find it peaceful. If you want excitement and volatility probably more than 1/2 of all game playing space is just that, go to Null, True or WH space and have at it.
What would stop you from continuing to mine or run missions?
Personal attacks just damage your credibility. They are also delicious. If you have a counter argument reasoned out I would be happy to see it presented. Recruiting |
|
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
89
|
Posted - 2013.10.11 19:45:00 -
[1051] - Quote
Wooo this topic is still around! This still needs to happen!!!!! |
KanashiiKami
105
|
Posted - 2013.10.11 22:18:00 -
[1052] - Quote
if CCP do seriously consider this, i will suggest the below :
1) instead of the suggested hard core low sec boundary around every empire, introduce a new type of space --> 0.4 space is now known as neutral space.
2) in 0.4 ... both lowsec and high sec mechanics are in place. there is a secondary concord police call the mercenary concord and there is also random pirates.
3) merc concord reaction time in 0.4 carries a delayed reaction time of additional 15 seconds but the armada that turns up will only consist of ECM frigates. they are destroyable ships.
4) CCP introduces a new type of player structure. a mercenary concord battlestation (MCB) with finite HP (player destroyable). the MCB defense mechanics is the same as a POS, but MCB consumables do not require player intervention. it only functions to dispatch more merc concord ships based on concord rules of engagement (and these MCB will dispatch ships that carry heavy firepower, not like ECM frigs)
5) every addition/anchoring of these MCB will impose a merc concord NPC tax on the anchoring corp. maybe a daily tax charge of 5m isk per MCB set to auto deduct from corp wallet. due to this variation, mercenary concord will also react faster to anchor corp members under "distress".
6) MCB structures are usable in 0.4sec (so now 0.4 may see a whole new type of game play). logistics "business" alliances will need to secure a route lined with MCBs, player pirate group will seek to destroy these annoying things in 0.4. and for these things to play out flexibly, CCP will need to create a rather large boundary of 0.4sec.
7) in any 0.4 sec, a MCB can be anchored (and up to 2 per gate) 100-120km off the gate.
8) MCB structure and ships can be targetted and destroyed. a MCB station can spawn a finite number of merc concord ships per minute, and there is a maximum limit of 10 additional merc concord ship spawned per system per MCB anchored.
9) MCB can be upgraded by anchoring shield resist mods and other mods (limited by PG/CPU)
10) instead of completely destroying a MCB. MCB can be taken over, by unloading 20000 units of marines into the MCB when it is vunerable during a 30 second window of it coming out of reinforce mode. this is a idea borrowed from HQ TCRC (incursions). now i think this is a good idea, CCP may extend this idea into normal POS, but maybe inject 50000 marines instead, or even 1440 exotic dancers to render it un-usable for the next 24 hours! LOL !
11) to bring things further, maybe this method of implementing MCB can be expanded into the entire universe and not just 0.4sec. and maybe the MCB can become an auxilliary anchor object next to your own POS?
of cos .... i must be very bored to be thinking up the above .... plz do comment WUT ??? |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
893
|
Posted - 2013.10.14 14:36:00 -
[1053] - Quote
ye https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Aesheera
Blacklight Recon Strictly Unprofessional
447
|
Posted - 2013.10.14 15:36:00 -
[1054] - Quote
Common Arguments:
This would make everyone just live in Jita!
If all hisec players lived in Jita then who would do amarr missions and mine amarr ice/ore? Not everything can be found in one empire making it nessecary that players spread themselves out evenly.
**Don't they already?
Every system will be like Rancer
Rancer is Rancer because it is impossible to go around it. Their is only 1 link that connects Minmatar and Caldari space, only one. If new regions are added like I prescribe then it will always be easy to circumvent these camps with a little know how.
** You CAN get around it, it's just a truckload more jumps.
This interrupts my playstyle!
Do you really need to do Damsel in Distress once for every faction? Is it really that big a deal if you now need to sell your products locally instead of at one super hub as an industrialist?
** Only truly bad indies sell it all in Jita. Those that pay attention to their goods and their respective values ALREADY park their wares all over New Eden.
It is impossible to cross low sec safely and it disrupts traders gameplay!
On the contrary, empire to empire wormholes that can fit freighters and cloaking haulers are available to traders. Volumes of items being moved to make prices more homogenous will be reduced meaning greater profits will be made each trip making the use of these methods more profitable.
** Such wormholes are few and far between. The opposite will occur: pirates will all get their sec up to be able to get to highsec and just buy there stuff their directly. Lowsec markets will be even worse than they are now.
It doesnt make sense lore wise!
WRONG. Borders between enemy nations do not have to be safe and are often not. Security status is not determined by the presence of the empires military but concord's ability to secure those areas. 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. The borders between allied empires could be also insecure, since they may be frontier areas since this idea comes with adding new regions that disrupt gate travel, these areas would be a frontier, thus not very well secured.
** Empire gates already aren't safe perse. Plenty of freighters get suicide ganked as is. Miners get ganked plenty as is. Plenty of wars to disrupt empire 'safety'. Also, borders are protected. The people - in EVE's case the players - make it unsafe. It's already that way.
Gate camps aren't fun or pvp!
While mostly true the fact that gate camps exist will provide opportunities for pirates to make money actually pirating. More importantly the fact that a gate camp is there means that someone will want to come and break it up, encouraging fleet pvp off stations encouraging more fun.
** As you mentioned before: JF's will be used to directly hop into lowsec - if they would to begin with. As far as making ISK from pirating goes: gatecamping isn't necessarily profitable. 15 people on a gate, 1 bill isk, split 15 ways. Yay. Also, with numerously more entries, it will be alot easier to detect where camps are, they'll be spread even more thin and creative people will avoid these systems easier than they do now.
I'm not trying to beat you down for being creative, but i don't think this will be a solution, this will only be frustrating. And not just for carebears - for pirates as well. Primary since '07. GÖŅ
If It Bleeds, Kill It - II |
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS type X
78
|
Posted - 2013.10.14 18:15:00 -
[1055] - Quote
Mr Barbeque wrote:1. The point is to illustrate how these gates wouldn't be perma-camped. Your response is it wont make your freighter safe. Yes, you undocked, you are no longer safe. 2. Thats your choice of investment. You would still be able to compete locally, saving those JF trips for what would be worth it. What is it that forces you to freight that cargo across empires? Could it be your choice of where to aquire these goods? Your choice of what goods to invest in? 2.5 The proposition isn't about ganking freighters. 3. Show how you've trumped the supporting arguments in any way shape or form. 4.You attempt to argue against me by using the example of a space ship in the context of real life. Then proceed to attack me personally for poorly thinking. Sounds like projection. What makes it a bad example of how trade does not need stability to exist? 5. mr barbeque wrote:Destabilizing the markets is the point, as static gameplay is boring Maldiro Selkurk wrote: I mine ore and run the same missions everyday, it is basically static. I cannot speak for all highsec players but there are definitely a significant amount of us that basically do the same thing every game day.
You find it boring, I find it peaceful. If you want excitement and volatility probably more than 1/2 of all game playing space is just that, go to Null, True or WH space and have at it.
What would stop you from continuing to mine or run missions? 6. Personal attacks just damage your credibility. They are also delicious. If you have a counter argument reasoned out I would be happy to see it presented.
1. Stating that some pirates will be fighting each other over gate camp spots hardly qualifies as refuting that they will be perma-camped. Seeing as the pirates are fighting over them means that the gates are so valuable as camping places that intelligent pirates will be killing each other so they can feed on high sec commerce 23/7.
2. Why should my high sec activities and profits be nerfed into the ground just to make yours better?
2.5 If you don't realize this proposal definitely concerns freighters then i can only say that clearly your lobotomy was an absolute and unbridled success!
3. My arguments are better than yours that is just a fact, your inability to see that not withstanding.
4. You said that black markets exist and gave an example that mary jane gets smuggled into and around the U.S. all the time. Basically you are saying that since it is easy to smuggle a kilo of mary jane around the U.S. it would be easy for commerce to smuggle goods through the new gate camp infested low sec hell that this proposal would create. I said as a counter example that smuggling a 2km long spaceship around the U.S. surely would not go unnoticed and likewise major commerce going through your gate camp hell wont go unnoticed either.
5. Your argument was, "Destabilizing the markets is the point, as static gameplay is boring". I stated that what is boring to you is peaceful to me and others that live in highsec space. I personally would find endless blasting each other into bite sized pieces boring but i'm not calling for the end to piracy or any other pvp activity simply because i would find it boring. I only state that given that a majority of EVE space already is a pvp paradise that no further EVE space be given to it and more importantly that highsec no be busted into four parts by this new pvp space you desire.
5.1 Where do i state that i will stop running missions or mining? (I don't blame you for refuting arguments I never made, I know for a fact it is a much easier task than refuting the ones I actually make).
6. You state, "Personal attacks just damage your credibility. They are also delicious."
I at least have credibility to destroy, your arguments have none.
7. You said, "If you have a counter argument reasoned out I would be happy to see it presented".
Consider them so presented.
Looking forward to your next post ending with this exact same statement as it seems you end all our discourse with it. It is a lame attempt at APPEARING ahead in an argument you clearly lost three posts ago.
p.s. I will impose upon you to enlighten me about an area which i must admit total ignorance. It is clear you have spent countless years mastering this particular area of expertise so if you would be so kind as to answer this simple question.
How does it feel to lose every argument you get into? Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really. |
KanashiiKami
105
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 06:21:00 -
[1056] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:Matthias Thullmann wrote:I should start a new thread "Separate the four empires space with nullsec". Maybe we should separate the nulls with high "It would create more dynamic gameplay"
HAHAHA ! YES !!!
and for aprils fools joke ... jita is surrounded by lowsec?
actually the idea null is webbed by hisec is great. but i would ... use the neutral sec thingy ... the neutral sec perforates every space system, neutral sec is the only real "highway" to all of eve WUT ??? |
Anthar Thebess
REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN
144
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 07:40:00 -
[1057] - Quote
Up Up you go +1 |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
594
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 15:21:00 -
[1058] - Quote
damn... and I thought this thread was dead... stupid alt bumping |
Vox Zevin
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 02:30:00 -
[1059] - Quote
This is my first post on the Forums ever, My apologies If it isn't appropriate to post here i see it's a bit of a old topic. I am a care-bear , I have been since i started eve in 2011, I mostly play alone and don't have the personal time to devote to Big corps and hardcore pvp, Mad respect to people who do, I think it's really cool. That out of the way, Eve needs this, or something like it. I'm not entirely risk adverse, but why would i travel through low sec now?? I'm not a masochist.. Being forced to travel through low-sec though is entirely different and everyone would be in the same boat, I say bring it on. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
615
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 03:33:00 -
[1060] - Quote
Vox Zevin wrote:This is my first post on the Forums ever, My apologies If it isn't appropriate to post here i see it's a bit of a old topic. I am a care-bear , I have been since i started eve in 2011, I mostly play alone and don't have the personal time to devote to Big corps and hardcore pvp, Mad respect to people who do, I think it's really cool. That out of the way, Eve needs this, or something like it. I'm not entirely risk adverse, but why would i travel through low sec now?? I'm not a masochist.. Being forced to travel through low-sec though is entirely different and everyone would be in the same boat, I say bring it on.
Alright, who's alt bumping..... |
|
Anomaly One
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
10
|
Posted - 2013.11.12 04:27:00 -
[1061] - Quote
still think this is a good idea
|
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
645
|
Posted - 2013.11.12 05:00:00 -
[1062] - Quote
Apparently not, or the select very few wouldn't have to keep bumping the thread.... (Still not convinced they're not all the same person)
|
Jacque Custeau
Knights of the Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2013.11.12 05:03:00 -
[1063] - Quote
I started playing in 2003, and this is exactly how empires were separated. What we have now is the latest edition of the 'highway' CCP put in place because people complained about travel times (we have warp to zero now, we didn't back then). I for one, thought it was neat. I had to go through Amamake and Sisiede to buy blueprints from Gallente space, and I remember it being a nice roadtrip. It also allows markets to be more localized, instead of one super hub like Jita.
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
901
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 15:52:00 -
[1064] - Quote
Jacque Custeau wrote:I started playing in 2003, and this is exactly how empires were separated. What we have now is the latest edition of the 'highway' CCP put in place because people complained about travel times (we have warp to zero now, we didn't back then). I for one, thought it was neat. I had to go through Amamake and Sisiede to buy blueprints from Gallente space, and I remember it being a nice roadtrip. It also allows markets to be more localized, instead of one super hub like Jita.
Exactly https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Powers Sa
731
|
Posted - 2013.11.15 15:43:00 -
[1065] - Quote
I like how this thread is 64 pages long. lol |
Fatima Kara-Khanid
0
|
Posted - 2013.11.15 17:22:00 -
[1066] - Quote
I would agree with low and even null bordering the enemy empires, but having low sec separating caldari and amarr for example has no reason. Minmatar and Ammatar should have, but not Amarr and Ammatar.
But all of this would make no sense at all if the present state of crime, penalties and concord action remains the lazy work it is.
The sense a true section of the empire alliances would work for its possible reasons only if such empires had engaged in full war. If there is trade from NPC corporations among empires, enemy corps operating in enemy space (like pend in amarr space), there is no reason to have such thing aswell.
Empires grudges (cant be called war) is something very little loved by CCP it seems. Things in that front had not change from a long time, and it seems not likely that they will change soon.
But again, with the kind of players that dominates the online time of hisec, there is no reason to look into this matters aswell. Concept Warfare: Argument made by changing the concept the words used actually refeer to. Often used with: Stick Figure Argument - Red Herring - Ad Hominen - Reductio ad Absurdum |
Kaerakh
Obscure Joke Implied Kiki's Delivery Service.
21
|
Posted - 2013.11.15 17:33:00 -
[1067] - Quote
Fatima Kara-Khanid wrote:I would agree with low and even null bordering the enemy empires, but having low sec separating caldari and amarr for example has no reason. Minmatar and Ammatar should have, but not Amarr and Ammatar.
But all of this would make no sense at all if the present state of crime, penalties and concord action remains the lazy work it is.
The sense a true section of the empire alliances would work for its possible reasons only if such empires had engaged in full war. If there is trade from NPC corporations among empires, enemy corps operating in enemy space (like pend in amarr space), there is no reason to have such thing aswell.
Empires grudges (cant be called war) is something very little loved by CCP it seems. Things in that front had not change from a long time, and it seems not likely that they will change soon.
But again, with the kind of players that dominates the online time of hisec, there is no reason to look into this matters aswell.
Reason, this person has some. |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
1848
|
Posted - 2013.11.18 20:46:00 -
[1068] - Quote
This should happen. It could be implemented with FW events which would gradually change the controlled territories and maybe even destroy some star gates. Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
Anomaly One
38
|
Posted - 2013.11.19 00:39:00 -
[1069] - Quote
^great one
This change alone would bring so much into EVE please CCP consider this! it will NOT affect a carebears life since they mainly stay in the same system/region, think of the possibilties ! *~~*running my own mission and have some class bully run up and blow me up because they think its funny, then give the excuses that I was just firing fireworks at you*~~* |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1041
|
Posted - 2014.02.02 16:38:00 -
[1070] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:Apparently not, or the select very few wouldn't have to keep bumping the thread.... (Still not convinced they're not all the same person)
I have 188 characters to like this thread. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1041
|
Posted - 2014.02.02 16:39:00 -
[1071] - Quote
Fatima Kara-Khanid wrote:I would agree with low and even null bordering the enemy empires, but having low sec separating caldari and amarr for example has no reason. Minmatar and Ammatar should have, but not Amarr and Ammatar.
But all of this would make no sense at all if the present state of crime, penalties and concord action remains the lazy work it is.
The sense a true section of the empire alliances would work for its possible reasons only if such empires had engaged in full war. If there is trade from NPC corporations among empires, enemy corps operating in enemy space (like pend in amarr space), there is no reason to have such thing aswell.
Empires grudges (cant be called war) is something very little loved by CCP it seems. Things in that front had not change from a long time, and it seems not likely that they will change soon.
But again, with the kind of players that dominates the online time of hisec, there is no reason to look into this matters aswell.
Lore should never guide gameplay, especially when you can pull new lore straight out of you're ass and people would accept it. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Seranova Farreach
Biomass Negative
634
|
Posted - 2014.02.02 16:46:00 -
[1072] - Quote
this shouldnt happen.
low/null are already rather unpopulated except for the choak points and stating areas.. all you would be doign is creating more choak points and more low/nulls which wouldnt get attention _______________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1041
|
Posted - 2014.02.02 16:47:00 -
[1073] - Quote
Seranova Farreach wrote:this shouldnt happen.
low/null are already rather unpopulated except for the choak points and stating areas.. all you would be doign is creating more choak points and more low/nulls which wouldnt get attention
Unless you added lots of systems, so there wouldn't be any choke points, and every system added would touch an alternate route. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Cael Autumn
Daktaklakpak. Red Coat Conspiracy
31
|
Posted - 2014.02.02 17:01:00 -
[1074] - Quote
I can get on board with this, with a few stipulations:
There needs to be tax on racial goods for empire stations. Pirate goods should be taxed more heavily in empire than lowsec. Hybrids should be taxed more heavily in Amarr/Rens than in Gallente/Caldari space. Shield tank modules should be taxed in amarr/gallente space; AND racial stations should give production bonuses to their racial mods, so it's cheaper to produce gallente things in gallente space, and caldari things in caldari space.
I would like there to be incentive for the minor hubs to be better than Jita for non-caldari items; but the players won't do that on their own.
I'd like a universe where you want to go buy a ship, you have to ask "which hub do I go to to get it cheapest" instead of "oh, I'm going to jita..."
---
Second, there should be ONE highsec route around the 4 empires, but it should be the absolute longest way imaginable. All trade hubs should be at least 20 jumps from each other through highsec.
There should be ONE, ridiculously short, optimal route, which links each hub together within ~7 jumps, 3 of which are lowsec. There should be TWO alternative routes, which makes the trek from hub to hub about 10 jumps, which has 2 distinct lowsec jumps. There should be TWO additional alternative routes, which makes the trek about 13-15 jumps, and has only 1 lowsec jump.
The ability to chose an alternate route and the unlikelyhood of all 5 routes being camped would give players incentive to use these routes. Not with freighters, mind you, but maybe battleships, cruisers, things they don't want to burn 20+ jumps in to buy a module 10-15% cheaper. |
Anomaly One
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
262
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 07:13:00 -
[1075] - Quote
This needs to happen. Never forget. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8sfaN8zT8E http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5l_ZjVyRxx4 Trust me, I'm an Anomaly. DUST 514 FOR PC |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1255
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 08:43:00 -
[1076] - Quote
Jacque Custeau wrote:I started playing in 2003, and this is exactly how empires were separated. What we have now is the latest edition of the 'highway' CCP put in place because people complained about travel times (we have warp to zero now, we didn't back then). I for one, thought it was neat. I had to go through Amamake and Sisiede to buy blueprints from Gallente space, and I remember it being a nice roadtrip. It also allows markets to be more localized, instead of one super hub like Jita.
yes, but nowadays eve population is 4 times larger... no way to have that traffic only trough single lines on low sec. The whoel network would need to be revamped to have at LEAST 3 routes always... "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1255
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 08:45:00 -
[1077] - Quote
Cael Autumn wrote:I can get on board with this, with a few stipulations:
There needs to be tax on racial goods for empire stations. Pirate goods should be taxed more heavily in empire than lowsec. Hybrids should be taxed more heavily in Amarr/Rens than in Gallente/Caldari space. Shield tank modules should be taxed in amarr/gallente space; AND racial stations should give production bonuses to their racial mods, so it's cheaper to produce gallente things in gallente space, and caldari things in caldari space.
I would like there to be incentive for the minor hubs to be better than Jita for non-caldari items; but the players won't do that on their own.
I'd like a universe where you want to go buy a ship, you have to ask "which hub do I go to to get it cheapest" instead of "oh, I'm going to jita..."
---
Second, there should be ONE highsec route around the 4 empires, but it should be the absolute longest way imaginable. All trade hubs should be at least 20 jumps from each other through highsec.
There should be ONE, ridiculously short, optimal route, which links each hub together within ~7 jumps, 3 of which are lowsec. There should be TWO alternative routes, which makes the trek from hub to hub about 10 jumps, which has 2 distinct lowsec jumps. There should be TWO additional alternative routes, which makes the trek about 13-15 jumps, and has only 1 lowsec jump.
The ability to chose an alternate route and the unlikelyhood of all 5 routes being camped would give players incentive to use these routes. Not with freighters, mind you, but maybe battleships, cruisers, things they don't want to burn 20+ jumps in to buy a module 10-15% cheaper.
High sec currently already have groups that can ALONE camo that many routes if they are moved to live in low sec. I am pretty sure combined with low sec curretn dwellers, if there was sure traffic.. all these routes would be camped... "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1428
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 11:12:00 -
[1078] - Quote
Make this so CCP. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Anthar Thebess
REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN
348
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 12:20:00 -
[1079] - Quote
Like it. -=Reopening old corporations=- Do you have old and closed corporation and like to reopen it? Like this topic and keep it on the top by posting. |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1263
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 15:40:00 -
[1080] - Quote
I think.. another way .. but less enforceful woudl be.
Add a TAX based on the ship mass to jump between regions.. except when in low sec... suddenly there is a reason to try to do it.
As long as the tax is enough. "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
|
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
387
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 17:04:00 -
[1081] - Quote
Necro threaded yet again. Just when you think you have seen the last of it. Ah well, at least its not so bad as trying to put suspect flags on people just for warpijg on grid with you. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
516
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 18:59:00 -
[1082] - Quote
I still very much support this idea. I strongly believe that long hisec routes between regions combined with short "smuggler" routes will be good for the eve economy and increase the number of meaningful choices available to all pilots.
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Z'zauoe Euopaeqorua
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
6
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 12:52:00 -
[1083] - Quote
I support this idea. |
Veronica Felix
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
12
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 13:37:00 -
[1084] - Quote
Make it happen. |
Lugalbandak
Anunnaku Warfare Corp.
457
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 13:49:00 -
[1085] - Quote
+1 The police horse is the only animal in the world that haz his male genitals on his back |
John Holt
Apollo Technologies Inc
29
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 15:15:00 -
[1086] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Ordellus wrote:Commander Ted wrote: Sounds like extremely boring emergent gameplay. Actually LOL'd there. By "emergent gameplay" do you mean a bunch of prepared war vessels trapping and killing a respectively helpless ship? I'd rather keep the high sec where it is. Yea, it is emergent gameplay. Do you know what that even means? Also I have yet to see any good reasons why Hi-sec needs to be kept the way it is.
The reason high sec needs to be kept the way it is...You will lose the majority of your player base if you radically change it. Done my time in null sec, now I'm just a Privateer wandering around High and Low Sec.
|
Sylveria Relden
Spartan Shipyards THE H0NEYBADGER
12
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 15:59:00 -
[1087] - Quote
I've thought of this question many, many, many times after reading the usual "nerf hisec" threads- and pondered it on occasion to try "play the tape all the way through" to get a visual on what it would look like.
Structure and order is usually set in place to keep "anarchy and chaos" from ruling everything. I personally do not have a preference either way (in traditional RPG sense, I'm one of those neutral sort of players who believes in balance in everything) but I can see why extremes on either side would cause problems. I do agree that neither complete chaos nor complete order have a place in the EVE Universe.
I don't know if his has been suggested as an alternative- but perhaps we could consider something to the effect of things like Gate Guns having "technical difficulties" randomly- defense systems going out at random points, etc. Not just in hisec- but everywhere.
That would make the game in general much more interesting. Can you imagine losing SOV randomly and having to field troops to defend? Or high traffic areas like Jita/Dixie/Hek and so forth randomly losing defensive power and pirates being able to attack without CONCORD assistance? It wouldn't be too hard to justify something like EMP interference from GRB's in order to facilitate it. You must be THIS tall to use the "I WIN" button. |
Angelo Schilling
Interstellar Protections Incorporated Clandestine.
1
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 17:17:00 -
[1088] - Quote
I find this idea mesmerizingly attractive. +1 |
Angelo Schilling
Interstellar Protections Incorporated Clandestine.
1
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 17:20:00 -
[1089] - Quote
Sylveria Relden wrote:I've thought of this question many, many, many times after reading the usual "nerf hisec" threads- and pondered it on occasion to try "play the tape all the way through" to get a visual on what it would look like.
Structure and order is usually set in place to keep "anarchy and chaos" from ruling everything. I personally do not have a preference either way (in traditional RPG sense, I'm one of those neutral sort of players who believes in balance in everything) but I can see why extremes on either side would cause problems. I do agree that neither complete chaos nor complete order have a place in the EVE Universe.
I don't know if his has been suggested as an alternative- but perhaps we could consider something to the effect of things like Gate Guns having "technical difficulties" randomly- defense systems going out at random points, etc. Not just in hisec- but everywhere.
That would make the game in general much more interesting. Can you imagine losing SOV randomly and having to field troops to defend? Or high traffic areas like Jita/Dixie/Hek and so forth randomly losing defensive power and pirates being able to attack without CONCORD assistance? It wouldn't be too hard to justify something like EMP interference from GRB's in order to facilitate it.
Problem here is that CCP (rightfully) doesn't want to take that much "control" away from players. "Random" events like that could be interesting if they were so few and far between as to be interesting aberrations, but using them to drive conflict is a bad idea. |
Mario Putzo
Welping and Dunking.
250
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 18:51:00 -
[1090] - Quote
This idea is good for the game! |
|
Eran Mintor
Esoteric Philosophy
357
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 19:05:00 -
[1091] - Quote
As a trader/industrialist, I support this |
ashley Eoner
274
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 21:50:00 -
[1092] - Quote
Sylveria Relden wrote:I've thought of this question many, many, many times after reading the usual "nerf hisec" threads- and pondered it on occasion to try "play the tape all the way through" to get a visual on what it would look like.
Structure and order is usually set in place to keep "anarchy and chaos" from ruling everything. I personally do not have a preference either way (in traditional RPG sense, I'm one of those neutral sort of players who believes in balance in everything) but I can see why extremes on either side would cause problems. I do agree that neither complete chaos nor complete order have a place in the EVE Universe.
I don't know if his has been suggested as an alternative- but perhaps we could consider something to the effect of things like Gate Guns having "technical difficulties" randomly- defense systems going out at random points, etc. Not just in hisec- but everywhere.
That would make the game in general much more interesting. Can you imagine losing SOV randomly and having to field troops to defend? Or high traffic areas like Jita/Dixie/Hek and so forth randomly losing defensive power and pirates being able to attack without CONCORD assistance? It wouldn't be too hard to justify something like EMP interference from GRB's in order to facilitate it. Why stop there? Why not have the same RNG randomly kill of people every day due to "pod life support failure". That would make the game much more interesting .
Why not have ships randomly explode because of power systems failure? Why not make ships cost money to maintain and if you skimp it explodes even more!!
That'd make eve so interesting!! |
xRyokenx
Boris Johnson's Love Children Awakened.
335
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 22:22:00 -
[1093] - Quote
+1 xRyokenxFatal Ascension Rental Manager |
Marie Trudeau
Trudeau Industrie SA
11
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 13:29:00 -
[1094] - Quote
Quote:This would make everyone just live in Jita!
If all hisec players lived in Jita then who would do amarr missions and mine amarr ice/ore? Not everything can be found in one empire making it nessecary that players spread themselves out evenly.
Not everyone, of course, no, but the concentration of players in Caldari space would greatly increase -- players would not be evenly spread, or even close. You'd have some players mining ice or what have you and using JFs to get them to the big market, but otherwise most people would be running missions in Caldari space and using the big, deep market there to make money -- as is the case today. This would amplify the concentration, not diminish it.
As I said in the other thread, I don't care much about this proposal one way or the other, other than I think it will increase concentration in the Forge -- which, if the servers can handle it, isn't really a big deal anyway. I don't think the number of targets for lowsec hunters would go up much more than marginally, and a lot of the other three empires would be even less populated than they are now. Not really a big deal, though, I think, because things are already fairly concentrated as they are. |
Gimme more Cynos
Du nervst geh sterben
134
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 18:28:00 -
[1095] - Quote
Oh, the "Gimme more easy targets for my lolsec camp so I can feel like a leet PvP'er"-Suggestion is still arround.
Bad weeds grow tall it seems. |
Z'zauoe Euopaeqorua
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
18
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 18:52:00 -
[1096] - Quote
Gimme more Cynos wrote:Oh, the "Gimme more easy targets for my lolsec camp so I can feel like a leet PvP'er"-Suggestion is still arround.
Bad weeds grow tall it seems. Seriously what part of having four continent of highsec instead of one large continent of highsec you guys do not understand?
There are highsec pockets out there and yes, there are mission runners inside them and they are happy.
Just break the empire space into four continents! It would not harm mission runners at all. |
H2O Hairey
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
23
|
Posted - 2014.02.10 09:39:00 -
[1097] - Quote
Might be a great idea that could move EVE forwards, but it needs a lot of good people think this through.
Thoughts that came to me when i read this; -Make FW fight for a couple of systems around the borderlines of the four empire (30-40 systems) The "owner" can lower it's sec-status (with a max of "50+"% of those 30-40 systems) r(est of FW remains). -Possible to make new (smaller) jumpgates (between those 30-40 systems) that can be destroyed and be defended. -Make the systems that are most heavy fought for, pay out the highest lp. -Valkyrie and Dust could be nicely implemented in to these areas.
-And a lot more content can be put in to this, further expanding the idea of eve as a big sandbox . (ccp does need to create more brilliance in to this game, instead of balancing things out (kind of boring)) http://heavysteel-inc.blogspot.nl/ |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
520
|
Posted - 2014.02.10 09:52:00 -
[1098] - Quote
Marie Trudeau wrote:Quote:This would make everyone just live in Jita!
If all hisec players lived in Jita then who would do amarr missions and mine amarr ice/ore? Not everything can be found in one empire making it nessecary that players spread themselves out evenly. Not everyone, of course, no, but the concentration of players in Caldari space would greatly increase -- players would not be evenly spread, or even close. You'd have some players mining ice or what have you and using JFs to get them to the big market, but otherwise most people would be running missions in Caldari space and using the big, deep market there to make money -- as is the case today. This would amplify the concentration, not diminish it. As I said in the other thread, I don't care much about this proposal one way or the other, other than I think it will increase concentration in the Forge -- which, if the servers can handle it, isn't really a big deal anyway. I don't think the number of targets for lowsec hunters would go up much more than marginally, and a lot of the other three empires would be even less populated than they are now. Not really a big deal, though, I think, because things are already fairly concentrated as they are.
This is a thoughtful post, which shows a good deal of insight and I want to reply to it thoughtfully.
The existing pressure on Jita must have come about in part I think due to the traditional favouring of caldari ships in PVE. Caldari Navy Invulnerability fields, ballistic control systems and missiles have always been in high demand so it made sense for many people to mision for caldari close to a convenient market for these goods. This is of course how all trade hubs emerge, even in the real world.
It is not so true today that caldari ships are far and away the best ships for pve and it seems reasonable to me that demand pressure for them and their fittings must have eased a little.
But your post hints at something else. Caldari Navy goods are still largely the best available from a navy store, certainly for shield fitted ships. The Amarr navy also has desirable items, such as invulnerability fields and armour repairers but these do not confer anywhere near the advantage of the CNIF.
Gallente and Minmatar (fitting) gear is lacklustre in comparison, and it is no surprise that their trade hubs are less populated and liquid.
Separating trade areas would actually in my view, give a more clear picture of which faction's gear was more desirable since as you rightly point out, trade would gravitate to convenient hubs near the good loot.
This is actually a good thing from a game design perspective since it gives good and clear information as to which faction's loot is under-performing and should therefore arguably be redesigned.
With this in mind, I now support the idea of separation even more. I still believe there should be long hisec routes between faction areas but the quick routes should be lowsec, or for the very quickest even nullsec.
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
647
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 00:06:00 -
[1099] - Quote
CCP have clearly stated there will be new space to explore/make home. No point critically disrupting existing areas until we know the effects.
Disruption that leads to improved opportunities is interesting. Disruption to create Chaos is generally a poor idea.
CCP have enough on their hands at the moment, destabilising the whole Known universe as well as creating new areas will not end well, All would be done Badly.
Does anyone really think that CCP would have the resources to deal with all the issues that would result from a change to the very fabric of the player space?
And to create a new player space as well?
Revisit this idea if you feel it has value later after the changes already in hand play out, The new opportunities in the New space will no doubt effect trading and population densities, And the issues and concerns raised, may be resolved already in this process.
If however this is a long winded "give me more gank targets" thread, the effect would be very short lived and the whole game would be disrupted for a few players to have a few more ships to shoot for a short while, and we all live with the fallout for years after. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
524
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 01:49:00 -
[1100] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:CCP have clearly stated there will be new space to explore/make home. No point critically disrupting existing areas until we know the effects.
Not the point. The point is that at the moment, the shortest route beiween regional trtade hubs is via hisec. There is no decision to make. CCP believe that the necessity of making tradeoffs results in interesting and emergent gameplay. The OP and I agree.
epicurus ataraxia wrote: 1. Disruption that leads to improved opportunities is interesting. 1. Disruption to create Chaos is generally a poor idea.
2. CCP have enough on their hands at the moment, destabilising the whole Known universe as well as creating new areas will not end well, All would be done Badly.
1. Please define Chaos. Also, there is a hidden premise here. The OP is asking for players to have to make tradeoffs in route selection. He's not requesting 'chaos'.
2. This is an assertion. I challenge you to provide evidence of this claim.
epicurus ataraxia wrote: Does anyone really think that CCP would have the resources to deal with all the issues that would result from a change to the very fabric of the player space?
If they choose to allocate resources to it, as I would sincerely hope they will, then the resources will be there.
We're talking about re-routing a map during downtime and maybe, at player request, moving some assets via a database update script. It's quite trivial actually once you have designed the new map.
epicurus ataraxia wrote: And to create a new player space as well?
Do you really think that this is under way? Please provide evidence of this position.
epicurus ataraxia wrote: Revisit this idea if you feel it has value later after the changes already in hand play out, The new opportunities in the New space will no doubt effect trading and population densities, And the issues and concerns raised, may be resolved already in this process.
If however this is a long winded "give me more gank targets" thread, the effect would be very short lived and the whole game would be disrupted for a few players to have a few more ships to shoot for a short while, and we all live with the fallout for years after.
[/quote]
As stated above, the OP is simply stating that it's a good idea that players moving between trade areas be pushed to make a decision.
For example, I am not a lowsec pirate. I sometimes go out to fight them, and I sometimes move ships through hisec.
I *want* the choice to shorten my journey by going through lawless space or the take a longer, safer route.
At the moment I don't have that choice. The shortest routes are also the safest. It's ridiculous.
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
|
Commander Ted
Red Dragon Crime Syndicate Path of Destruction.
1065
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 02:15:00 -
[1101] - Quote
John Holt wrote:
The reason high sec needs to be kept the way it is...You will lose the majority of your player base if you radically change it.
Based on what?
I would say that is an unfair generalization. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Red Dragon Crime Syndicate Path of Destruction.
1065
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 02:17:00 -
[1102] - Quote
Gimme more Cynos wrote:Oh, the "Gimme more easy targets for my lolsec camp so I can feel like a leet PvP'er"-Suggestion is still arround.
Bad weeds grow tall it seems.
Even if I were a gatecamper, why would that matter?
I suppose I should just call you a stupid carebear then who doesn't play eve right? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Z'zauoe Euopaeqorua
Nomads of the Thukker
19
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 05:18:00 -
[1103] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:Marie Trudeau wrote:Quote:This would make everyone just live in Jita!
If all hisec players lived in Jita then who would do amarr missions and mine amarr ice/ore? Not everything can be found in one empire making it nessecary that players spread themselves out evenly. Not everyone, of course, no, but the concentration of players in Caldari space would greatly increase -- players would not be evenly spread, or even close. You'd have some players mining ice or what have you and using JFs to get them to the big market, but otherwise most people would be running missions in Caldari space and using the big, deep market there to make money -- as is the case today. This would amplify the concentration, not diminish it. As I said in the other thread, I don't care much about this proposal one way or the other, other than I think it will increase concentration in the Forge -- which, if the servers can handle it, isn't really a big deal anyway. I don't think the number of targets for lowsec hunters would go up much more than marginally, and a lot of the other three empires would be even less populated than they are now. Not really a big deal, though, I think, because things are already fairly concentrated as they are. This is a thoughtful post, which shows a good deal of insight and I want to reply to it thoughtfully. The existing pressure on Jita must have come about in part I think due to the traditional favouring of caldari ships in PVE. Caldari Navy Invulnerability fields, ballistic control systems and missiles have always been in high demand so it made sense for many people to mision for caldari close to a convenient market for these goods. This is of course how all trade hubs emerge, even in the real world. It is not so true today that caldari ships are far and away the best ships for pve and it seems reasonable to me that demand pressure for them and their fittings must have eased a little. But your post hints at something else. Caldari Navy goods are still largely the best available from a navy store, certainly for shield fitted ships. The Amarr navy also has desirable items, such as invulnerability fields and armour repairers but these do not confer anywhere near the advantage of the CNIF. Gallente and Minmatar (fitting) gear is lacklustre in comparison, and it is no surprise that their trade hubs are less populated and liquid. Separating trade areas would actually in my view, give a more clear picture of which faction's gear was more desirable since as you rightly point out, trade would gravitate to convenient hubs near the good loot. This is actually a good thing from a game design perspective since it gives good and clear information as to which faction's loot is under-performing and should therefore arguably be redesigned. With this in mind, I now support the idea of separation even more. I still believe there should be long hisec routes between faction areas but the quick routes should be lowsec, or for the very quickest even nullsec. Good post.
Back in days caldari had the best template for miner alt. Achura.
Also it was the best for mission running alt, raven, navy raven, drake. Still is?
It has been caldari > rest of the game, for way too long. |
Gimme more Cynos
Du nervst geh sterben
134
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 06:11:00 -
[1104] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Gimme more Cynos wrote:Oh, the "Gimme more easy targets for my lolsec camp so I can feel like a leet PvP'er"-Suggestion is still arround.
Bad weeds grow tall it seems. Even if I were a gatecamper, why would that matter? I suppose I should just call you a stupid carebear then who doesn't play eve right?
you can call me whatever you like. I'm just against a stupid idea called "forcing people through lowsec".
I mean, look how ridiculously hard Niarja is camped. And that's a highsec bottleneck. What do you think would happen if you would have to go through lowsec?
Yes, right - more easy targets for campscrubs.
And no, multiple connections won't solve anything. Even 5+ connections would be camped, and the bottlekneck would be found, just because scrubs want easy kills because they can't stand a real fight.
One has to be majorly ******** to not see / ignore the inherent problems. |
Glyphe Temare
Viziam Amarr Empire
6
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 08:22:00 -
[1105] - Quote
This thread seems to be totally polarized, on one side those who prefer to play the "pvp/bad guy/stacked decks" role. On the other, those who prefer to play the "pve/good guy/fair game" role.
Kinda the same as in RL, fascinating...
This being said, using coercion or control is considered in modern psychology as a symptom of fear and as a desire to feel better, to control one's emotions through the control of the environment and/or others and can be seen most eloquently in the behaviour of OCD patients.
Control feeds the fear, numbing it for a while. Fear being the mental equivalent to physical pain, it is like using morphine instead of actually taking care of the root cause. Control also acts as a vector of fear, spreading it through free will infringements.
Well people, we got the psychological mechanics right there^^. Now we just have to choose wether we want more madness in the game because there isn't enough already for the taste of the extroverts or if we observe that there is already enough and maybe it's just an outcry from a bored extroverts crowd who would like the introverts to start acting like them like the pandemic we've seen since the dawn of the 20th century with the cult of personality ( favoring extroverts ) that replaced the old cult of character ( favoring introverts ) that is now a cancer for most corporations and governments management. The consensus seems that if we want the best, we need balance in this extro/intravert thing.
See: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiet:_The_Power_of_Introverts_in_a_World_That_Can't_Stop_Talking" for the beef on that introvert/extrovert thing and the mechanics at play in the brains of the 2 "types" of individuals.
Not making any judgements here mind you, merely observing what is and what could be. This is a GAME after all, so such concerns aren't big deals, but it is one game which comes and touches us in remarkable ways...
Really a fascinating thread you started here Ted, gold mine for a psychosocial study and philosopher like me. :)
But we also may have to consider that we'll never be able to balance it and if we do, or if it is, unknowingly, tho this is doubtfull, already in balance, of course the "extremists" of both sides may want it to become more like they want it to be, more like themselves. And it's quite understandable as it would put them more at ease and alleviate their un-ease stemming from inner conscious or even totally under the radar unconscious fears.
Cheers! :) |
Dav Varan
Spiritus Draconis Sicarius Draconis
151
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 13:38:00 -
[1106] - Quote
Nice idea I would like to see.
But I think it would require a rework of how tackle works as you are making camping a major aspect of "highsec" game play.
I don't think the 150k frig can tackle and hold 1.5B isk freighter indefinatelly will make for balanced risk versus reward for pies and industialists.
Can't expect industrialist to take all the risk and pies to have all the fun otherwise it becomes just a pain in the butt for indi's with very few willing to take the risk.
I think we would need to explore concepts such as: Making tackle time based with stacking so that ships cant be held forever. tackle time = warp disruption strength / warp core strength with dissys starting at 50 strength, scrams around 30, hic fields arounf 200 etc.
Making bumpage of heavier* ship classes near impossible. *Heavier than the ship your flying , with a rework of mass addition from mwd etc. Creating preemptive ways to escort ships more effectivelly such as remote shield/armor hardening.
|
Moloney
Doobie Den
26
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 16:48:00 -
[1107] - Quote
How about splitting up null sec first.
Remove titans bridge feature. Leave them capable of jumping them selfs only.
There are 4 Josef entities... Only 2 null |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Awakened.
1365
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 16:54:00 -
[1108] - Quote
I like the idea but if it were to happen, i think there should still be one high sec link between the four empires, even if that link had significant disadvantages.
It would be cool if FW had some influence over these links, like maybe rival factions could take over the system that connects two empires and that faction could collect a tax from everyone traveling through the gate. +1 |
Commander Ted
Red Dragon Crime Syndicate Path of Destruction.
1069
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 17:25:00 -
[1109] - Quote
Dav Varan wrote:Nice idea I would like to see.
I don't think the 150k frig can tackle and hold 1.5B isk freighter indefinatelly will make for balanced risk versus reward for pies and industialists.
In low sec it can't.
A frigate would only survive max 3 volleys from gate guns before it was space dust, if that.
A t1 cruiser wouldn't be able to do so either as it's active or passive tank would not be able to survive the gate guns long enough to kill you.
Secondly, if you are moving a freighter through low sec you shouldn't be alone. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Antillie Sa'Kan
Forging Industries Silent Infinity
350
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 17:27:00 -
[1110] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: It will all just be jump freightered across the gap!
There are a limited number of jump freighters to move items. At 6bil a pop it will be very difficult to move lots of ships and over the gap constantly. Also with the next patch about to increase fuel prices, such a constant demand for ships jumping will make the JF option less attractive.
Because making a ship silly expensive and time consuming to build is a great way to ensure that it remains rare. How many titans and supers are there again? |
|
Commander Ted
Red Dragon Crime Syndicate Path of Destruction.
1069
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 17:28:00 -
[1111] - Quote
Gimme more Cynos wrote:
you can call me whatever you like. I'm just against a stupid idea called "forcing people through lowsec".
I mean, look how ridiculously hard Niarja is camped. And that's a highsec bottleneck. What do you think would happen if you would have to go through lowsec?
Yes, right - more easy targets for campscrubs.
And no, multiple connections won't solve anything. Even 5+ connections would be camped, and the bottlekneck would be found, just because scrubs want easy kills more than anything else.
One has to be majorly ******** to not see / ignore the inherent problems.
Except the eve map is made in such a way that it creates these problems. Going around Niarja is a many jump affair.
My plan specifically says to add lots of entry systems that criss cross and provide multiple paths of equal or close length, so that it would take many gate camps happening simultaneously for the system to be stopped up.
If there were that many gate camps there would be a ton of pvp ships just sitting on gates to shoot. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Red Dragon Crime Syndicate Path of Destruction.
1069
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 17:31:00 -
[1112] - Quote
Antillie Sa'Kan wrote: Because making a ship silly expensive and time consuming to build is a great way to ensure that it remains rare. How many titans and supers are there again?
I would say that if there were lots of JF's jumping all over the place, there would be lots of people screwing up with those JF's and many would explode.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Dav Varan
Spiritus Draconis Sicarius Draconis
151
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 17:49:00 -
[1113] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Dav Varan wrote:Nice idea I would like to see.
I don't think the 150k frig can tackle and hold 1.5B isk freighter indefinatelly will make for balanced risk versus reward for pies and industialists.
In low sec it can't. A frigate would only survive max 3 volleys from gate guns before it was space dust, if that. A t1 cruiser wouldn't be able to do so either as it's active or passive tank would not be able to survive the gate guns long enough to kill you. Secondly, if you are moving a freighter through low sec you shouldn't be alone.
What are you saying ?, you want to stop solo movments of everything except for interceptor between empires ? STFU.
|
Commander Ted
Red Dragon Crime Syndicate Path of Destruction.
1069
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 18:19:00 -
[1114] - Quote
Dav Varan wrote:
What are you saying ?, you want to stop solo movments of everything except for interceptor between empires ? STFU.
That isn't remotely what I said Mr.Strawman.
I dont think it is to much to ask for a billion isk ship that takes 30 seconds to enter warp to need an escourt ship or two, considering that already there are tons of people who use webifiers to move faster in hi-sec. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Batelle
Komm susser Tod
1659
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 18:55:00 -
[1115] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Antillie Sa'Kan wrote: Because making a ship silly expensive and time consuming to build is a great way to ensure that it remains rare. How many titans and supers are there again?
I would say that if there were lots of JF's jumping all over the place, there would be lots of people screwing up with those JF's and many would explode.
Well, this would be wrong. Moving a JF now isn't a particularly risky proposition, and if the demand for JF and JF services go up, that doesn't really increase the risk of the activity.
What will happen is that JFs will be overwhelmingly used, but fuel ain't cheap and that will be priced into the costs. Depending on what you're building and where you're building, the JF costs of importing/exporting to a hub in a different system will be significant, which means a significant competetive advantage to people who creatively source their materials and can sell locally. It also means more individual customers going to each faction hub rather than automatically to Jita.
If the ease of traveling, and specifically the ease moving large volumes of goods from one area to another is decreased, then its a fairly simple conclusion that where you are and where things are built will have more relevance. If everyone decides as a result to move to Jita, then thats much more profit to be made elsewhere. "CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"
Never forget. |
Commander Ted
Red Dragon Crime Syndicate Path of Destruction.
1069
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 19:05:00 -
[1116] - Quote
Batelle wrote:
Well, this would be wrong. Moving a JF now isn't a particularly risky proposition, and if the demand for JF and JF services go up, that doesn't really increase the risk of the activity.
If the ease of traveling, and specifically the ease moving large volumes of goods from one area to another is decreased, then its a fairly simple conclusion that where you are and where things are built will have more relevance. If everyone decides as a result to move to Jita, then thats much more profit to be made elsewhere.
If everyone moved to Jita then who mines the other factions ores, mines the other factions ice, gets the other factions LP, fuels the other factions FW pilots, and uses the other factions manufacturing slots?
And while the risk of doing a JF run will not go up, the number of runs each JF pilots does would probably go up, increasing the chance that they screw up, meaning more JF's will explode per person.
Nobody is perfect, misplace a cyno to close or to far to a station, forgetting to dock when you need to ****, etc. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
JetStream Drenard
EVE University Ivy League
8
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 19:36:00 -
[1117] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:I like the idea but if it were to happen, i think there should still be one high sec link between the four empires, even if that link had significant disadvantages.. There is ONLY 1 high sec link between factions already...
Quote:It would be cool if FW had some influence over these links, like maybe rival factions could take over the system that connects two empires and that faction could collect a tax from everyone traveling through the gate. I asked for something like this in another thread. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=320028&find=unread Bottom line is that it was a bad idea because the PvP power blocks would hold sole dominion over this game mechanic. |
Silent Rambo
State Protectorate Caldari State
122
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 22:13:00 -
[1118] - Quote
I'd be for this between Caldari-Gallante space and Amarr-Minmatar space. Makes the division of each faction/alliance more pronounced, and cause a little bit more of a division. I would still want to see each alliance be connected via high-sec space. Faction warfare is the entry level pvp, and you'd see more people join since the factions would actually feel like they are at war. If you are Caldari, you'd need to "cross the front" to get to Gallante space, which would make the wars between the empires feel much much more real and feel like they actually matter as well.
It would be hard to implement this and not just **** a lot of people off though, it should have been done when eve was still young. If it was implemented, then there should be something that people get outside of the systems being highsec. Perhaps manufacturing costs of the empire ships that below to your specific empire section are reduced. Manufacturing a caldari ship in Caldari space costs less, and maybe creating a Gallante ship would cost more, with Minmatar and Amarr costs being unchanged. That would mean larger profit margins can be made with risky travel between empires. You really think someone would do that? Just log into EvE and tell lies? |
Thirtythousand
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
29
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 23:31:00 -
[1119] - Quote
i really think shifting the FW zones to be between highsec empires would make the best lore. but barring that.
i think this would create many niches for players, blockade runners would be huge fun and hauling contracts to another region would mean something!
the only people this would really hurt are the people too lazy to do any real work and just want to afk many haulers from hub 1 to hub 2.
Hek is a great hub because its so close to low sec and on the way to rens. so many people stop and shop there too. (maybe i got that backwards)
if one empire has a lot of pilots in it, the price for modules (aka demand) goes way up in one region and supply from other regions would spike to support this demand.
only thing i do worry about is that highsec is NOT created equal, some regions have great agents while others do not (SOE for example) causing lots of players to migrate naturally to one region over the others for missions. also incursion runners would be impacted, and we cant have that! |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2184
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 03:33:00 -
[1120] - Quote
Still support this idea! Glad to see it is back on page 1.
The easiest way to introduce this would be with FW events, it would add to game play as well as soften the blow to the change so players would not freak out and rage quit. Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
|
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
389
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 04:36:00 -
[1121] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Dav Varan wrote:Nice idea I would like to see.
I don't think the 150k frig can tackle and hold 1.5B isk freighter indefinatelly will make for balanced risk versus reward for pies and industialists.
In low sec it can't. A frigate would only survive max 3 volleys from gate guns before it was space dust, if that. A t1 cruiser wouldn't be able to do so either as it's active or passive tank would not be able to survive the gate guns long enough to kill you. Secondly, if you are moving a freighter through low sec you shouldn't be alone.
Why would the pirates not just use a neutral standing alt to bump the freighter all day?
I have seen it work in high sec without much problem.
Of course in Low sec the frigate could just be shot until you crashed your own standing in self defense. |
Dr Sraggles
The Covenant of Blood
70
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 06:28:00 -
[1122] - Quote
[quote=JetStream Drenard
Bottom line is that it was a bad idea because the PvP power blocks would hold sole dominion over this game mechanic.
[/quote]
This.
|
Vas Eldryn
71
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 06:59:00 -
[1123] - Quote
I'll start buy saying I love the idea for so many reasons I wont TL;DR, however there are so many problems in the implementation of it... again i won't wall of text.
If there was an easy solution for implementing it and making everyone but solo traders happy (as there is no version of this that will make them happy)... BIG +1
I apologize, I didn't read the last 40 pages... So if i'm repeating a former post, sorry. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Awakened.
1365
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 10:15:00 -
[1124] - Quote
JetStream Drenard wrote:Rek Seven wrote:I like the idea but if it were to happen, i think there should still be one high sec link between the four empires, even if that link had significant disadvantages.. There is ONLY 1 high sec link between factions already... Quote:It would be cool if FW had some influence over these links, like maybe rival factions could take over the system that connects two empires and that faction could collect a tax from everyone traveling through the gate. I asked for something like this in another thread. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=320028&find=unreadBottom line is that it was a bad idea because the PvP power blocks would hold sole dominion over this game mechanic.
i didn't know there was only one link already.
I don't think the powerblock camping the link system would be bad as it would create pvp content and healthy competition. Maybe you could allow FW guys to upgrade their system eventually turning it into a 0.5 system... After all, the more people that pass through that system, the more money they make. +1 |
Hasan al-Askari Mujahideen
Islamic Movement of Minmatar
0
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 11:22:00 -
[1125] - Quote
This is a good idea but what is made is made so why not expand? put high sec on the other side of null and give the pirate fractions high sec space |
Commander Ted
Red Dragon Crime Syndicate Path of Destruction.
1072
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 16:10:00 -
[1126] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Why would the pirates not just use a neutral standing alt to bump the freighter all day?
I have seen it work in high sec without much problem.
Of course in Low sec the frigate could just be shot until you crashed your own standing in self defense.
The sec hit would be extremely negligible. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Red Dragon Crime Syndicate Path of Destruction.
1072
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 16:14:00 -
[1127] - Quote
Thirtythousand wrote:
only thing i do worry about is that highsec is NOT created equal, some regions have great agents while others do not (SOE for example) causing lots of players to migrate naturally to one region over the others for missions. also incursion runners would be impacted, and we cant have that!
Lol maybe they should just make the trip as a group in their officer fit isk printers.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy
509
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 18:13:00 -
[1128] - Quote
A. It does not fit the lore.
B. All people will not all be in Jita.. just most of them.
C. It will reduce the number of systems in routes between empire and place them at specific choke points so that all gate campers will then be drawn to the same 4 systems.. reducing the needs to fly anywhere else in low sec to get your "kill thrill"
D. This would unfairly reduce the number of high sec systems in favor of low sec, an area nearly no one really likes to play in.
E. High sec, low sec, and null sec are equivenlent areas of play.. not equal. They should be different. We should celebrate that difference - not try to reduce it or merge the areas..
F. If this is such a good idea, why not put patches of high sec separating null sec zones? The motive here doesn't seem to be for making the game better for the majority but instead making it better for a few.
I'm not a fan of this old and otfen repeated idea. I am in favor of new and exciting areas to explore and ways to play. That's where I think the focus should be. -á-á- remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not-á "afk" cloaking-á-
[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG] |
Commander Ted
Red Dragon Crime Syndicate Path of Destruction.
1072
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 18:16:00 -
[1129] - Quote
Barbara Nichole wrote:A. It does not fit the lore.
B. All people will not all be in Jita.. just most of them.
C. It will reduce the number of systems routes and place them at specific choke points so that all gate campers will then be drawn to the same 4 systems.. reducing the needs to fly anywhere else in low sec to get your "kill thrill"
D. This would unfairly reduce the number of high sec systems in favors or low sec, an area nearly no one really likes to play in.
E. High sec, low sec, and null sec are equivenlent areas of play.. not equal. They should be different. We should celebrate that difference - not try to reduce it or merge the areas..
F. If this is such a good idea, why not put patches of high sec separating null sec zones? The motive here doesn't seem to be for making the game better for the majority but instead making it better for a few.
I'm not a fan of this old and otfen repeated idea. I am in favor of new and exciting areas to expore and ways to play. That's where I think the focus should be. A. Make up new lore.
B. We already determined that wouldn't happen
C. Not if you add new systems.
D. You didn't read the first post.
E. You didn't read the first post
F. Because High Sec is easy to cross and there wouldn't be a point?
When was the last time you saw it posted? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy
509
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 18:21:00 -
[1130] - Quote
No, I read the first post. I just disagree.. I can't help that my objections remain relevant. -á-á- remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not-á "afk" cloaking-á-
[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG] |
|
Commander Ted
Red Dragon Crime Syndicate Path of Destruction.
1072
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 18:29:00 -
[1131] - Quote
Barbara Nichole wrote:No, I read the first post. I just disagree.. I can't help that my objections remain relevant.
Then you would have ready that I am not changing the sec status of any system. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1435
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 18:29:00 -
[1132] - Quote
Barbara Nichole wrote: B. All people will not all be in Jita.. just most of them.
already happened incase you didn't notice
~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Batelle
Komm susser Tod
1693
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 18:48:00 -
[1133] - Quote
Barbara Nichole wrote: C. It will reduce the number of systems in routes between empire and place them at specific choke points so that all gate campers will then be drawn to the same 4 systems.. reducing the needs to fly anywhere else in low sec to get your "kill thrill"
There are already multiple lowsec routes between the empires. So if as per your comment, everyone's congregating to the same systems, that means there are safer crossings elsewhere.
Quote:D. This would unfairly reduce the number of high sec systems in favor of low sec, an area nearly no one really likes to play in. Its not really unfair to anyone, except maybe to the people living directly in those systems that would change. They would have plenty of time to move or whatever. Not the end of the world really.
Quote:E. There are already low sec and null sec route between empire areas. Why add another low sec route? Because having 99% of hisec be contiguous renders these areas irrelevant from an economic or trade perspective.
Quote: F. High sec, low sec, and null sec are equivenlent areas of play.. not equal. They should be different. We should celebrate that difference - not try to reduce it or merge the areas..
Converting a dozen hisec systems into lowsec systems doesn't make hisec any less hisec than it was before.
Quote: G. If this is such a good idea, why not put patches of high sec separating null sec zones? The motive here doesn't seem to be for making the game better for the majority but instead making it better for a few.
Because that's stupid and wouldn't make any sense. "CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"
Never forget. |
Notorious Fellon
Republic University Minmatar Republic
214
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 18:50:00 -
[1134] - Quote
Dr Sraggles wrote:JetStream Drenard wrote:
Bottom line is that it was a bad idea because the PvP power blocks would hold sole dominion over this game mechanic.
This. If you want to improve Eve stop making every change in the game a case of "The Rich will get Richer".
This. Bottom up, not trickle down. |
SunTzu Liao
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 20:55:00 -
[1135] - Quote
+1 for this idea.
I see nothing but positives: opportunities for merchants, industrialists, haulers, pirates, mercs, protection rackets. |
Gimme more Cynos
Du nervst geh sterben
138
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 08:57:00 -
[1136] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Gimme more Cynos wrote:
you can call me whatever you like. I'm just against a stupid idea called "forcing people through lowsec".
I mean, look how ridiculously hard Niarja is camped. And that's a highsec bottleneck. What do you think would happen if you would have to go through lowsec?
Yes, right - more easy targets for campscrubs.
And no, multiple connections won't solve anything. Even 5+ connections would be camped, and the bottlekneck would be found, just because scrubs want easy kills more than anything else.
One has to be majorly ******** to not see / ignore the inherent problems.
Except the eve map is made in such a way that it creates these problems. Going around Niarja is a many jump affair. My plan specifically says to add lots of entry systems that criss cross and provide multiple paths of equal or close length, so that it would take many gate camps happening simultaneously for the system to be stopped up. If there were that many gate camps there would be a ton of pvp ships just sitting on gates to shoot.
Wow, it get's even more ********.
A lot of Systems won't help.. Scrublords will find the bottleneck. And who cares about how many ships one has to shoot on a gate, when it's just the largest entity which camps it..
Anyway, it's like arguing with a wall. You chose to ignore the problems. Easy to see where this is going. Buff me, Nerf others.
|
Basil Pupkin
Why So Platypus
48
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 14:59:00 -
[1137] - Quote
Extreme buff to power blocks able to get jump bridges between empires, practically monopolizing the hauling business and the trans-empire super-lucrative markets. Players who don't belong to those are thrown off the market both in trade hauling and in industry - because nobody would ever undermine people with cheapest materials from all empires.
-1 would unsub all alts just for that, before I mention other issues with it.
Other issues, which I normally won't give a flowing puck about, but there's just too many:
Wormholes, no way. Only 3 of 9 hisec ones would even allow a freighter, and would allow a total of 2 or 3. Jump bridges will serve 10 in time it takes to scan one down. I've been scanning wormholes for half a year (until Odyssey obsoleted it) and only met TWO hisec wormholes, neither of them freighter-sized, in hisec. Not an option.
Travelling through lowsec was never an option, it's a suicide in anything other than cloaked inty, which is a delayed suicide until you meet a smartbomber, which you WILL meet if this goes live.
There would be no market for stealth transports either. Because they won't be needed due to having no hauling value based on their lolcargocapacity - they can't even bring enough ammo, try hauling something in them. I'd say people would just pay to local pirates to pass in their jump freighter, but there would be no local pirates either. Blobs would overrun them all for this new gold, and claim it for themselves, so nobody not belonging to a blob shall pass.
To sum it up: There are no opportunities for mercs, as they can only harass blobbers in hisec at best. In lowsec they'll live for about as long as a freighter it costed to hire them. There are no opportunities for pirates, just regular gate camping scrubs tired of getting blobbed would join a power block and employed as guard dogs to let everyone from the blue donut pass, and chew on whatever tries to scout in T1 frigs (since obviously nothing bigger would ever come into a camped gate). There are no opportunities for haulers, just get blue standings, train for jump freighter, pay a billion for a month long cyno rights in a certain empire-bound system, and keep doing whatever you were doing - but now for free, because as long as it's profitable to do, cyno rights would just raise in prices. There are no opportunities to industrialists - blocks holding every market under their fat belly would have cheapest materials of every region, which no non-block industrialist would be able to obtain, and the ability to deliver to any region so that nobody is left untouched.
Honestly, I don't see anyone (except blue donut slumlords) who gains something with this change. |
Amanda Rosewater
Wolfger's Retreat
1
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 15:55:00 -
[1138] - Quote
I'll start off by saying this will never happen.
However, I really like this idea. Basically a "demilitarized zone" between the 4 empires. And I really like the idea of having to cross this low-sec zone to get between the 4 empires. Even if its only 1-2 low sec systems. I also agree you need multiple routes of similar distance, no single choke-point between empires.
The main point I do disagree with though is you greatly underestimate the power and numbers of the jump freighter. There are tons of them, and using them to mostly avoid the low sec wouldn't be that big a deal. I would expect JF's to continue moving goods between trade hubs w/o much issue. |
Gisander
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
6
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 17:17:00 -
[1139] - Quote
+1 I want this.
Maybe some tweaking against easy hauling options would be needed but otherwise this idea is solid. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
96
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 23:47:00 -
[1140] - Quote
It's been a while since I last commented in this thread. But I am still totally for it and I'd like to make (remake) some points.Barbara Nichole wrote:A. It does not fit the lore.
B. All people will not all be in Jita.. just most of them.
C. It will reduce the number of systems in routes between empire and place them at specific choke points so that all gate campers will then be drawn to the same 4 systems.. reducing the needs to fly anywhere else in low sec to get your "kill thrill"
D. This would unfairly reduce the number of high sec systems in favor of low sec, an area nearly no one really likes to play in.
E. There are already low sec and null sec route between empire areas. Why add another low sec route?
F. High sec, low sec, and null sec are equivenlent areas of play.. not equal. They should be different. We should celebrate that difference - not try to reduce it or merge the areas..
G. If this is such a good idea, why not put patches of high sec separating null sec zones? The motive here doesn't seem to be for making the game better for the majority but instead making it better for a few.
I'm not a fan of this old and otfen repeated idea. I am in favor of new and exciting areas to explore and new ways to play. That's where I think the focus should be.. this idea would be a waste of time. A. The most recent lore has a building strain in relations between Gallente/Minmatar and Amarr/Caldari. The way the story is unfolding this could very well be where the Lore is taking us. If you don't follow the lore then you shouldn't try to use it in your argument. In this instance it is a very strong counterpoint to your own position. B. wut? C. That is just an assumption you're making. The way i would see it, there would be a huge X across empire with extremely long boarder between empires and a at least a few systems thick. I'm sure though the path with least low jumps will be more traveled and more dangerous. D. Another assumption. Most likely each nation would move out. Turn low sec into high sec on the side facing null to replace high sec systems turned low, assuming they don't just add new star systems and routes in between. E. The idea is to remove highsec rountes between empire areas. If there was only 1 high sec route between empires everyone would just use that route. The entirety of profitable "trade" is based on barriers such as mountains, bodies of water, and land masses. This is what makes trade profitable. Currently in high sec distance is the only barrier, so there is very minimal profitability. Fortunately that gives a good perspective on this. If all systems in high sec were connected to Jita would there be any profit to be made in high sec hauling(physical trade)? Well you can correlate this to continuous high sec and non-continous high sec. Separating the empires would give much profit to be made in hauling(trading) by crossing these barriers.
Amanda Rosewater wrote:The main point I do disagree with though is you greatly underestimate the power and numbers of the jump freighter. There are tons of them, and using them to mostly avoid the low sec wouldn't be that big a deal. I would expect JF's to continue moving goods between trade hubs w/o much issue. When you bring up JF's there are a few things you have to remember.
First of all you still have to travel through (or jump into) at least 1 low sec system since you can't cyno in high sec.
Second and much more importantly, Jumping a Jump Freighter isn't free. Jumping a JF requires fuel. This has 2 very strong implications. 1. To continue the movement of materials to a place like Jita in any amount near what we have with continuous high sec, the amount of fuel used would be enormous. This would cause the price of isotopes to sky rocket. 2. There will be a minimum amount of investment return required to cover the fuel costs. Anything not meeting and exceeding this requirement will not be hauled via JF. And if the first implication has any weight to it at all, the minimum profit to use a JF will also increase substantially.
So to say we greatly underestimate the power and numbers of JFs is absolutely wrong. In fact we are very aware of the implications of such a large number of JF's and believe not only will JFs balance themselves, but will also drive other aspects of the market itself in doing so. |
|
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
96
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 00:03:00 -
[1141] - Quote
Gimme more Cynos wrote: Wow, it get's even more ********.
A lot of Systems won't help.. Scrublords will find the bottleneck. And who cares about how many ships one has to shoot on a gate, when it's just the largest entity which camps it..
Anyway, it's like arguing with a wall. You chose to ignore the problems. Easy to see where this is going. Buff me, Nerf others.
Not sure how you get to this conclusion. First of all with a lot of low sec systems there's is a large area to choose from to move across. Think of it like a river. Sure there's places where the banks on each side of the river are closer together and you spend less time in the water, but this is also where muggers are going to be waiting for you. If you go a bit down stream sure you have a bit longer of a swim but there's less likely someone to hassle you.
And seriously, the larger entities in the game are not going to spend 24/7 camping low sec. Null sec is a different beast. Everything is on timers and winning is with the most "peak" numbers. And people own their piece of space and tend to be there. That doesn't quite translate to low sec.
There may be some entities that do end up patrolling a piece of the border and sell "protection" to people who want to cross. But to be able to do that is not going to be an easy feat. You can't just take control of a system, you have to actively patrol it, and you have to have quite a lot of people diligently patrolling at all times of day if you want it to be effective. If someone pulls this off then maybe they deserve to be paid for their efforts.
I have very little belief that some large Null Block will put this much effort into something like this. The reward/effort ratio is way too small. And if one of them did, you'd be sure to find everyone else from null sec there looking for a "Good Fight".
If you use a scout, then this is not an issue in the least anyways. |
Basil Pupkin
Why So Platypus
49
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 08:07:00 -
[1142] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Not sure how you get to this conclusion. First of all with a lot of low sec systems there's is a large area to choose from to move across. Think of it like a river. Sure there's places where the banks on each side of the river are closer together and you spend less time in the water, but this is also where muggers are going to be waiting for you. If you go a bit down stream sure you have a bit longer of a swim but there's less likely someone to hassle you. Except every gate will have a T1 frig with a trial account waiting on them to check your entry point, and a gang ready to intercept will be on their way should you approach the gate.
Erutpar Ambient wrote:And seriously, the larger entities in the game are not going to spend 24/7 camping low sec. Null sec is a different beast. Everything is on timers and winning is with the most "peak" numbers. And people own their piece of space and tend to be there. That doesn't quite translate to low sec. Sakht. Your argument is now invalid. Given enough incentive, "larger entities" ARE going to spend 23/7 camping low sec. And oh they will have it, if not by just absorbing whoever is camping it now.
Erutpar Ambient wrote:There may be some entities that do end up patrolling a piece of the border and sell "protection" to people who want to cross. But to be able to do that is not going to be an easy feat. You can't just take control of a system, you have to actively patrol it, and you have to have quite a lot of people diligently patrolling at all times of day if you want it to be effective. If someone pulls this off then maybe they deserve to be paid for their efforts. No need for patrols, as said before. All haulers will belong to "larger entities" and at best will be accompanied by 1 cyno ship ready to drop a hundred supers on anyone who tries.
Erutpar Ambient wrote:I have very little belief that some large Null Block will put this much effort into something like this. The reward/effort ratio is way too small. And if one of them did, you'd be sure to find everyone else from null sec there looking for a "Good Fight". Well, the blue donut showed us they're perfectly able to split their areas of influence, and set up rules everyone inside can benefit from, and no one outside can. This thread itself is a fine example.
Erutpar Ambient wrote:If you use a scout, then this is not an issue in the least anyways. Now this is just stupid below par. So what if you use a scout? True, you might avoid losing a ship, but the cornerstone issue is that you still can't haul if you found anyone. Along with afk cloakers we will start seeing afk carebear repellents. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
217
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 08:30:00 -
[1143] - Quote
What can scouts do if the lowsec between Jita and Amarr on the shortest route, and all the other routes that also have lowsecs, are camped? Niarja and Uedama are already camped regularly and they are not even lowsec routes. Tama and Aunenen are also camped and haulers die there and those systems are not even direct routes between tradehubs.
A scout cannot do anything, except for preventing a ship loss. If the Border gate connection between Kaputeenen and Niarja should ever collapse, it's going to cause a mess of proportions without precedent. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
96
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 09:44:00 -
[1144] - Quote
If any amount of people can plant any amount of T1 trial frigates in whatever amount of systems and keep a close enough eye on ALL of them to effectively catch people. Then with that amount of diligence they deserve to catch people.... The truth though is that is physically impossible. It's one thing to multibox 20 miners taking the same commands, but it's another thing for one person to watch 12 or even 4 or even 1 screen diligently enough to lock down a system, much less more than one. .... To be honest, after the statement "accompanied by 1 cyno ship ready to drop a hundred supers" it's obviously that you're concept of EVE is vastly different than reality.
Your comment "Along with afk cloakers we will start seeing afk carebear repellents." makes it obvious you were a null bear for a very short period of time and the extent of your pvp interaction is getting hot dropped by an afk cloaker. Afk Cloakers are not going to migrate en-mass to lowsec to loom over 1 person jumping through the system. Afk cloaking is not just something to do for fun, it does have a purpose.
And dropping a hundred supers isn't going to be very effective vs a hauler.
Rivr Luzade wrote:A scout cannot do anything, except for preventing a ship loss. Nail on the Head. Welcome to EVE, where proper scouting will prevent you from a pointless loss.
Nobody can camp lowsec 23/7. Scouting is to find when the time is right to make your move. If there is a gate camp happening, then guess what, someone will come looking for a fight and will engage that gate camp. And then if either one of those groups has backup, well if they were camping a system too, you'll have a chance to go through while they're away supporting the other group.
Low sec isn't a static camp fest. It's a dynamic movement of people looking to fight each other on their own terms moving towards the targets they're most suited to kill and away from the ones most suited to kill them.
If people camp ALL of the systems too hard then nobody will go through and the campers will lose interest and disperse opening the way for people to travel through and then eventually the campers will move back and you'll have an ebb and flow of campers vs haulers. |
Basil Pupkin
Why So Platypus
49
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 10:27:00 -
[1145] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:If any amount of people can plant any amount of T1 trial frigates in whatever amount of systems and keep a close enough eye on ALL of them to effectively catch people. Then with that amount of diligence they deserve to catch people.... The truth though is that is physically impossible. It's one thing to multibox 20 miners taking the same commands, but it's another thing for one person to watch 12 or even 4 or even 1 screen diligently enough to lock down a system, much less more than one. .... To be honest, after the statement "accompanied by 1 cyno ship ready to drop a hundred supers" it's obviously that you're concept of EVE is vastly different than reality. They don't have to be all on the same guy's screen - a gang can split them. They don't have to watch. Gates make SOUND. My concept of EVE is undeniably different from blue donut dwellers - and I cannot see anything wrong with that.
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Your comment "Along with afk cloakers we will start seeing afk carebear repellents." makes it obvious you were a null bear for a very short period of time and the extent of your pvp interaction is getting hot dropped by an afk cloaker. Afk Cloakers are not going to migrate en-mass to lowsec to loom over 1 person jumping through the system. Afk cloaking is not just something to do for fun, it does have a purpose. One person jumping thru a system is some wild nullbear dream. Current throughput is 5 per minute at lowest, 15k jumps per 24 hours systems are 10 per minute, and closer to hubs we get even more. That makes it 300 to 2000 per hour, and even if this transport stream would be spread 5 ways, it's still 60 to 400. That is about 60 to 400 more people to loom at than in average nullbear den, so migration seems inevitable to me. That said, the bear repellent doesn't need to be cloaked. Just standing there at the gate is fine to spook people. Can be a trial that doesn't even need to be watched.
Erutpar Ambient wrote: Nail on the Head. Welcome to EVE, where proper scouting will prevent you from a pointless loss. Nobody can camp lowsec 23/7.
Nail on the Butt. Or other place you used to think this up, definitely not head. Preventing the ship loss does not matter. Prevent me a failed hauling, then we'll talk. Like people pointed out to your ignorant face before, TEST is already camping lowsec 23/7.
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Scouting is to find when the time is right to make your move. If there is a gate camp happening, then guess what, someone will come looking for a fight and will engage that gate camp. And then if either one of those groups has backup, well if they were camping a system too, you'll have a chance to go through while they're away supporting the other group. Nobody engages gate camps, unless it's hotdrop bait. Systems will be blobbed by power blocks and divided, then each will camp their own, so nobody would engage gate camps. OK, let's for lulz assume you found one uncamped gate. 4 to go, bless you to hang in lowsec in a hauler to find 4 more uncamped ones from there on. From my point of view, that is getting nowhere, since you won't find even one - all of them are going to be camped by blob-bears.
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Low sec isn't a static camp fest. It's a dynamic movement of people looking to fight each other on their own terms moving towards the targets they're most suited to kill and away from the ones most suited to kill them.
If people camp ALL of the systems too hard then nobody will go through and the campers will lose interest and disperse opening the way for people to travel through and then eventually the campers will move back and you'll have an ebb and flow of campers vs haulers. Certain low sec is a static camp fest as it is. Some has been for ages. And with this proposal all inter-empire lowsec will become "certain". Flow of haulers will pay to blobbers for passage like flow of renters paying rent atm, and that's about it. Except most of them will unsub the moment it goes live, along with industrials not belonging to power blocks, because the overall effect of it will be "the market just closed on you, thank you for playing all those years, nullbears will now take your share". |
Ilyana Nehla
Sanctum Prime Spears of Destiny
3
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 11:33:00 -
[1146] - Quote
+1 |
djentropy Ovaert
Crazy Bird Inc.
101
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 12:18:00 -
[1147] - Quote
Saw the best counter to this idea way back at the beginning of this threadnaut - it just does not make any sense.
Look at the borders between nations in all of human history - the borders are the areas where we have the highest amount of military build up and security checkpoints.
It does not make any sense to have these major empires that have grown over many thousands of years allowing massive gaps of lawless space between their space and their enemies space. Any power large enough to become a interstellar empire would focus resources on taking control of as many systems as they could, right up to the very border of the other empires.
But, throwing that kind of logic aside - I don't see any good coming out of this. We already have too many players who have been playing for years and years who are too spooked and convinced that entering any system under 0.5 is the same as pushing the self destruct button. A change like this would just isolate high-sec carebears from eachother further, lowering the one thing that high-sec needs more of - communication and cooperation between players versus JoeBob and JoeBobAlt1 to JoeBobAlt15 mining a veldspar rock off and on for a decade. |
rswfire
Firesworn Firesworn Nation
165
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 17:16:00 -
[1148] - Quote
djentropy Ovaert wrote:Saw the best counter to this idea way back at the beginning of this threadnaut - it just does not make any sense.
Look at the borders between nations in all of human history - the borders are the areas where we have the highest amount of military build up and security checkpoints.
It does not make any sense to have these major empires that have grown over many thousands of years allowing massive gaps of lawless space between their space and their enemies space. Any power large enough to become a interstellar empire would focus resources on taking control of as many systems as they could, right up to the very border of the other empires.
But, throwing that kind of logic aside - I don't see any good coming out of this. We already have too many players who have been playing for years and years who are too spooked and convinced that entering any system under 0.5 is the same as pushing the self destruct button. A change like this would just isolate high-sec carebears from eachother further, lowering the one thing that high-sec needs more of - communication and cooperation between players versus JoeBob and JoeBobAlt1 to JoeBobAlt15 mining a veldspar rock off and on for a decade.
This one speaks truth.
I actually like the OP's idea in theory. It would do wonders for regional markets, but it would require erasing ten years of history to implement it, either by pretending it didn't happen or creating an entire disruptive narrative that fractures the lines between the empires. It's a thought-provoking idea though. +1 for that. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYAz0aWEzpw http://www.firesworn.com/index.php?/topic/69-about-firesworn-nation/
|
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
99
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 18:39:00 -
[1149] - Quote
rswfire wrote:djentropy Ovaert wrote:Saw the best counter to this idea way back at the beginning of this threadnaut - it just does not make any sense.
Look at the borders between nations in all of human history - the borders are the areas where we have the highest amount of military build up and security checkpoints.
It does not make any sense to have these major empires that have grown over many thousands of years allowing massive gaps of lawless space between their space and their enemies space. Any power large enough to become a interstellar empire would focus resources on taking control of as many systems as they could, right up to the very border of the other empires.
But, throwing that kind of logic aside - I don't see any good coming out of this. We already have too many players who have been playing for years and years who are too spooked and convinced that entering any system under 0.5 is the same as pushing the self destruct button. A change like this would just isolate high-sec carebears from eachother further, lowering the one thing that high-sec needs more of - communication and cooperation between players versus JoeBob and JoeBobAlt1 to JoeBobAlt15 mining a veldspar rock off and on for a decade. This one speaks truth. I actually like the OP's idea in theory. It would do wonders for regional markets, but it would require erasing ten years of history to implement it, either by pretending it didn't happen or creating an entire disruptive narrative that fractures the lines between the empires. It's a thought-provoking idea though. +1 for that.
This is constantly brought up and constantly I have to inform people of some recent Lore events that you're probably not following. Please don't post about "Making sense in Lore" if you're not keeping up with the Lore!!!
Amarr > Minmatar http://community.eveonline.com/news/news-channels/world-news/report-sarum-family-heir-recommends-assault-on-republic/
Gallente - Minmatar relations strain http://community.eveonline.com/news/news-channels/world-news/conservative-senator-calls-republic-untrustworthy/
Gallente > Minmatar Shots Fired http://community.eveonline.com/news/news-channels/world-news/republic-fleet-force-destroyed-entering-federation-despite-capsuleer-pleas-for-peace/
Amarr > Caldari Gives a sense of a rift opening between them. http://community.eveonline.com/news/news-channels/world-news/empress-jamyl-i-becoming-increasingly-erratic-reports-say/
All of these things are foreshadowing a breakdown in relations between each nation.... Again! Concord is just an agreement between the nations. It can be easily dissolved. (Caldari Prime event turned Concord off because the Caldari decided to ignore the Concord agreement.)
Why don't you guys try to walk between the boarders of two warring countries and tell me again how it's the safest place to be. |
djentropy Ovaert
Crazy Bird Inc.
118
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 18:54:00 -
[1150] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:[quote=rswfire] This is constantly brought up and constantly I have to inform people of some recent Lore events that you're probably not following. Please don't post about "Making sense in Lore" if you're not keeping up with the Lore!!!
You are assuming that I am not keeping up with the lore?
Trust me, I am.
Relations breaking down between the empires would result in MORE military presence along the borders between regions, not less. Sure, we'd see some violent actions - but this would not qualify the systems to be considered "low-sec". If you read up on your lore and game mechanics, you will see that most low sec systems in the game are where the fight between nations is actually going on - this is why we have Factional Warfare. The systems flip from empire to empire quite often.
It's a fun idea - but erasing ten years of storyline and totally fragmenting the way empire space works does not seem like a very solid idea.
If anything, given a total breakdown in relations - i'd expect the various empires to actually expand their presence further into low sec and start grabbing as much of a strategic foothold in those areas, thus increasing the traffic and importance of those systems, thus making CONCORD more likely to impose tighter security on those areas in a effort to keep us safer :) |
|
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
554
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 19:05:00 -
[1151] - Quote
This thread has attracted a great deal of attention and as such I think deserves a sticky. Does anyone agree with that?
Further, I would propose a small change to the idea:
Provide one long hisec route between each region, all other routes to be a great deal shorter (1/6th for example). This way everyone gets what they want. People who value safety over time can go through hisec. People who value time over safety can go through lowsec.
I would think that for example, amarr to jita should be 30 jumps of hisec or 5 jumps of lowsec.
Now I think there is a reasonable trade off.
Thoughts? Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Commander Ted
Red Dragon Crime Syndicate Path of Destruction.
1078
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 21:21:00 -
[1152] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:This thread has attracted a great deal of attention and as such I think deserves a sticky. Does anyone agree with that?
If CCP were to ever consider this idea they would have to make their own sticky, featuring their own interpretation. Also the one Dev post in this thread (which has earned it lots of views) is just Fozzie saying that he in fact exists.
considering the amount of negative feedback i have gotten what would have to happen is make a few suggestions at a time, or else people will go crazy.
1. Make hisec routes longer, see what happens 2. Make new low sec regions with more shortcuts 3. cut the chord.
Keep on posting and arguing though, and it may happen. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Arthur Aihaken
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
2894
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 21:44:00 -
[1153] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:This thread has attracted a great deal of attention and as such I think deserves a sticky. Does anyone agree with that? Definitely needs a sticky. Instead of extending the high-sec routes between the major trade hubs, I think I'd prefer a shorter low-sec route. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Cody Rasr
Goat Watch Inc. Look at all them herds
1
|
Posted - 2014.02.16 07:32:00 -
[1154] - Quote
I think trying this between Amarr/Caldari and Minmatar/Gallente may be a good way to test it out. It would at a lot to the game with FW players fighting for corporations / players to secure trade routes. Perhaps giving a captured system protection for a very limited time from enemies. At the same time require FW pilots to actively participate in providing. Maybe create a new structure that can only be deployed during this time that would give them more intel on the systems that are currently under this protection or some type of timer. In turn they could use this info to decide for the haulers or who ever where to go and what to do. Sorry for being vague but I'm really tired. |
Cody Rasr
Goat Watch Inc. Look at all them herds
1
|
Posted - 2014.02.16 07:38:00 -
[1155] - Quote
Quick thought before I forget. With my idea maybe add some systems that don't have any purpose other than to test this. Perhaps creating some nice short cuts. This would take a lot of work I'm sure but I think it would be interesting to try. |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
845
|
Posted - 2014.02.16 12:23:00 -
[1156] - Quote
Basil Pupkin wrote:Extreme buff to power blocks able to get jump bridges between empires, practically monopolizing the hauling business and the trans-empire super-lucrative markets. Players who don't belong to those are thrown off the market both in trade hauling and in industry - because nobody would ever undermine people with cheapest materials from all empires.
-1 would unsub all alts just for that, before I mention other issues with it.
You need SOV to use a jump bridge, that is why there are none in low sec
Basil Pupkin wrote: Wormholes, no way. Only 3 of 9 hisec ones would even allow a freighter, and would allow a total of 2 or 3. Jump bridges will serve 10 in time it takes to scan one down. I've been scanning wormholes for half a year (until Odyssey obsoleted it) and only met TWO hisec wormholes, neither of them freighter-sized, in hisec. Not an option.
Yeah, they are usually C1/C2s in High, I use them regularly.
Basil Pupkin wrote: Travelling through lowsec was never an option, it's a suicide in anything other than cloaked inty, which is a delayed suicide until you meet a smartbomber, which you WILL meet if this goes live.
Way false.
I don't think I have ever actually lost a ship to smartbombers. Getting around them is a simple matter usually...and that includes fun systems like Amamake and Rancer.
Basil Pupkin wrote: There would be no market for stealth transports either. Because they won't be needed due to having no hauling value based on their lolcargocapacity - they can't even bring enough ammo, try hauling something in them. I'd say people would just pay to local pirates to pass in their jump freighter, but there would be no local pirates either. Blobs would overrun them all for this new gold, and claim it for themselves, so nobody not belonging to a blob shall pass.
You do understand that us null bears use blockades extensively to move things around, both in null and in low sec because we have **** we need to sell as well.
Basil Pupkin wrote: There are no opportunities for mercs, as they can only harass blobbers in hisec at best. In lowsec they'll live for about as long as a freighter it costed to hire them. There are no opportunities for pirates, just regular gate camping scrubs tired of getting blobbed would join a power block and employed as guard dogs to let everyone from the blue donut pass, and chew on whatever tries to scout in T1 frigs (since obviously nothing bigger would ever come into a camped gate). There are no opportunities for haulers, just get blue standings, train for jump freighter, pay a billion for a month long cyno rights in a certain empire-bound system, and keep doing whatever you were doing - but now for free, because as long as it's profitable to do, cyno rights would just raise in prices. There are no opportunities to industrialists - blocks holding every market under their fat belly would have cheapest materials of every region, which no non-block industrialist would be able to obtain, and the ability to deliver to any region so that nobody is left untouched.
Honestly, I don't see anyone (except blue donut slumlords) who gains something with this change.
As to all of this .......sperg ~mercs hang near trade hubs, because they know SOMEONE will show up ~powerblocks rarely camp in low? Why, so we can kill a couple shuttle and the odd indy that doesn't know how to set his autopilot? Usually if we are in low at all in a group we have a target and that is simply the fastest way to get somewhere . ~What is this cyno rights crap? Have you EVER moved a ship with a jump drive? All you need is a station, getting back out may be a little more tricky, but meh. I've seen Black Frog jump a freighter in with a 400 man battle including titans onfield......on the station grid.
The rest just lol.
That is an impressive amount of fear.
|
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
580
|
Posted - 2014.02.16 14:53:00 -
[1157] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:This thread has attracted a great deal of attention and as such I think deserves a sticky. Does anyone agree with that? Definitely needs a sticky. Instead of extending the high-sec routes between the major trade hubs, I think I'd prefer a shorter low-sec route.
This makes a lot of sense.
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
846
|
Posted - 2014.02.16 15:47:00 -
[1158] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:This thread has attracted a great deal of attention and as such I think deserves a sticky. Does anyone agree with that? Definitely needs a sticky. Instead of extending the high-sec routes between the major trade hubs, I think I'd prefer a shorter low-sec route.
Already exists. Go to Hek or Rens and route shortest for either Dodixie or Jita respectively.
Hek takes you through Rancer and Rens will lead you through Rancer. We all know those system names right? They are kinda of Eve famous Up north that can be fixed by making Udema low sec , pretty much ALL east/west traffic in the Forge has to pass through there that is why its gank city. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1080
|
Posted - 2014.02.16 18:18:00 -
[1159] - Quote
This would add four new regions, obviously these regions would be unexplored and lack infrastructure, therefore the law enforcement provided by concord would be low.
No strained relations.
No "but muh lore!"
No "BORDERS ARE ALWAYS MOST SECURE PLACE IN WORLD!"
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1080
|
Posted - 2014.02.16 18:19:00 -
[1160] - Quote
Cody Rasr wrote:Quick thought before I forget. With my idea maybe add some systems that don't have any purpose other than to test this. Perhaps creating some nice short cuts. This would take a lot of work I'm sure but I think it would be interesting to try.
Except that is how it already is. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Cody Rasr
Goat Watch Inc. Look at all them herds
2
|
Posted - 2014.02.16 18:47:00 -
[1161] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Cody Rasr wrote:Quick thought before I forget. With my idea maybe add some systems that don't have any purpose other than to test this. Perhaps creating some nice short cuts. This would take a lot of work I'm sure but I think it would be interesting to try. Except that is how it already is.
Ok sorry I've only been playing for about 4 months now. Just trying to get involved with the community. Thanks for the info. Are they allowed to be controlled in any why by the controlling faction or provide some sort of boost to them. I think providing the controlling faction a boost or some way of furthering intel for a short period would give players more ways of interacting and impacting each other. I believe any thing that would make FW have real and significant impacts to other players not participating would be interesting. I may need to do some more research before my next post but thanks for the feedback |
voetius
BITB Support Services
187
|
Posted - 2014.02.16 22:28:00 -
[1162] - Quote
I like the idea in general but the implementation could be done in different ways. I'm also wary of Big Bang changes to gamepplay (aka Jesus features) that could have a serious effect on subscriber numbers - see Incarna.
I would be more inclined to agree with the person above that mentioned offering a choice, a longer high sec route versus a shorter less secure route. It's not all about sticks, it is possible to have a carrot and stick.
|
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University Minmatar Republic
279
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 02:50:00 -
[1163] - Quote
You would probably just get a lot more jump freighters used and hisec traffic being moved by JF between small losec islands of just one or two systems.
Probably those same lowsec islands that already always have cynos up, the ones that are regularly used by bluesec people to move stuff from high into SOV.
Could be amusing, you might see nullsec alliances getting involved in the hisec carebear freight business. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1080
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 02:52:00 -
[1164] - Quote
voetius wrote: I like the idea in general but the implementation could be done in different ways. I'm also wary of Big Bang changes to gamepplay (aka Jesus features) that could have a serious effect on subscriber numbers - see Incarna.
I would be more inclined to agree with the person above that mentioned offering a choice, a longer high sec route versus a shorter less secure route. It's not all about sticks, it is possible to have a carrot and stick.
This is not a jesus feature.
A jesus feature is a resource heavy project.
Like Incarna.
and the problem with Incarna was it was just a stupid station hangar thing instead of anything remotely close to what CCP promised.
and $1000 dollar pants. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Catherine Laartii
Providence Guard Templis CALSF
70
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 07:56:00 -
[1165] - Quote
Challenge people and they will come up with creative solutions. Necessity is the mother of invention, after all. I would love to see this linked in with expanding factional warfare to ALL lowsec, and include pirate FW. You could have the Khanid added as a permanently sovereign empire faction, so you balance with 5 high and 5 null. Having nullsec corridors like the ones you're talking about would be astonishingly wonderful because it would allow permanent profession pirates and solo pvpers the opportunity to navigate the whole of the map without too much difficulty.
A good way of introducing this from a lore perspective would be to have the onset of pirate factional warfare with each of the major empires shoring up their borders, and the breakdown of a non-capsuleer front since certain empires like the caldari and gallente would no longer be able to keep up a "border zone" which is technically a holdover from the days of peace.
The current map mechanics are antiquated and outdated. They need to change. Warzones can be expanded to different regions rather than a single map, and be more of a free-for-all setting with more emphasis on system capturing over LP donation.
As much love as I have for caldari FW, I would love to be a Khanid militia person fighting in low against the blood raider/sansha onslaught; I love the idea of FW players being the soldiers that hold back the tides of war and terror from the simple, sheltered ways of hisec.
Opening ALL lowsec to FW...and having lowsec corridors to separate the empires...now THERE's an interesting idea. :) |
voetius
BITB Support Services
188
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 08:53:00 -
[1166] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:voetius wrote: I like the idea in general but the implementation could be done in different ways. I'm also wary of Big Bang changes to gamepplay (aka Jesus features) that could have a serious effect on subscriber numbers - see Incarna.
I would be more inclined to agree with the person above that mentioned offering a choice, a longer high sec route versus a shorter less secure route. It's not all about sticks, it is possible to have a carrot and stick.
This is not a jesus feature. A jesus feature is a resource heavy project. Like Incarna. and the problem with Incarna was it was just a stupid station hangar thing instead of anything remotely close to what CCP promised. and $1000 dollar pants.
Maybe I shouldn't have used the term Jesus Feature and just left it at Big Bang change although I think you are being a bit picky about terminology and you understand the point I'm making. Which is that big changes to gameplay could work out well or could work out badly but either way will have effects that are hard to undo if they go wrong.
I'm still generally in favour of the idea but would be more supportive if it could be implemented incrementally or in such a way that there was someway to back out if it all went disastrously wrong. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1080
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 14:23:00 -
[1167] - Quote
voetius wrote:
Maybe I shouldn't have used the term Jesus Feature and just left it at Big Bang change although I think you are being a bit picky about terminology and you understand the point I'm making. Which is that big changes to gameplay could work out well or could work out badly but either way will have effects that are hard to undo if they go wrong.
I'm still generally in favour of the idea but would be more supportive if it could be implemented incrementally or in such a way that there was someway to back out if it all went disastrously wrong.
How would you even start by implementing it incrementally?
Nothing would really change until you sever the tie completely. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
855
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 15:18:00 -
[1168] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:voetius wrote:
Maybe I shouldn't have used the term Jesus Feature and just left it at Big Bang change although I think you are being a bit picky about terminology and you understand the point I'm making. Which is that big changes to gameplay could work out well or could work out badly but either way will have effects that are hard to undo if they go wrong.
I'm still generally in favour of the idea but would be more supportive if it could be implemented incrementally or in such a way that there was someway to back out if it all went disastrously wrong.
How would you even start by implementing it incrementally? Nothing would really change until you sever the tie completely.
It's happened before.....twice |
Amanda Rosewater
Wolfger's Retreat
1
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 17:58:00 -
[1169] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Amanda Rosewater wrote:The main point I do disagree with though is you greatly underestimate the power and numbers of the jump freighter. There are tons of them, and using them to mostly avoid the low sec wouldn't be that big a deal. I would expect JF's to continue moving goods between trade hubs w/o much issue. When you bring up JF's there are a few things you have to remember. First of all you still have to travel through (or jump into) at least 1 low sec system since you can't cyno in high sec. Second and much more importantly, Jumping a Jump Freighter isn't free. Jumping a JF requires fuel. This has 2 very strong implications. 1. To continue the movement of materials to a place like Jita in any amount near what we have with continuous high sec, the amount of fuel used would be enormous. This would cause the price of isotopes to sky rocket. 2. There will be a minimum amount of investment return required to cover the fuel costs. Anything not meeting and exceeding this requirement will not be hauled via JF. And if the first implication has any weight to it at all, the minimum profit to use a JF will also increase substantially. So to say we greatly underestimate the power and numbers of JFs is absolutely wrong. In fact we are very aware of the implications of such a large number of JF's and believe not only will JFs balance themselves, but will also drive other aspects of the market itself in doing so.
I don't think i'm trying to say what you interpreted. My comment related to JF's is in response to the OPs seeming dismissive attitude towards JF's being capable of picking up the hauling slack when freighters become less useful between trade hubs because they are too expensive and there aren't many of them. That is the part I disagree with. There are tons of them, and they are capable of picking up the hauling load freighters will no longer fulfill. That's the only point I was making. The flow of goods between trade hubs will not be too interrupted.
I agree JF's aren't free to operate, and tope prices could go up, but the cost of burning fuel to move goods will be added into the cost of the goods on the market, so prices of good will also go up. This does not inhibit the flow of goods, the added cost just gets pushed to the end consumer. You can't assume traders will continue to sell things at current prices given an increase in costs. Goods being produced within the high sec empire will be freightered to the trade hub at current prices, and goods not being produced within the high sec empire will be JF'd between empires at an increased cost to the consumer, all else being equal.
One last thing I'd point out though, I think you exaggerate the "enormous" cost of fuel and the "sky rocket" of tope prices in order to JF goods between trade hubs. If JF pilots choose to gate travel as much high sec as possible, jump a small low sec border, and then continue on using high sec gates, unless CCP created some crazy distances between systems, you're talking about a negligible amount of topes to move between hubs. Unless you are envisioning full regions of low sec between empires. I'm just talking like 1-4 systems. If you're only jumping between 1-4 systems, without crossing regions, you're only talking 2-5k topes to move between hubs. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
103
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 20:58:00 -
[1170] - Quote
Catherine Laartii wrote: Necessity is the mother of invention.
This is totally wrong!
Convenience is the mother of invention.
i.e. Drone Assist ;) |
|
IoNiAn Beldrulf
Minmatar Brotherhood
0
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 21:34:00 -
[1171] - Quote
I really hope CCP is not thinking of developing this into the game. Veteran players are not the only players of the game, and newbies want to roam in safety until they are ready to start losing all of their ISKies and start the chain reaction of lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex. I say buy more plex because it is too hard to make ISK in game that will cover all of the bills generated from playing PVP. Unless your a veteran player with tons of SP and you buy a shiny ship and never lose it. Now you want to make it even easier for newbies to lose their stuff. Come On... Are You Serious? |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
594
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 21:43:00 -
[1172] - Quote
IoNiAn Beldrulf wrote:I really hope CCP is not thinking of developing this into the game. Veteran players are not the only players of the game, and newbies want to roam in safety until they are ready to start losing all of their ISKies and start the chain reaction of lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex. I say buy more plex because it is too hard to make ISK in game that will cover all of the bills generated from playing PVP. Unless your a veteran player with tons of SP and you buy a shiny ship and never lose it. Now you want to make it even easier for newbies to lose their stuff. Come On... Are You Serious?
I paid for my first 3 or 4 months of Eve. After that I plexed myself for 18 months on 2 accounts while flying expensive ships in lawless space.
I took a break from the game with 6 months of pilots licences already fully paid for with in-game plex on 2 accounts.
Most of my corp mates don't pay to play Eve. I pay now because it's more convenient to choose when I make isk rather than feeling as if I have to.
I never robbed anyone and never scammed anyone. Making ISK is very easy in Eve.
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Jill Chastot
Oath of the Forsaken Sanguis Ignis Prosperitum
221
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 21:44:00 -
[1173] - Quote
IoNiAn Beldrulf wrote:I really hope CCP is not thinking of developing this into the game. Veteran players are not the only players of the game, and newbies want to roam in safety until they are ready to start losing all of their ISKies and start the chain reaction of lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex. I say buy more plex because it is too hard to make ISK in game that will cover all of the bills generated from playing PVP. Unless your a veteran player with tons of SP and you buy a shiny ship and never lose it. Now you want to make it even easier for newbies to lose their stuff. Come On... Are You Serious?
Safety in eve is the greatest fallacy you will ever encounter. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=298596&find=unread OATHS wants you. Come to the WH "Safety in eve is the greatest fallacy you will ever encounter. Once you accept this you will truely enjoy this game."
|
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
103
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 23:56:00 -
[1174] - Quote
IoNiAn Beldrulf wrote:I really hope CCP is not thinking of developing this into the game. Veteran players are not the only players of the game, and newbies want to roam in safety until they are ready to start losing all of their ISKies and start the chain reaction of lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex. I say buy more plex because it is too hard to make ISK in game that will cover all of the bills generated from playing PVP. Unless your a veteran player with tons of SP and you buy a shiny ship and never lose it. Now you want to make it even easier for newbies to lose their stuff. Come On... Are You Serious?
Again, nobody is taking high sec away. This will, however, generate more of a reason to go into low sec. Currently there's basically nothing in low sec worth making the trip for. With an update like this you would have a reason to go through it at some point. |
Cody Rasr
Goat Watch Inc. Look at all them herds
2
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 00:04:00 -
[1175] - Quote
IoNiAn Beldrulf wrote:I really hope CCP is not thinking of developing this into the game. Veteran players are not the only players of the game, and newbies want to roam in safety until they are ready to start losing all of their ISKies and start the chain reaction of lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex. I say buy more plex because it is too hard to make ISK in game that will cover all of the bills generated from playing PVP. Unless your a veteran player with tons of SP and you buy a shiny ship and never lose it. Now you want to make it even easier for newbies to lose their stuff. Come On... Are You Serious?
If new systems were created that provided shortcuts to key systems far better than any current would not force anyone to take them or change any current routes. It would be a choice perhaps not allowing JF to jump across these new routs or into them unless the system they want to jump from/to has been captured by the empire the JF pilot is a part of. To promote player interaction between FW pilots and traders/haulers there should also be a requirement for JF to be given permission by the FW pilots who participated in capturing the system to jump to and from the systems. With the ideas I mentioned earlier this would provide more interaction and strategy in the game without forcing anyone to use this who didn't want to take the risk. There doesn't need to be a ton of these to test it out or make it worth while in my opinion. |
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University Minmatar Republic
287
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 00:07:00 -
[1176] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:[quote=IoNiAn Beldrulf] Currently there's basically nothing in low sec worth making the trip for. With an update like this you would have a reason to go through it at some point.
Well there is FW and PI.
But PI alts only need to log every 4 or 5 days, play with the extractors in station and then make a quick 20 minute run around the planets before logging out for another 4 or 5 days. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
103
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 00:19:00 -
[1177] - Quote
Hasikan Miallok wrote:Well there is FW and PI.
But PI alts only need to log every 4 or 5 days, play with the extractors in station and then make a quick 20 minute run around the planets before logging out for another 4 or 5 days. Though FW is in low sec, i consider FW it's own space. FW space is always in low sec, but low sec isn't always FW space. Basically, the general low sec is worthless.
As for PI, lowsec is less worthwhile than WH or Null but has as much if not great risk for a lower rate of return. And you still end up coming across POCOs anyways.
My statement still stands, there is nothing in low sec(in and of itself) worth making the trip for. |
Paul Alpha Walker
KnownUnknown
0
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 01:19:00 -
[1178] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Jackal Datapaw wrote: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. No it won't your being silly. You can still mine as much as you want, you can still mission as much as you want, you can still wardec as much as you want, you can still single station trade as much as you want,you can still incursion as much as you want, you can still do exploration as much as you want, and you can still build as much as you want. Carebears don't have to participate and can still be afk casual zombies with the same mission rewards intact. All it ads are options for less risk averse people to make more isk than they already do. Carebears can team up with these risk takers, carebears do the farming while the haulers do the dangerous activities. It's not even like the risky activity is even hard or that dangerous! Also each high security region will still be self sufficient, just foreign goods will be harder to get. Stop being dramatic OMG EVERY REGION IS BIASED TO CERTAIN SHIP TYPES OMFG UNSUB. Lowsec has very little real meaning outside of faction warfare. The only role it plays on the sov level is a safe cyno haven, the only role it plays in industry is that it is where capitals are safely baked in stations. If my change were added, lowsec would be a important part of the high sec dynamic. Null needs changes to it's industry that need to be addressed in an entirely separate thread, in such dire need it could be game breaking. Making alliances have to move their jump freighters slightly farther is hardly a nerf to null.
So what about high sec incursion runners? How are they supposed to move there big slow shiny ships from space to space without you ganking us all to hell for no reward huh? HS gankers already target and catch many now in the existing conditions with ship bumping tactics. (Which needs to be nerfed if not turned into a bannable offense, or at least make bumping inflict damage on said ships) but honestly... most incursion runners only have a couple ships and it takes them a long time to build them... separating k-space like this will cause many issues in the incursion community |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2198
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 01:33:00 -
[1179] - Quote
Paul Alpha Walker wrote:Commander Ted wrote:Jackal Datapaw wrote: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. No it won't your being silly. You can still mine as much as you want, you can still mission as much as you want, you can still wardec as much as you want, you can still single station trade as much as you want,you can still incursion as much as you want, you can still do exploration as much as you want, and you can still build as much as you want. Carebears don't have to participate and can still be afk casual zombies with the same mission rewards intact. All it ads are options for less risk averse people to make more isk than they already do. Carebears can team up with these risk takers, carebears do the farming while the haulers do the dangerous activities. It's not even like the risky activity is even hard or that dangerous! Also each high security region will still be self sufficient, just foreign goods will be harder to get. Stop being dramatic OMG EVERY REGION IS BIASED TO CERTAIN SHIP TYPES OMFG UNSUB. Lowsec has very little real meaning outside of faction warfare. The only role it plays on the sov level is a safe cyno haven, the only role it plays in industry is that it is where capitals are safely baked in stations. If my change were added, lowsec would be a important part of the high sec dynamic. Null needs changes to it's industry that need to be addressed in an entirely separate thread, in such dire need it could be game breaking. Making alliances have to move their jump freighters slightly farther is hardly a nerf to null. So what about high sec incursion runners? How are they supposed to move there big slow shiny ships from space to space without you ganking us all to hell for no reward huh? HS gankers already target and catch many now in the existing conditions with ship bumping tactics. (Which needs to be nerfed if not turned into a bannable offense, or at least make bumping inflict damage on said ships) but honestly... most incursion runners only have a couple ships and it takes them a long time to build them... separating k-space like this will cause many issues in the incursion community Beyond massive amounts of isk, what does the high sec incursion community bring to the rest of the eve community? Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
Dav Varan
Spiritus Draconis Sicarius Draconis
151
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 11:47:00 -
[1180] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Dav Varan wrote:
What are you saying ?, you want to stop solo movments of everything except for interceptor between empires ? STFU.
That isn't remotely what I said Mr.Strawman. How did you even come anywhere close to that? I dont think it is to much to ask for a billion isk ship that takes 30 seconds to enter warp to need an escourt ship or two, considering that already there are tons of people who use webifiers to move faster in hi-sec.
You don't know what your saying is the problem. By that I mean you are no considering the consequences of what you are proposing.
You are right when you say there is an unwritten rule don't travel solo through low sec in freighters. That also applies to a lot of ship classes anything larger than frig is almost ceratin to get caught at some point.
Now that unwritten rule is fine with the current low sec distributiuon.
But you want to combine don't travel alone through low sec rule with a sec distribution that surrounds each empire with low sec.
The unwritten rule Don't travel solo in low sec becomes Don't travel solo between empires.
Travel between empires should never require multiple clients or a planned corp operation. Thats unacceptable game design.
Confining high sec gamers to a single empire is no fun for them.
While I have no issue with low sec between empire it would need to be balanced with changes making low sec travel between empires less risky for larger ship classes than it would be today.
The unwritten rule should become Its risky to travel between empires in a large ship not Don't travel between empires in a large ship ( because you die )
|
|
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1709
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 12:04:00 -
[1181] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:IoNiAn Beldrulf wrote:I really hope CCP is not thinking of developing this into the game. Veteran players are not the only players of the game, and newbies want to roam in safety until they are ready to start losing all of their ISKies and start the chain reaction of lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex. I say buy more plex because it is too hard to make ISK in game that will cover all of the bills generated from playing PVP. Unless your a veteran player with tons of SP and you buy a shiny ship and never lose it. Now you want to make it even easier for newbies to lose their stuff. Come On... Are You Serious? Again, nobody is taking high sec away. This will, however, generate more of a reason to go into low sec. Currently there's basically nothing in low sec worth making the trip for. With an update like this you would have a reason to go through it at some point. Only in uncatchable frigs, inties and covert ops ships. Which would be completely pointless. You would end up with 95% of people hanging around Jita and the rest a complete wasteland. Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
608
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 12:07:00 -
[1182] - Quote
Dav Varan wrote:Commander Ted wrote:Dav Varan wrote:
What are you saying ?, you want to stop solo movments of everything except for interceptor between empires ? STFU.
That isn't remotely what I said Mr.Strawman. How did you even come anywhere close to that? I dont think it is to much to ask for a billion isk ship that takes 30 seconds to enter warp to need an escourt ship or two, considering that already there are tons of people who use webifiers to move faster in hi-sec. You don't know what your saying is the problem. By that I mean you are no considering the consequences of what you are proposing. You are right when you say there is an unwritten rule don't travel solo through low sec in freighters. That also applies to a lot of ship classes anything larger than frig is almost ceratin to get caught at some point. Now that unwritten rule is fine with the current low sec distributiuon. But you want to combine don't travel alone through low sec rule with a sec distribution that surrounds each empire with low sec. The unwritten rule Don't travel solo in low sec becomes Don't travel solo between empires. Travel between empires should never require multiple clients or a planned corp operation. Thats unacceptable game design. Confining high sec gamers to a single empire is no fun for them. While I have no issue with low sec between empire it would need to be balanced with changes making low sec travel between empires less risky for larger ship classes than it would be today. The unwritten rule should become Its risky to travel between empires in a large ship not Don't travel between empires in a large ship ( because you die )
I think Dav makes a reasonable point here. Freighters are somewhat vulnerable.
The answer might be that in order to get a freighter through low sec, you would need a chain of scouts, each equipped with a web.
This is of course, for someone who's never done it, a logistical nightmare and does not support the free movement of goods between empires.
But of course for those who make the effort, the rewards could be large...
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1709
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 12:10:00 -
[1183] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:Dav Varan wrote:Commander Ted wrote:Dav Varan wrote:
What are you saying ?, you want to stop solo movments of everything except for interceptor between empires ? STFU.
That isn't remotely what I said Mr.Strawman. How did you even come anywhere close to that? I dont think it is to much to ask for a billion isk ship that takes 30 seconds to enter warp to need an escourt ship or two, considering that already there are tons of people who use webifiers to move faster in hi-sec. You don't know what your saying is the problem. By that I mean you are no considering the consequences of what you are proposing. You are right when you say there is an unwritten rule don't travel solo through low sec in freighters. That also applies to a lot of ship classes anything larger than frig is almost ceratin to get caught at some point. Now that unwritten rule is fine with the current low sec distributiuon. But you want to combine don't travel alone through low sec rule with a sec distribution that surrounds each empire with low sec. The unwritten rule Don't travel solo in low sec becomes Don't travel solo between empires. Travel between empires should never require multiple clients or a planned corp operation. Thats unacceptable game design. Confining high sec gamers to a single empire is no fun for them. While I have no issue with low sec between empire it would need to be balanced with changes making low sec travel between empires less risky for larger ship classes than it would be today. The unwritten rule should become Its risky to travel between empires in a large ship not Don't travel between empires in a large ship ( because you die ) I think Dav makes a reasonable point here. Freighters are somewhat vulnerable. The answer might be that in order to get a freighter through low sec, you would need a chain of scouts, each equipped with a web. This is of course, for someone who's never done it, a logistical nightmare and does not support the free movement of goods between empires. But of course for those who make the effort, the rewards could be large... No they just stop using freighters and use jump freighters to safe POS and then warp to high sec gate. Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
608
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 12:15:00 -
[1184] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Erutpar Ambient wrote:IoNiAn Beldrulf wrote:I really hope CCP is not thinking of developing this into the game. Veteran players are not the only players of the game, and newbies want to roam in safety until they are ready to start losing all of their ISKies and start the chain reaction of lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex. I say buy more plex because it is too hard to make ISK in game that will cover all of the bills generated from playing PVP. Unless your a veteran player with tons of SP and you buy a shiny ship and never lose it. Now you want to make it even easier for newbies to lose their stuff. Come On... Are You Serious? Again, nobody is taking high sec away. This will, however, generate more of a reason to go into low sec. Currently there's basically nothing in low sec worth making the trip for. With an update like this you would have a reason to go through it at some point. Only in uncatchable frigs, inties and covert ops ships. Which would be completely pointless. You would end up with 95% of people hanging around Jita and the rest a complete wasteland.
I don't agree here.
Looking at this empirically, without recourse to supposition and uninformed opinion, we do actually see cruisers, battlecruisers, some battleships in low sec today - even though the rewards are not there.
I have personally guided a fleet of orcas through low sec for fun. We made it, despite meeting a small gate camp.
Now and again, one of our wormhole-closing orcas gets stuck on the wrong side of a wormhole when it closes, and then we have to get it back to empire and then back into w-space. This is almost invariably through low sec at some point.
In fact, at present, almost everywhere other than mission hubs and trade hubs *is* a wasteland. Giving people an incentive (profit) to travel through dangerous space will I think actually encourage them to do it. The natural acquisitiveness of human beings (some call it greed) is a very powerful behavioural driver.
People are bright and good at solving problems. We have solved the problem of moving slow ships though dangerous space. So will others.
Interesting, varied gameplay will ensue. There will be a reason not to AFK, your heart rate will go up, and you'll feel a great sense of satisfaction when it goes right.
This is the eve I live in - because I choose to live in lawless space. It's a good Eve.
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
610
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 12:20:00 -
[1185] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:But of course for those who make the effort, the rewards could be large...
No they just stop using freighters and use jump freighters to safe POS and then warp to high sec gate.
There you go - you've just solved the problem - you're on your way to becoming an Eve trillionaire already!
Once you have your trains of jump freighters jumping effortlessly through low sec making excess profits, you'll want to start protecting your market share...
... You might start unsung your profits to invest in pvp fleets to 'discourage' other haulers from doing the same thing....
... and thus eve's economy becomes even more fascinating, with militias supporting trade organisations, trade organisations keeping a militia - they way it should be.
Separate the empires, create trade disparities - this is the foundation of the fun game Eve could be.
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1709
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 12:22:00 -
[1186] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:But of course for those who make the effort, the rewards could be large...
No they just stop using freighters and use jump freighters to safe POS and then warp to high sec gate. There you go - you've just solved the problem - you're on your way to becoming an Eve trillionaire already! Once you have your trains of jump freighters jumping effortlessly through low sec making excess profits, you'll want to start protecting your market share... ... You might start unsung your profits to invest in pvp fleets to 'discourage' other haulers from doing the same thing.... ... and thus eve's economy becomes even more fascinating, with militias supporting trade organisations, trade organisations keeping a militia - they way it should be. Separate the empires, create trade disparities - this is the foundation of the fun game Eve could be. What's the point since it won't accomplish anything except the same thing that already happening, avoidance of pvp in low. Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
610
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 12:28:00 -
[1187] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:But of course for those who make the effort, the rewards could be large...
No they just stop using freighters and use jump freighters to safe POS and then warp to high sec gate. There you go - you've just solved the problem - you're on your way to becoming an Eve trillionaire already! Once you have your trains of jump freighters jumping effortlessly through low sec making excess profits, you'll want to start protecting your market share... ... You might start unsung your profits to invest in pvp fleets to 'discourage' other haulers from doing the same thing.... ... and thus eve's economy becomes even more fascinating, with militias supporting trade organisations, trade organisations keeping a militia - they way it should be. Separate the empires, create trade disparities - this is the foundation of the fun game Eve could be. What's the point since it won't accomplish anything except the same thing that already happening, avoidance of pvp in low.
Well I think you've missed the part where other trade organisations may want to discourage you, so will start to learn your shipping lines' timings and routes. Then they will seek to engage your jump freighters which, although difficult to catch, are not impossible.
If they trap 2 or 3 of them in a station, you have a pretty strong incentive to free them.
This may require a degree of muscle, timing, luck or all three, depending on how incentivised your opponents are.
I think it's reasonable to put the empires far enough apart to require 2 jumps to get between them. Nothing rewarding should be without some risk. Savvy players should be rewarded as it gives them an incentive to stay savvy, and an incentive for less experienced players to learn.
Otherwise, why bother?
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1709
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 12:31:00 -
[1188] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:But of course for those who make the effort, the rewards could be large...
No they just stop using freighters and use jump freighters to safe POS and then warp to high sec gate. There you go - you've just solved the problem - you're on your way to becoming an Eve trillionaire already! Once you have your trains of jump freighters jumping effortlessly through low sec making excess profits, you'll want to start protecting your market share... ... You might start unsung your profits to invest in pvp fleets to 'discourage' other haulers from doing the same thing.... ... and thus eve's economy becomes even more fascinating, with militias supporting trade organisations, trade organisations keeping a militia - they way it should be. Separate the empires, create trade disparities - this is the foundation of the fun game Eve could be. What's the point since it won't accomplish anything except the same thing that already happening, avoidance of pvp in low. Well I think you've missed the part where other trade organisations may want to discourage you, so will start to learn your shipping lines' timings and routes. Then they will seek to engage your jump freighters which, although difficult to catch, are not impossible. If they trap 2 or 3 of them in a station, you have a pretty strong incentive to free them. This may require a degree of muscle, timing, luck or all three, depending on how incentivised your opponents are. I think it's reasonable to put the empires far enough apart to require 2 jumps to get between them. Nothing rewarding should be without some risk. Savvy players should be rewarded as it gives them an incentive to stay savvy, and an incentive for less experienced players to learn. Otherwise, why bother? You realise that Jump freighters can jump right next to an armed POS in low, then to another POS, then warp to a high sec gate and there's no possible way to interdict them. There won't be any shipping lines. Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
610
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 12:52:00 -
[1189] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:You realise that Jump freighters can jump right next to an armed POS in low, then to another POS, then warp to a high sec gate and there's no possible way to interdict them. There won't be any shipping lines.
If it is truly the case that it is impossible to catch a jump freighter no matter what, then:
a) there is no reasonable argument from trade pilots not to separate the empires with low sec, since they can just train up for a jump freighter.
b) if we wanted to create some peril for jump freighters we could simply ensure that there are no intermediary stations in the second jump system*. This is entirely possible since gate travel is not limited by distance, whereas jumps are.
* In this scenario, an organised fleet could ensure that the JF is trapped in low sec, at least until the freighting corp were able to light another cyno in the destination system. I'm not saying it would be easy, but then neither is killing a titan - but it does happen.
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1709
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 12:59:00 -
[1190] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:You realise that Jump freighters can jump right next to an armed POS in low, then to another POS, then warp to a high sec gate and there's no possible way to interdict them. There won't be any shipping lines. If it is truly the case that it is impossible to catch a jump freighter no matter what, then: a) there is no reasonable argument from trade pilots not to separate the empires with low sec, since they can just train up for a jump freighter. b) if we wanted to create some peril for jump freighters we could simply ensure that there are no intermediary stations in the second jump system*. This is entirely possible since gate travel is not limited by distance, whereas jumps are. * In this scenario, an organised fleet could ensure that the JF is trapped in low sec, at least until the freighting corp were able to light another cyno in the destination system. I'm not saying it would be easy, but then neither is killing a titan - but it does happen. They'll simply just jump them to POS, which is much safer. You'll likely just be buffing huge alliances / corps since they have the ability to wipe out smaller corporations POS and put their own up for logistics. So that'd end up being bye bye for small corporation solo freighter pilots and another monopoly for the big guys.
Well it currently is virtually impossible to catch them with the current mechanics. You'd have to make a really stupid mistake with your cyno alt to get caught before you could get inside the safety of the POS or station. You can undock in Jita and jump straight off the dock straight to a dock or POS.
Its like that because the alliances are virtually in charge of development in EVE as they control the majority of the CSM. Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |
|
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
610
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 13:04:00 -
[1191] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:You realise that Jump freighters can jump right next to an armed POS in low, then to another POS, then warp to a high sec gate and there's no possible way to interdict them. There won't be any shipping lines. If it is truly the case that it is impossible to catch a jump freighter no matter what, then: a) there is no reasonable argument from trade pilots not to separate the empires with low sec, since they can just train up for a jump freighter. b) if we wanted to create some peril for jump freighters we could simply ensure that there are no intermediary stations in the second jump system*. This is entirely possible since gate travel is not limited by distance, whereas jumps are. * In this scenario, an organised fleet could ensure that the JF is trapped in low sec, at least until the freighting corp were able to light another cyno in the destination system. I'm not saying it would be easy, but then neither is killing a titan - but it does happen. They'll simply just jump them to POS, which is much safer. You'll likely just be buffing huge alliances / corps since they have the ability to wipe out smaller corporations POS and put their own up for logistics. So that'd end up being bye bye for small corporation solo freighter pilots and another monopoly for the big guys. Well it currently is virtually impossible to catch them with the current mechanics. You'd have to make a really stupid mistake with your cyno alt to get caught before you could get inside the safety of the POS or station. You can undock in Jita and jump straight off the dock straight to a dock or POS. Its like that because the alliances are virtually in charge of development in EVE as they control the majority of the CSM.
Thank you for the explanation of jump mechanics.
I'm unfortunately forced to disagree with you that jump freighters cannot be killed, here is some evidence: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=21965851
Jump freighters were conceived in Eve before there was a CSM.
The CSM was created in response to a growing disconnect between the player base and the management of CCP. Flawed as it may be, it is a great deal better than the Autocracy we suffered previously. Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1709
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 13:38:00 -
[1192] - Quote
They can only be killed if you mess up. Warp to the wrong gate, get a bad cyno position and get bumped off station etc. They are rarely killed in reality. Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
612
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 17:08:00 -
[1193] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:They can only be killed if you mess up. Warp to the wrong gate, get a bad cyno position and get bumped off station etc. They are rarely killed in reality.
OK, so this is movement from the position of "Jump Freighters cannot be killed".
We agree that Jump Freighters can be killed (seemly by very few people if you look at the low sec killmails on eve-kill). We agree that it's not easy, that it's a specialist job...
...and this feeds into my argument I think. With low sec separating trade areas, there will be excess profits on the table for those willing to take a (controlled) risk.
This means that more people will have the incentive to take a risk and work together. We have established that all you need is two cyno ships and a jump freighter - 3 toons. This is hardly looking like a monopoly controlled by mega-corps.
In this brave new Eve, you too would be able to play the part of Han Solo, transporting goods that no-one else will carry for huge profit. No doubt Mr Solo would also take an escort and some scouts if he had the opportunity...
It's better gameplay is it not? Can you really say that you enjoy 15 jumps of high sec in a freighter? As a way to entertain yourself in the modern age I can't think of a less fun way, can you?
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Udonor
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
51
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 11:50:00 -
[1194] - Quote
Whenever you beg for chokepoints you are really describing the formula for a BORING gate camp manned by a handful of ships rather than an adventurous pirate fleet situation. The idea is a scam to put power and PROFITS in the hands of a select few -- absolute control of trade to whoever holds the choke point. Fewer pirates - not more.
Far worse than null sec gate camps - because at least null sec gate camps have null sec threats to their back.
Bold roaming pirate fleets gambling on the odds actually would mean several alternate routes exist. Thus the caravan might escape encounters or fall to someone else's pirate fleet.
Really the current hi sec situation is great for small pirate attacks as CONCORD guards them against preemptive attacks by suspicious escorts. You can hang around openly and take your time to get organized. The only minor difficulty is that you need an extra pilot in sacrificial rookie ship (or industrial for really large items) to flip the loot can before your cargo ship guy grabs the loot. Once you learn to operate smoothly in hi sec you are ready to join bigger groups hitting juicy convoys in null and wh space. Speed and coordination.
And really No change is needed to game mechanics to choke down trade until every Jita module is worth billions. As you point out CONCORD does not deal with pirates until AFTER they strike. So a sufficient supply of new destroyers and dedicated pilots in Uedema and elsewhere could kill every industrial trying to get to Jita.
The reason a trade embargo does not happen now is BOREDOM and that a large number of pilots would lead to secondary destruction of loot and dilute profits. BURN JITA campaigns do that plus more....but only until boredom mounts and the number of replacements ship run out. If you can counter BOREDOM there really is no reason that replacements ships cannot be sustained (meta 0 can work in numbers). |
Ayana Mayuko
Mayuko Sisters' Trading Enterprises Ltd. PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
18
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 14:20:00 -
[1195] - Quote
To the people above talking about JFs being too hard to kill (too many posts to pick one to quote), JFs die on heavily armed POSes all the time. Theres this wonderful ship called a supercarrier which is immune to all forms of EWAR (including POS warp distuptors) and just yolos in and blaps the JF, it happens all the time. Sure, not a lot of people have a supercarrier but for those who do, content is created!
Then you, the JF pilot, decide you want to bait this super and kill it, so you bring HICs and there, more content is created! This carries on and escalations happens and so on and so forth. Basically, at the end of the day, content which wouldn't have happened before does happen due to this change (or at least, more often, since JFs do die even with current lowsec distributions).
The fact that JFs wouldn't be able to 100% risk free avoid a lowsec between the empires is good for the game - JFs would probably be the easiest method but by far the most costly and most damaging if you die, as it should be. There would be no method of completely eliminating the risk (short of being very good at picking spots for station cynos) which would only serve to further increase prices between region-specific or faction-specific items in the different regions which then goes back in to making your risky JF jump that bit more profitable and hence the motivation to actually brave lowsec. |
Markku Laaksonen
EVE University Ivy League
361
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 15:20:00 -
[1196] - Quote
That damn Dev post gets me every time.
"Oh, a Dev has something to say about this, huh? ... Well ****." DUST 514 Recruit Code - https://dust514.com/recruit/zluCyb/
EVE Buddy Invite - https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=047203f1-4124-42a1-b36f-39ca8ae5d6e2&action=buddy
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
204
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 15:37:00 -
[1197] - Quote
Can't help but think this would isolate all newer players or lone wolf types into the empire space they start out in. And when a player is skilled enough they will simply haul stuff in a blockade runner or some such instead.. Wouldn't this separation simply hand all the best hauling profits straight to the corps big enough to support their freighters?
I still don't understand the antagonism towards hi-sec. All areas in eve server (or at least should) a purpose. Hi-sec is relatively stable for business to thrive and produce stuff, low-sec provides for stuff being blown up. Lots. Null-sec and WH's provide Sov warfare. What I would rather see would be true exploration regions where nobody can set up Sov control and a pilot with wits can make serious isk by themselves or in a fleet. Hopefully the new space regions accessed with the player built gates will provide this, but all must have access one way or another.
|
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
618
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 16:59:00 -
[1198] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Can't help but think this would isolate all newer players or lone wolf types into the empire space they start out in. And when a player is skilled enough they will simply haul stuff in a blockade runner or some such instead.. Wouldn't this separation simply hand all the best hauling profits straight to the corps big enough to support their freighters?
I still don't understand the antagonism towards hi-sec. All areas in eve server (or at least should) a purpose. Hi-sec is relatively stable for business to thrive and produce stuff, low-sec provides for stuff being blown up. Lots. Null-sec and WH's provide Sov warfare. What I would rather see would be true exploration regions where nobody can set up Sov control and a pilot with wits can make serious isk by themselves or in a fleet. Hopefully the new space regions accessed with the player built gates will provide this, but all must have access one way or another.
It's probably important to point out that most freighters are bought by individuals. Once you figure out how, Isk is not so hard to come by in eve.
People who invest time in their eve skills benefit by being rewarded with bigger profits and opportunities, which us probably as it should be, otherwise people would not invest time and the game would not be so rich.
Additionally, "big corps" don't hand out expensive assets to players as a rule, since the threat of theft is high and there is no law against theft, or indeed any recourse whatsoever in eve. Most JFs and freighters are privately owned I can assure you.
Eve is a social game. If you want to get the most out of it, you need to get social and form or join a corp - and then invest in it. This is also desirable.
So with lowsec separating hisec empires, we are saying that investing in eve skills and your social network will bring better rewards. Savvy soloers will also enjoy excess profits.
I am struggling to understand what would be undesirable about this. Human beings like to strive to be better. We can't all be born at the top. Eve is the epitome of an egalitarian society where anyone can get ahead.
Separate the empires. People will cope, adapt and thrive. People who never leave hisec won't actually notice the difference. In-empire hauling will continue to be a low skill activity, intra-empire hauling will become a specialist skill.
This is good isn't it?
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Sunai Karvinoinas
Divide et Impera DE
13
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 17:04:00 -
[1199] - Quote
Why I cannot rate down the always stupid and everlasting stuff like this. :( I don't know whether it's reasonable to participate in the eternal "war of threads" between pirates and carebears. Probably not.
I'm a pure highsec indstrialist and hauler with one of my active chars. If you'd divide the empire factions with lowsec space I will haul within a smaller part of the universe only. Some stuf I'd try to contract for courier. I'd need several jump clones spread out to the other high sec areas of different factions.
I would rather leave the game than carrying goods through lowsec or truesec space finally. I enjoy the game, because it's NOT a PvP only game. EvE became much more than a stupid pewpew game. The former game definition by CCP needs an overhaul instead of the highsec worlds.
I cannot buy an escort service by contract yet. Why? Why I cannot hire some online fighters for a fast job? I want not wait for corp members to have time for escorting some boring hauler jobs. Casual players are lonesome riders often.
Finally prices for goods will rise, which are not available everywhere. Else the market may not take bigger notice of a division in parts.
Maybe I understand pirates wish for something new to shoot. But this is not the wish for fight between some guys who are equal to each other but the search for easy unarmed victims only. So far: keep whining. And keep spamming this annoying thread. I'm out here.
If there are some more reasonable ideas about more smooth and floating borders between high and lowsec space, they will roared down to the same war as always. No need to participate for me again. It's time wasting only. - this is an unskilled forum char |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
204
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 17:20:00 -
[1200] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote: It's probably important to point out that most freighters are bought by individuals. Once you figure out how, Isk is not so hard to come by in eve.
People who invest time in their eve skills benefit by being rewarded with bigger profits and opportunities, which us probably as it should be, otherwise people would not invest time and the game would not be so rich.
Additionally, "big corps" don't hand out expensive assets to players as a rule, since the threat of theft is high and there is no law against theft, or indeed any recourse whatsoever in eve. Most JFs and freighters are privately owned I can assure you.
Eve is a social game. If you want to get the most out of it, you need to get social and form or join a corp - and then invest in it. This is also desirable.
So with lowsec separating hisec empires, we are saying that investing in eve skills and your social network will bring better rewards. Savvy soloers will also enjoy excess profits.
I am struggling to understand what would be undesirable about this. Human beings like to strive to be better. We can't all be born at the top. Eve is the epitome of an egalitarian society where anyone can get ahead.
Separate the empires. People will cope, adapt and thrive. People who never leave hisec won't actually notice the difference. In-empire hauling will continue to be a low skill activity, intra-empire hauling will become a specialist skill.
This is good isn't it?
I can see your thinking but still think this would increase the separation between the empires and benefit only the larger groups. It would be too easy for large corps to choke the trade routes to all but themselves (and allies). This would not encourage people to leave hi-sec at all but further entrench them I feel.
Hi-sec serves a purpose and needs to be freely navigable to do so, as you say greater profits are available from low/null but individuals must choose to make that jump, not be forced to do so.
Enticements and inducements to run into low would be better than creating low-sec buffer zones. I regularly jump into low and have great fun running through in a crappy nereus. Is it nerve-wracking? Hell yes...Is it fun? Damn right...Do I care if I lose a crappy loot fitted t1 hauler? nope. We need ways to show people that it's fun to do things differently, but even then if manufacturing in hi-sec is their thing good luck to them. It should always be a choice to enter low-sec space.
All I could see happening would be blockade runners hauling goods the 2 jumps from area to area, pretty much limiting the inter-regional trade ti high isk density goods or bulk goods carried by corps big enough to mount a defensible convoy
A different take on this... Hi-Sec folks tend to include the PvE people who would be interested in better storyline development etc. Some kind of storyline development that drew them into low-sec by jumping in through empire dropped cynos and such would be more likely to draw them in to run missions. If the mission site was effectively safe until completion, but you were on your own to make your way out afterwards then I think this would likely draw more people in and provide better hunting opportunities for the low-sec folks too.
The higher level the mission, the further into low you are dropped so a lvl II mission would drop you 2 jumps in, lvl II 3 jumps in, lvl IV 4 jumps in. You want all the loot and salvage? Better bring a corpmate to help carry it. You'd also better be ready to fight your way out...
These kind of missions could easily be linked to story developments in futre and even live events setup.
|
|
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
618
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 18:12:00 -
[1201] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
I can see your thinking but still think this would increase the separation between the empires and benefit only the larger groups. It would be too easy for large corps to choke the trade routes to all but themselves (and allies). This would not encourage people to leave hi-sec at all but further entrench them I feel.
Hi-sec serves a purpose and needs to be freely navigable to do so, as you say greater profits are available from low/null but individuals must choose to make that jump, not be forced to do so.
Enticements and inducements to run into low would be better than creating low-sec buffer zones. I regularly jump into low and have great fun running through in a crappy nereus. Is it nerve-wracking? Hell yes...Is it fun? Damn right...Do I care if I lose a crappy loot fitted t1 hauler? nope. We need ways to show people that it's fun to do things differently, but even then if manufacturing in hi-sec is their thing good luck to them. It should always be a choice to enter low-sec space.
All I could see happening would be blockade runners hauling goods the 2 jumps from area to area, pretty much limiting the inter-regional trade ti high isk density goods or bulk goods carried by corps big enough to mount a defensible convoy
A different take on this... Hi-Sec folks tend to include the PvE people who would be interested in better storyline development etc. Some kind of storyline development that drew them into low-sec by jumping in through empire dropped cynos and such would be more likely to draw them in to run missions. If the mission site was effectively safe until completion, but you were on your own to make your way out afterwards then I think this would likely draw more people in and provide better hunting opportunities for the low-sec folks too.
The higher level the mission, the further into low you are dropped so a lvl II mission would drop you 2 jumps in, lvl II 3 jumps in, lvl IV 4 jumps in. You want all the loot and salvage? Better bring a corpmate to help carry it. You'd also better be ready to fight your way out...
These kind of missions could easily be linked to story developments in futre and even live events setup.
You say you think this and feel that. I understand the feelings but in truth improvements to human society don't happen through thoughts and feelings, they happen through rigorous examination of the facts and the testing of hypotheses (thoughts) against experimental data (facts). I am of course thinking of such things and the eradication of Polio, Smallpox, malnutrition and so on..
So lets look at some facts.
We do have storyline missions that draw you into lowsec. We do have level 5 missions, which are exclusively in lowsec. These things exist. They may be a bit rubbish and in need of improvement, I'll grant you that. But they are there.
Another fact is that lowsec dwellers don't need to be given opportunities - they are the kind of people who find them. This trait is common to successful people in real life. While some accept the staus-quo and/or moan about their weight, poverty, race, gender or whatever; others get off their bums and make stuff happen. Behold the lowsec priate/explorer/FW pilot.
My view is that hisec is full of people who would like some adventure, but need a reason. This is how you get otherwise intelligent young men to fight in a bloody dangerous war - you give them a cause.
At the moment, there is no cause. Hisec is full of people not realising their potential. Trolling around from jita to Osmon, earning isk to bling up ships which hisec pirates then blow up for fun, profit and tears!
I have to be completely honest with you - I have lost more ships in hisec than in low, null and w-space put together. Hisec makes you lazy and passive, but it's actually very dangerous if you are carrying anything of value, or even just meet someone who likes ganking people. You cannot take preemptive action against pirates - you are entirely at their mercy.
It might be surprising to read this, but this is how the pirates, griefers and trolls see it. In lowsec they really have to work hard for their kills - because people shoot back first!
There is another theme to your post - this idea of "big corps" gate-camping choke points. First of all, "big corps" have better things to do than hunting low value targets for more than a short time. They have plex's to buy and pvp ships to replace. They need to make money. You only make money by going after high value targets. High value targets make money by avoiding trouble. The OP is proposing multiple lowsec routes between regions - i.e. no choke points. There will always be a way round.
I have further proposed that there could be one, long highsec route between regions. Something quite boringly long like 20 or 30 jumps. Then if you really, really want to avoid lowsec you can do it, but the extra money will be made by managing risks through the lowsec routes. This then does give what we agree people need - incentive. Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1104
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 18:22:00 -
[1202] - Quote
A real dev post would be nice... https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
DSpite Culhach
284
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 19:37:00 -
[1203] - Quote
The kind of issues I see with these changes is that the game has been running 10 years. All the "tricks" that can be extracted from the mechanics have been already found, and are been milked non stop.
If you did this, it would have zero effect on the large established organizations, that are already making a ton of money in null, and usually just come to hisec to suicide gank blingy ships and overloaded freighters. With this move, they will start making even more isk, and now with no ships lost to CONCORD.
I only see Red/Black Frog gaining a ton more freighter and escort pilots and making a killing in the new economy, doing all the heavy lifting for everyone.
It's not that I mind the general idea, but unless CCP brings out an expansion called Scorched Universe, I don't see it happening. ~ |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
205
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 19:46:00 -
[1204] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote: You say you think this and feel that. I understand the feelings but in truth improvements to human society don't happen through thoughts and feelings, they happen through rigorous examination of the facts and the testing of hypotheses (thoughts) against experimental data (facts). I am of course thinking of such things and the eradication of Polio, Smallpox, malnutrition and so on..
OK 'Thoughts and feelings' aside lets go with facts. Sunai's previous post sums it up. Those with no wish to leave hi-sec never will and no amount of space between hisec will make them do so, if anything no or only a very long hi-sec route would just push them from the game lowering the player base. Also this is assuming that a hisec playing style of manufacture/trade/PI is in some way invalid or less than a low-sec PvP choice. I entirely disagree here, each style takes a particular and distinct set of skills in character terms and in player terms.
As you say low sec missions do exist as do level V's but if you want more people coming into low you need to entice them in. Those who are averse do to the potential gate-camps on the way into low-sec need the initial impetus to make that jump...a new kind of mission landing someone in low-sec to avoid the initial barrier to them would persuade more to do so, and once they've been in they'll be back for more.
Those of us in hi-sec who want aome adventure already do go and find it, otherwise where would the new players in low/nu/WH's come from? The problem is to pursuade those wavering on the edge to make the jump. As for those who want to stay hi-sec and live a trading/manufacturing etc lifestyle? That's their choice, it's a perfectly valid choice and shouldn't b looked down upon in any way. In the same way that they would have no chance in PvP a PvP specialist is unlikely to stand a chance against them in business.
I like eve because of the distinct career possibilities and will always be opposed to anything that forces unnecessary change on any play style without very good reason. So far I haven't seen that good reason for this proposal. |
Kerblar Erzma
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 20:36:00 -
[1205] - Quote
Thinly veiled "i dont want my ship to be destroyed while suicide ganking freightes" thread. It already is zero risk game, you want everything to be handed to you on a plate? |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
618
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 20:46:00 -
[1206] - Quote
Kerblar Erzma wrote:Thinly veiled "i dont want my ship to be destroyed while suicide ganking freightes" thread. It already is zero risk game, you want everything to be handed to you on a plate?
I have never suicide ganked anyone, and never will. I still support the motion.
It's actually a thread about how scarcity of supply makes a market.
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
104
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 07:26:00 -
[1207] - Quote
DSpite Culhach wrote:The kind of issues I see with these changes is that the game has been running 10 years. All the "tricks" that can be extracted from the mechanics have been already found, and are been milked non stop.
If you did this, it would have zero effect on the large established organizations, that are already making a ton of money in null, and usually just come to hisec to suicide gank blingy ships and overloaded freighters. With this move, they will start making even more isk, and now with no ships lost to CONCORD.
I only see Red/Black Frog gaining a ton more freighter and escort pilots and making a killing in the new economy, doing all the heavy lifting for everyone.
It's not that I mind the general idea, but unless CCP brings out an expansion called Scorched Universe, I don't see it happening. First of all, the points you are making are based on the way traffic moves in empire right now. Sure if they put lowsec between the empires and traffic moves like it does today with all high sec in between empires, then yeah i could see this catastrophe you guys are imagining. But that's not what would happen. Traffic would change. Each empire would have it's own local traffic of moving things from the edge of the empire to the trade hub and back. But this won't dump a ton of targets into the lap of everyone in null and low sec. This will only change the dynamic between low and high sec. Suicide ganking may or may not change it will definitely not get any worse because of this change. If you fly a freighter into lowsec, whether it's now or it's in a future with this change then you're putting it at significant risk.
This change doesn't make high sec less safe. This change doesn't make low sec more dangerous. This change doesn't force anyone to go into lowsec or engage in any non-consensual pvp. All this change does is create a boarder between the empires. A neutral zone where the systems are contested. This could be the future site of FW and this could create a great area to have Roleplay events.
Red/Black Frog seem to already be working at their maximum capacity. I don't know if they'd be able to support the entirety of EVE. And on another point, Logistics is very effort heavy. I'm not sure if you've done any living outside of high sec but getting stuff you need there and stuff you need to sell out is not as easy as auto-piloting to (insert local trade hub here). Doing logistics can be extremely profitable in those hard to reach areas. However such profitability doesn't exist in high sec because of the lack of effort required to auto pilot a freighter. By separating the empires with low sec, we will add back that effort to hauling and once again make it profitable.
Another point about the JF logistics is that they require Fuel. And the more JF's there are hauling things between empires the more fuel they're going to use. And the more Fuel they use, the more demand there will be on fuel. And when you have a high demand and a limited resource you end up with an increase in price. And as that price increases the cost to jump stuff will increase and the amount of isk you have to make to profit from JF hauling increases too. This will happen until an equilibrium is found between the cost and profit of JF hauling and this will leave a window of unforeseeable profitability for hauling gate to gate. Adding PoSs and such to the overhead will affect this too. (Remember Jump and PoS fuel are not free!!!)
Now about those escort pilots making some money. How about that, creating an entire new profession in EVE. This would be one of the greatest results that could come of a change like this. This is one of, if not the reason for this thread. To create a new dynamic where something like that is possible. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
104
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 07:30:00 -
[1208] - Quote
double post~~ |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
104
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 08:07:00 -
[1209] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: OK 'Thoughts and feelings' aside lets go with facts. Sunai's previous post sums it up. Those with no wish to leave hi-sec never will and no amount of space between hisec will make them do so, if anything no or only a very long hi-sec route would just push them from the game lowering the player base.
Since facts is a theme. People don't unsub because of (insert mechanic change here). They unsub because mechanics DON'T change.
The argument that players will unsub because of some game change is invalid. http://jestertrek.com/eve/blog/2013/eve-players-exp-2013-2.png As you can see here, after every major content expansion there is a rise in player subscription activity. However after a while that will start to decrease again until the next major content expansion. So, as you can see, when things change player subs increase. When changes are not made (especially after a major content-void expansion) then player subs decrease. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
206
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 08:57:00 -
[1210] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: OK 'Thoughts and feelings' aside lets go with facts. Sunai's previous post sums it up. Those with no wish to leave hi-sec never will and no amount of space between hisec will make them do so, if anything no or only a very long hi-sec route would just push them from the game lowering the player base.
Since facts is a theme. People don't unsub because of (insert mechanic change here). They unsub because mechanics DON'T change. The argument that players will unsub because of some game change is invalid. http://jestertrek.com/eve/blog/2013/eve-players-exp-2013-2.pngAs you can see here, after every major content expansion there is a rise in player subscription activity. However after a while that will start to decrease again until the next major content expansion. So, as you can see, when things change player subs increase. When changes are not made (especially after a major content-void expansion) then player subs decrease.
My point is that this idea would force a change on a large section of the player base that they absolutely would not want for seemingly no reason. If those players wanted to go into lowsec they already would be. There is no change you could make that would make the hisec types who only want to live in hisec even consider jumping to low in a freighter. Making the trips much longer for them to navigate hisec would heavily impact their profits and pretty much directly transfer it to those low sec groups who are prepared to run freighters through. I'm pretty sure this would alienate those hisec folks that just got mugged.
My main point is that you need to give people more reasons to go into lowsec *by choice*. Eve should always be about choice, and this suggestion removes one of those choices to all practical purposes (In my opinion of course). Hence my trying to make constructive suggestions as to how people could be attracted into low for the benefit of all.
I still don't buy into the idea that the hisec players 'should get out more' either. It is their choice to play in hisec and engage in business PvP. They enjoy that, they are pretty brutal at it, and they will not change what they do to give losec folks more targets. If the changes proposed stopped them from playing Eve the way they like to then there has to be a real risk that they would simply stop caring and therefore stop playing.
I acknowledge that the OP states a very long route around hisec would be available but that simply cripples starter players wishing to explore without running through losec initially and would make the start SoE Epic Arc mindnumbingly dull purely through the travel Obviously a huge increase in travel time would just decimate profit margins on many business activities too.
I still haven't seen anything that would persuade me this is a good idea but certainly hope the discussion gets people to think of other ways to encourage those interested to make the jump into losec now and again.
|
|
Basil Pupkin
Why So Platypus
50
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 15:00:00 -
[1211] - Quote
I'll start with this incredible load of bullcrap.
Erutpar Ambient wrote:First of all, the points you are making are based on the way traffic moves in empire right now. Sure if they put lowsec between the empires and traffic moves like it does today with all high sec in between empires, then yeah i could see this catastrophe you guys are imagining. But that's not what would happen. Traffic would change. Each empire would have it's own local traffic of moving things from the edge of the empire to the trade hub and back. But this won't dump a ton of targets into the lap of everyone in null and low sec. This will only change the dynamic between low and high sec. Suicide ganking may or may not change it will definitely not get any worse because of this change. If you fly a freighter into lowsec, whether it's now or it's in a future with this change then you're putting it at significant risk. Flying a freighter in lowsec is no risk. Certain death is called certain because it leaves nothing to chance, and there is no room for risky gambles, because nothing is a gamble. It's suicide, it always were, and it always would be.
Erutpar Ambient wrote:This change doesn't make high sec less safe. This change doesn't make low sec more dangerous. This change doesn't force anyone to go into lowsec or engage in any non-consensual pvp. All this change does is create a boarder between the empires. A neutral zone where the systems are contested. This could be the future site of FW and this could create a great area to have Roleplay events. This change doesn't make hisec less unsafe, it just destroys it completely and replaces it with 4 little unsafe hisecs. The lowsec is not a risk because it can be avoided. If it cannot be avoided, it's certain death. It lowers the risk and destroy the reward, along with hisec. "We don't force you to go to lowsec, just stay in your little pocket and lose 90% of your profits, NOBODY IS FORCING YOU!" (c) You. "Let's do the future FW! We can start by obliterating hisec." (c) You.
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Red/Black Frog seem to already be working at their maximum capacity. I don't know if they'd be able to support the entirety of EVE. And on another point, Logistics is very effort heavy. I'm not sure if you've done any living outside of high sec but getting stuff you need there and stuff you need to sell out is not as easy as auto-piloting to (insert local trade hub here). Doing logistics can be extremely profitable in those hard to reach areas. However such profitability doesn't exist in high sec because of the lack of effort required to auto pilot a freighter. By separating the empires with low sec, we will add back that effort to hauling and once again make it profitable. Cyno to station, pick up stuff, jump bridge, jump bridge, cyno to blue-camped lowsec near designated trade hub, done. Time: 7 minutes. EFFORT. You have to spend twice more time pushing 7 gates in empire to the hub. And you can be actually ganked there, a possibility unimaginable for low/null jump drive LOLogistics. And nope, profitability is just about as much as doing anything else, because if it were profitable, anyone would be doing it, considering how ridiculously little effort and risk it is.
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Another point about the JF logistics is that they require Fuel. And the more JF's there are hauling things between empires the more fuel they're going to use. And the more Fuel they use, the more demand there will be on fuel. And when you have a high demand and a limited resource you end up with an increase in price. And as that price increases the cost to jump stuff will increase and the amount of isk you have to make to profit from JF hauling increases too. This will happen until an equilibrium is found between the cost and profit of JF hauling and this will leave a window of unforeseeable profitability for hauling gate to gate. Adding PoSs and such to the overhead will affect this too. (Remember Jump and PoS fuel are not free!!!) Done some calculations, and found that current Red Frog costs more than jump fuel over the same distances, but that doesn't matter. What does matter, however, is that power blocks will monopolize cross-empire bridges from nearest null entries quicker than goons taking back their words about non-aggression once moon rebalance hit Tranquility.
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Now about those escort pilots making some money. How about that, creating an entire new profession in EVE. This would be one of the greatest results that could come of a change like this. This is one of, if not the reason for this thread. To create a new dynamic where something like that is possible. Blobbers will easily break any escort. Mercs can only harass nullsec blobbers from hisec, entering low is as suicidal for them as it is for a freighter.
So, in short: 1) blue donut, major buff - a new market easily exploitable with blobs. 2) haulers, traders - unsubbing or paying for cyno rights to blobbers and hauling for marginal profit, if any. 3) industrials - forced to join blue donut and work for free, or just work for free. I think they choose unsub. 4) mercs - screwed with hisec destruction. 5) hisec - destroyed.
Good job. |
Justin Cody
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
105
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 16:37:00 -
[1212] - Quote
Basil Pupkin wrote: Stupid stuff
Obviously you don't recall the era before the great gate redirect as well as new regions (hello dronelands, W-space and black rise).
At one point there were at least half the number of 0.0 entrances that there are now and you could go from amarr to rens through high sec in something like 6 jumps. Low Sec itself was more pockets than contiguous areas like it is now. I think the gate redirect was in 2005 and also added were new 00 entrances to allow for easier access by small gang forces seeking to infiltrate.
The state of the game in terms of high-sec/low-sec transportation routes is in actuality fairly in balance with now trying to go from Rens > Jita taking far longer than it used to and incentivising at least the small cargo runners to take a chance at running through rancer or through amamake to get to amarr.
To however FORCE people through low sec is a poor idea.
What is actually a good idea is to incentivize the use of low sec...or you can be a smart cookie and probe for direct High->High wormholes or even take a chance at going through a C5 WH chain to another high sec if you find it.
There are many options available to the intelligent pilot. |
Amanda Rosewater
Wolfger's Retreat
1
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 17:41:00 -
[1213] - Quote
Justin Cody wrote:
To however FORCE people through low sec is a poor idea.
This doesn't force anyone to do anything. If you don't want to go into low sec, then you don't go to another empire's space. You aren't FORCED to go there.
If you are going to knock this idea because it forces people to go into low sec, then you should also be getting rid of high sec missions that force you to low sec to complete. Or high sec pockets you can't get to without going through low sec. Or hell, keep going. I want to go to ORE controlled space, but don't want to be forced into 0.0. I don't want to be forced to go to low sec to do lvl 5's, so put them in high sec. I don't want to be forced into 0.0 to mine high value ores, so put them in high sec. I want to see the eve gate, but I don't want to be forced to go to low sec to see it. Etc. etc. etc.
Nothing in this idea FORCES a player to do anything. The player always has a choice, and they can simply choose to stay within the confines of a single empire if they choose to never enter low sec. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1108
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 20:07:00 -
[1214] - Quote
what is with all the locked topics. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
DrysonBennington
Eagle's Talon's
58
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 20:51:00 -
[1215] - Quote
How would the neutral zone between each empire be built? Would there be a security loss involved if you engage a player from another race?
How about if you engage a player from your own race? Shouldn't such an engagement lead to a severe security loss where you would have to remain in the neutral zone for a certain amount of time until the security loss was revoked and your security status returned to status that it was before you engaged the opposite race player or a permanent security loss for engaging a player from your own race?
Neutral Zone would be rather different from low sector and null space because you wouldn't even be allowed to go into low or null let alone high sector space if you have been tagged as having a neutral zone violation. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
106
|
Posted - 2014.02.21 10:04:00 -
[1216] - Quote
Amanda Rosewater wrote:Justin Cody wrote:
To however FORCE people through low sec is a poor idea.
This doesn't force anyone to do anything. If you don't want to go into low sec, then you don't go to another empire's space. You aren't FORCED to go there. If you are going to knock this idea because it forces people to go into low sec, then you should also be getting rid of high sec missions that force you to low sec to complete. Or high sec pockets you can't get to without going through low sec. Or hell, keep going. I want to go to ORE controlled space, but don't want to be forced into 0.0. I don't want to be forced to go to low sec to do lvl 5's, so put them in high sec. I don't want to be forced into 0.0 to mine high value ores, so put them in high sec. I want to see the eve gate, but I don't want to be forced to go to low sec to see it. Etc. etc. etc. Nothing in this idea FORCES a player to do anything. The player always has a choice, and they can simply choose to stay within the confines of a single empire if they choose to never enter low sec. Thank you. Couldn't have said it better myself.
Commander Ted wrote:what is with all the locked topics. what?
DrysonBennington wrote:I have never been to low sec. also what? |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
210
|
Posted - 2014.02.21 11:02:00 -
[1217] - Quote
Amanda Rosewater wrote:Justin Cody wrote:
To however FORCE people through low sec is a poor idea.
This doesn't force anyone to do anything. If you don't want to go into low sec, then you don't go to another empire's space. You aren't FORCED to go there. If you are going to knock this idea because it forces people to go into low sec, then you should also be getting rid of high sec missions that force you to low sec to complete. Or high sec pockets you can't get to without going through low sec. Or hell, keep going. I want to go to ORE controlled space, but don't want to be forced into 0.0. I don't want to be forced to go to low sec to do lvl 5's, so put them in high sec. I don't want to be forced into 0.0 to mine high value ores, so put them in high sec. I want to see the eve gate, but I don't want to be forced to go to low sec to see it. Etc. etc. etc. Nothing in this idea FORCES a player to do anything. The player always has a choice, and they can simply choose to stay within the confines of a single empire if they choose to never enter low sec.
It doesn't force players to do anything but it does arbitrarily take away large chunks of profit from those in hi-sec who's business relies on stability and hand it straight to the larger lo-sec groups who would monopolize and control the trade routes. The idea that there is still a long route around hisec would still destroy profit margins. It is *effectively* forcing players to use losec routes to maintain profitability whilst providing the losec folks with more big juicy targets for free.
Saying a business player can choose between very real risk of massive loss from freighter destruction or guaranteed huge loss from tripling the hauling route is really no choice at all. To get more players to go to losec means giving them reason to go and the means to do so in a way that they believe they can have a fair chance with. I know that it isn't as scary getting into losec as many believe but that is the problem. Large numbers of players probably avoid going into losec due to the perception that you get bounced at the first gate (which can of course happen)
That is the reasoning behind my suggestion for a new set of missions that cyno the player into the mission site in deep space. It would get people past the initial fear of jumping into low and still leave them having to navigate their own way out safely. Once players get used to operating in lo and losing ships more often they will begin to go back to losec by choice. In fact when they crave a combat fix hisec simply wouldn't cut it anymore most likely.
The key is getting players past the initial block to jumping in and effectively forcing them to do so by separating hisec into enclaves. Marginalizing new players and eisting indy players would do nothing to help the game overall.
|
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
106
|
Posted - 2014.02.22 06:42:00 -
[1218] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: It doesn't force players to do anything but it does arbitrarily take away large chunks of profit from those in hi-sec who's business relies on stability
Please give an example of this. |
Kiryen O'Bannon
Thrall Nation Brave Collective
63
|
Posted - 2014.02.22 08:26:00 -
[1219] - Quote
Amanda Rosewater wrote:Justin Cody wrote:
To however FORCE people through low sec is a poor idea.
This doesn't force anyone to do anything. If you don't want to go into low sec, then you don't go to another empire's space. You aren't FORCED to go there. If you are going to knock this idea because it forces people to go into low sec, then you should also be getting rid of high sec missions that force you to low sec to complete. Or high sec pockets you can't get to without going through low sec. Or hell, keep going. I want to go to ORE controlled space, but don't want to be forced into 0.0. I don't want to be forced to go to low sec to do lvl 5's, so put them in high sec. I don't want to be forced into 0.0 to mine high value ores, so put them in high sec. I want to see the eve gate, but I don't want to be forced to go to low sec to see it. Etc. etc. etc. Nothing in this idea FORCES a player to do anything. The player always has a choice, and they can simply choose to stay within the confines of a single empire if they choose to never enter low sec. Yes it does. They would no longer be able to fly from point A to point B as they do now without entering lowsec; A and B being in different empires.
That's what forced means. They would have to either do the activity at much greater risk, with no demostrable increase in reward,, or cease that activity. Claiming they aren't bein "forced" is semantic pedantry of the worst sort trying to catch someone in a technical linguistic error to divert attention from the real issue. That issue is that this is just a thinly veiled "I want it to be easier to blow stuff up" with no indication at all of how reward would increase for this much larger risk. Freighters and to a lesser extent T1 haulers would he of suddenly far less use.
People throw terms around like "emergent gameplay", but as usual for the playerbase that just means "bbuff my playstyle and sccrew someone else because loaded language annd ad hom fallacy." These arguments,, usually heavily referencing the ursine, ignore that much of this highsec activity is alts funding the activity of low/null.
For this idea to be viable it would need to be of clear benefit to the highsec character affected,, in proportion to risk. It isnt, and probably cannot be made so, and is thus DOA. |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2207
|
Posted - 2014.02.22 08:33:00 -
[1220] - Quote
Kiryen O'Bannon wrote:Amanda Rosewater wrote:Justin Cody wrote:
To however FORCE people through low sec is a poor idea.
This doesn't force anyone to do anything. If you don't want to go into low sec, then you don't go to another empire's space. You aren't FORCED to go there. If you are going to knock this idea because it forces people to go into low sec, then you should also be getting rid of high sec missions that force you to low sec to complete. Or high sec pockets you can't get to without going through low sec. Or hell, keep going. I want to go to ORE controlled space, but don't want to be forced into 0.0. I don't want to be forced to go to low sec to do lvl 5's, so put them in high sec. I don't want to be forced into 0.0 to mine high value ores, so put them in high sec. I want to see the eve gate, but I don't want to be forced to go to low sec to see it. Etc. etc. etc. Nothing in this idea FORCES a player to do anything. The player always has a choice, and they can simply choose to stay within the confines of a single empire if they choose to never enter low sec. Yes it does. They would no longer be able to fly from point A to point B as they do now without entering lowsec; A and B being in different empires. That's what forced means. They would have to either do the activity at much greater risk, with no demostrable increase in reward,, or cease that activity. Claiming they aren't bein "forced" is semantic pedantry of the worst sort trying to catch someone in a technical linguistic error to divert attention from the real issue. That issue is that this is just a thinly veiled "I want it to be easier to blow stuff up" with no indication at all of how reward would increase for this much larger risk. Freighters and to a lesser extent T1 haulers would he of suddenly far less use. People throw terms around like "emergent gameplay", but as usual for the playerbase that just means "bbuff my playstyle and sccrew someone else because loaded language annd ad hom fallacy." These arguments,, usually heavily referencing the ursine, ignore that much of this highsec activity is alts funding the activity of low/null. For this idea to be viable it would need to be of clear benefit to the highsec character affected,, in proportion to risk. It isnt, and probably cannot be made so, and is thus DOA. What forces you to travel between empires? Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
211
|
Posted - 2014.02.22 11:15:00 -
[1221] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: It doesn't force players to do anything but it does arbitrarily take away large chunks of profit from those in hi-sec who's business relies on stability
Please give an example of this.
Currently for trader characters they make much of their profits by hauling goods bought cheaply where one empire has an excess to another empire where there is a dearth. They often use isk per jump as a measure of profitability and tripling the jumps basically cuts the profitability to a third since time is money. The argument here is that they can keep making that profit by going through losec to get there but suddenly requiring the very real risk of doing so to keep making the same profit? Traders simply won't bother and the market will destabilize.
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
211
|
Posted - 2014.02.22 11:18:00 -
[1222] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote: What forces you to travel between empires?
That's most often what generates the profits. Many traders buy in dixie and sell in jita because that makes them profit. Suddenly you throw in having to traverse losec (to get there in any realistic time) and the risk to profit goes through the roof.Sure a player can choose not to go through losec and make that profit but you just arbitrarily removed their game from eve.
|
Oblivion King
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2014.02.22 12:33:00 -
[1223] - Quote
A good idea would be the FW system in low in the route between empires, CCP should change them to 0.4-0.5 and introduce something new for players, CITIZENSHIP, what this does is each player/civilian can choose who his citizenship belongs to (can be without fighting in factionwarfare) and it provides safe haven in those systems, meaning there is a small presence of NPC militia/faction ships to "guard" that system, they are unlike Concord though and only attack enemies of the milita on sight, they can be tanked and destroyed though,
Only citizens and FW fighters ( associated with the conquering faction) can benefit from the protection of NPC militia, neutrals/reds (non fw/citizens) do not get shot on sight but also do not benefit from help from the NPC militia.
And Only citizens and FW participants (to the conquering faction) are allowed to dock in the system, furthermore any neutral entering the system can be shot freely by players (turns suspect) because it is a militia ground. |
M1k3y Koontz
Thorn Project Surely You're Joking
548
|
Posted - 2014.02.22 13:07:00 -
[1224] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote: Only in uncatchable frigs, inties and covert ops ships. Which would be completely pointless. You would end up with 95% of people hanging around Jita and the rest a complete wasteland.
Solitude is only reachable through Syndicate or a long roundabout path through Aridia and is heavily populated. It has a small local tradehub. It basically acts as a proof of concept for this idea, and show that local trade hubs would strengthen. How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
211
|
Posted - 2014.02.22 15:28:00 -
[1225] - Quote
I don't think they would strengthen if the routes between the major hubs were effectively cut. You would end up with many more local people chasing the same diminishing profits and the main profitable trade routes being monopolized.
There must be better ways to get people to fly to losec by choice rather than by forcing them. |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Black Core Alliance
1403
|
Posted - 2014.02.24 20:54:00 -
[1226] - Quote
I like this idea. GĮĢAny fool can criticize, condemn, and complain - and most fools do. GĮĨ - Dale Carnegie
Maximze your Industry Potential! - Download EVE Isk per Hour! |
Vartan Sarkisian
Reasonable People Of Sound Mind
138
|
Posted - 2014.02.25 12:49:00 -
[1227] - Quote
+1
I like this idea. I think I put something similar not eh forums a long time ago, currently there is no real difference where you are, if you are in galente space you have caldari and Amarr stations/npc corps etc which seems nuts, maybe a couple of stations in a diplomatic type function but nothing more.
I am sure that there would be a massive amount of work involved but as the basis of an idea I would like to see this or something like it. It would certainly make things more interesting. And will probably get rid of the bottle neck that is Jita with each faction having their own busy hub,
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be lost in time... like tears in rain... Time to die. |
Luwc
Easy Co. Fatal Ascension
46
|
Posted - 2014.02.25 13:30:00 -
[1228] - Quote
+1.
DO IT |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
217
|
Posted - 2014.02.25 13:41:00 -
[1229] - Quote
Vartan Sarkisian wrote:+1
I like this idea. I think I put something similar not eh forums a long time ago, currently there is no real difference where you are, if you are in galente space you have caldari and Amarr stations/npc corps etc which seems nuts, maybe a couple of stations in a diplomatic type function but nothing more.
I am sure that there would be a massive amount of work involved but as the basis of an idea I would like to see this or something like it. It would certainly make things more interesting. And will probably get rid of the bottle neck that is Jita with each faction having their own busy hub,
It would make a big difference to traders since they buy cheap at one hub and sell for profit at another, this would at bets severly cut the profit margins for such players for nothing in return. If you want lo/null sec regions around hi sec I prefer the ideas in the DEEEEEEP space thread, where anything outside a defined CONCORD patrol range becomes null.
In all honesty this idea would improve my profits for the goods I produce, but I can't support something that would cripple others for no good reason. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
675
|
Posted - 2014.02.25 15:30:00 -
[1230] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Vartan Sarkisian wrote:+1
I like this idea. I think I put something similar not eh forums a long time ago, currently there is no real difference where you are, if you are in galente space you have caldari and Amarr stations/npc corps etc which seems nuts, maybe a couple of stations in a diplomatic type function but nothing more.
I am sure that there would be a massive amount of work involved but as the basis of an idea I would like to see this or something like it. It would certainly make things more interesting. And will probably get rid of the bottle neck that is Jita with each faction having their own busy hub,
It would make a big difference to traders since they buy cheap at one hub and sell for profit at another, this would at bets severly cut the profit margins for such players for nothing in return. If you want lo/null sec regions around hi sec I prefer the ideas in the DEEEEEEP space thread, where anything outside a defined CONCORD patrol range becomes null. In all honesty this idea would improve my profits for the goods I produce, but I can't support something that would cripple others for no good reason.
With fewer people making the lowsec runs, wouldn't that increase your profits for doing them? Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
218
|
Posted - 2014.02.25 15:56:00 -
[1231] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
With fewer people making the lowsec runs, wouldn't that increase your profits for doing them?
My profits yes as I move smaller higher value goods in a blockade runner, but not the traders who shift stuff in bulk, they would suffer badly and probably wouldn't bother going through low. Then power blocks who control the trade routes would take up the trade and gather the profit of running goods from one empire to the other.
It would break that playstyle in my opinion. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
676
|
Posted - 2014.02.25 16:00:00 -
[1232] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:
With fewer people making the lowsec runs, wouldn't that increase your profits for doing them?
My profits yes as I move smaller higher value goods in a blockade runner, but not the traders who shift stuff in bulk, they would suffer badly and probably wouldn't bother going through low. Then power blocks who control the trade routes would take up the trade and gather the profit of running goods from one empire to the other. It would break that playstyle in my opinion.
What power blocks?
What stops a few individuals scouting a low sec route and shifting some goods through it?
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
218
|
Posted - 2014.02.25 16:08:00 -
[1233] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:
With fewer people making the lowsec runs, wouldn't that increase your profits for doing them?
My profits yes as I move smaller higher value goods in a blockade runner, but not the traders who shift stuff in bulk, they would suffer badly and probably wouldn't bother going through low. Then power blocks who control the trade routes would take up the trade and gather the profit of running goods from one empire to the other. It would break that playstyle in my opinion. What power blocks? What stops a few individuals scouting a low sec route and shifting some goods through it?
Nothing but then many people in hisec are there because it fits with the fre time they have to give to Eve. They don't have the time or desire to run multiple accounts and go through the excess effort above the current PvP they perform in trading. Take away the main means of profit they have and they most likely won't bother as in many cases they simply won't be able to invest in multiple chars scouting routes.
As I said it would benefit me but that doesn't mean that others playstyle is wrong or somehow invalid and I will defend theirs in these discussions as much as I would defend my own.
In terms of power blocs if you create a natural choke point and barrier that can be exploited then groups will form around it for that very purpose. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
676
|
Posted - 2014.02.25 16:32:00 -
[1234] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:
With fewer people making the lowsec runs, wouldn't that increase your profits for doing them?
My profits yes as I move smaller higher value goods in a blockade runner, but not the traders who shift stuff in bulk, they would suffer badly and probably wouldn't bother going through low. Then power blocks who control the trade routes would take up the trade and gather the profit of running goods from one empire to the other. It would break that playstyle in my opinion. What power blocks? What stops a few individuals scouting a low sec route and shifting some goods through it? Nothing but then many people in hisec are there because it fits with the fre time they have to give to Eve. They don't have the time or desire to run multiple accounts and go through the excess effort above the current PvP they perform in trading. Take away the main means of profit they have and they most likely won't bother as in many cases they simply won't be able to invest in multiple chars scouting routes. As I said it would benefit me but that doesn't mean that others playstyle is wrong or somehow invalid and I will defend theirs in these discussions as much as I would defend my own. In terms of power blocs if you create a natural choke point and barrier that can be exploited then groups will form around it for that very purpose.
The OP has specifically addressed the [non]creation of choke points, seeking to give haulers many options when picking a route through the lowsec systems.
There is no need to create a second account to scout a hauler - a friend will do.
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
107
|
Posted - 2014.02.26 06:00:00 -
[1235] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Erutpar Ambient wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: It doesn't force players to do anything but it does arbitrarily take away large chunks of profit from those in hi-sec who's business relies on stability
Please give an example of this. Currently for trader characters they make much of their profits by hauling goods bought cheaply where one empire has an excess to another empire where there is a dearth. They often use isk per jump as a measure of profitability and tripling the jumps basically cuts the profitability to a third since time is money. The argument here is that they can keep making that profit by going through losec to get there but suddenly requiring the very real risk of doing so to keep making the same profit? Traders simply won't bother and the market will destabilize. So basically your argument is that hauling for small differences in cost from place to place is large chunks of profit in high sec?
Well true or not, this change wouldn't take that away. Instead of moving between dodixie, jita, rens, hek, amarr you would be moving from the edges of each empire to the central trade hub. In fact there could potentially be even greater profit to be made from this than from normalizing each major trade hub between themselves. People want to buy everything in a central location, so there prices will be a premium, and there may be greater reason to dump and go from across lowsec areas if you're trying to move more than one load. Think about that for just a little bit. |
Mixu Paatelainen
Brutal Deluxe.
82
|
Posted - 2014.02.26 15:24:00 -
[1236] - Quote
Thumbs up. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
218
|
Posted - 2014.02.26 15:39:00 -
[1237] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote: So basically your argument is that hauling for small differences in cost from place to place is large chunks of profit in high sec?
Well true or not, this change wouldn't take that away. Instead of moving between dodixie, jita, rens, hek, amarr you would be moving from the edges of each empire to the central trade hub. In fact there could potentially be even greater profit to be made from this than from normalizing each major trade hub between themselves. People want to buy everything in a central location, so there prices will be a premium, and there may be greater reason to dump and go from across lowsec areas if you're trying to move more than one load. Think about that for just a little bit.
If I'm not mistaken there are already shorter routes between empires that go through losec yet people avoid them in favour of the longer hisec routes. There must be a reason for this which I think are the reasons I already listed. Many hisec players are playing alone in the time they have free on a casual basis. They don't want or choose not to run in a corp. When they do run in a corp they often can't guarantee when other members will be online..
Also how would you out losec space between the empires? Convert some of the border system to losec? So what about the hisec folks who already live in those systems? suddenly they are dumped into losec without a by-your-leave? And their POS's that they earnt the hisec standings for now become big fat tyargets for losec dwellers without the slightest hint of a wardec?
There would be many problems with such an arbitrary change. I could understand introducing sec rated zones around systems though as previously discussed. This would give people the option to get into null space without jumping through gate-camps and would open up a new method of getting into low-null. Set up a cyno in deep space around the hi-sec system, jump freighter to there, then jump across losec cynos until you get back to hisec deep space..
If we could build deep space POS's there it would open up other possibilities too such as building capitals out there and then jumping them to the buyer and such. |
MoonglumX
Viaticus Consortium
1
|
Posted - 2014.02.26 16:06:00 -
[1238] - Quote
I would like to see something like this. This could mix up some of the dynamics of high sec at least. People AFK space trucking around the universe is far too easy. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
107
|
Posted - 2014.02.27 14:30:00 -
[1239] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: If I'm not mistaken there are already shorter routes between empires that go through losec yet people avoid them in favour of the longer hisec routes. There must be a reason for this which I think are the reasons I already listed. Many hisec players are playing alone in the time they have free on a casual basis. They don't want or choose not to run in a corp. When they do run in a corp they often can't guarantee when other members will be online..
Also how would you out losec space between the empires? Convert some of the border system to losec? So what about the hisec folks who already live in those systems? suddenly they are dumped into losec without a by-your-leave? And their POS's that they earnt the hisec standings for now become big fat tyargets for losec dwellers without the slightest hint of a wardec?
There would be many problems with such an arbitrary change. I could understand introducing sec rated zones around systems though as previously discussed. This would give people the option to get into null space without jumping through gate-camps and would open up a new method of getting into low-null. Set up a cyno in deep space around the hi-sec system, jump freighter to there, then jump across losec cynos until you get back to hisec deep space..
If we could build deep space POS's there it would open up other possibilities too such as building capitals out there and then jumping them to the buyer and such.
This is the whole point. There is no reason to go through any non-high sec system currently. You can auto-pilot to anywhere in empire worry free and get there without any effort. I don't really get what point you're trying to make here. But this is what we're wanting changed.
How it happens is up to the devs. They can do it in different ways. They could change systems from high sec to low sec or they could add new low sec systems between the existing high sec systems. Either way it doesn't matter. They would give plenty of time for people to move their assets out of the systems that will turn low sec. And even after that i'm pretty sure they'll relocate all your assets if you put in a ticket. So not all is lost if you get trapped. Same with the PoS stuff. You'd have plenty of time to move your pos before it turns low sec. Moving it though wouldn't happen. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
684
|
Posted - 2014.02.27 14:44:00 -
[1240] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:If I'm not mistaken there are already shorter routes between empires that go through losec yet people avoid them in favour of the longer hisec routes.
You are indeed mistaken. Some of the low sec routes between trade hubs are actually longer.
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
219
|
Posted - 2014.02.27 14:45:00 -
[1241] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote: This is the whole point. There is no reason to go through any non-high sec system currently. You can auto-pilot to anywhere in empire worry free and get there without any effort.
There shouldn't be a forced reason to go through losec, if a player chooses to stay hisec and trade between empires they should be able to do so. The empires in lore terms would not allow trade routes to be cut, and neither would CONCORD as trade routes will assist with stability of the regions.
My point is there should be no forcing of people to adopt playstyles they do not wish to. They should be given a better reason to use losec or given the option to do so with the reward that would go with the increased risk. Those who do not want to go to losec never will and introducing losec between empires would simply turn the hisec areas into armed camps with choked industry or end up with people no longer bothering to play as they just had their profit destroyed without going where they have no wish to go.
People need to be shown the fun they can have in losec/null and given alternative means to get there without being wiped out 1 gate in. That would mean more people going to losec by choice. Given that WH's can be used for transit this way already I doubt that the people who want to go to losec/null aren't doing so already.
To be clear I'm not against losec, I go there all the time and my PI would suffer ghorribly if I didn't. I am agaimst players being forced into areas they would otherwise never choose to go, and damaging other playstyles for no good reason..
Rather than taking away some of hisec to present more targets to losec folks, why don't the losec folks fit up ships and run into null for more targets? |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
223
|
Posted - 2014.02.27 14:47:00 -
[1242] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:If I'm not mistaken there are already shorter routes between empires that go through losec yet people avoid them in favour of the longer hisec routes.
You are indeed mistaken. Some of the low sec routes between trade hubs are actually longer.
That surprises me, although when I set shortest route in the navcom thingy it usually goes through losec for better routes hence my mistaken belief. I still disagree with forcibly cutting of the empires with losec though :D
|
Decoe DeTouront
The Scope Gallente Federation
55
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 11:19:00 -
[1243] - Quote
i like the idea. perhaps one cut between two factions each would be enough. so these are my thoughts (sorry for my bad english)
because the space is divided it would be easiest to split territories and reinsert new pace into the galaxy along the border tear . possible causes :
a fatal accident in experiments at XYZ weapons leads to a spatially transverse fracture through the galaxy. coincidentally (or just inaccurate) between the warring factions. the area is unstable and dangerous. the old jump-gates (because of the instability in space-and energy flow) now lead to unknown locations in the fluid-space. by scan-able anomalies and mini - worm holes you can move around there, but you'll never know where you land until you have tried it yourself.
to keep the trade between the two sides of the galaxy up, all fractions work on a new transportation technology, and establish trans-warp gates. unfortunately these are still in the test phase and there is a chance that the connection becomes unstable and breaks off. if this happens, you'll land in the fluid-space. trans-warp generators / computer / module can counterbalance this effect under some circumstances and stabilize the channel. but a risk remains .
but the disaster also has something good . adventurer and explorer see new chances to explore unknown regions. they are unstable, dangerous for shields , weapons and drive but they also offer countless riches for the one who is brave enough. the cartography offers the explorer the possibility, to remember explored areas and positions of rich resource points in this space, special places, anomalies to other places etc. to find them again later on, or to sell these information to other pilots for quite some isk. but be aware: the space is fluid . No one knows how long the space is stable, or when it refolds again. your cards and plans may be out of date .
one can discuss whether you can build in these areas stations, if there are planets (newly created/destroyed/... ) , gigantic asteroid - belt with stuff you can loot, salvage or miner, or if there should be entirely new possibilities introduced.
and who knows - maybe the crack in the room also has also opened a split. hole in space to a totally different corner of the universe, older than anything previously known and darker. a connection to the builders was created. and they are anything but nice .. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
223
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 11:36:00 -
[1244] - Quote
I still don't see what this will bring other than more pain for hisec? If losec people want more targets why not fly into null and go harass people living there who clearly don't mind being in combat?
I can't read back through the 60-odd pages whilst in work so please summarize the key points for me to understand the reasoning behind this change. |
Bl00dyAngel
Soul Extermination X-intercept
49
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 13:29:00 -
[1245] - Quote
I love this idea! |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
224
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 14:32:00 -
[1246] - Quote
OK, I re-read the initial post. To me it is basically proposing messing with a currently relatively stable market to present more juicy unarmed freighter targets to losec folks. If you want more targets and to make money pirating you can already by ganking in hisec. This idea just means the targets come to you in losec where you won't be concorded afterwards.
If you want to pirate then why not hunt losec/null mission ratters? Surely they will bring more money?, you can even use your fleet to wipe out the rats afterwards and take the loot.
I still think this would mess with a currently balanced economy for no good reason (since I don't see providing easier targets for losec pirates as a good reason). |
JetStream Drenard
EVE University Ivy League
36
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 14:53:00 -
[1247] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:OK, I re-read the initial post. To me it is basically proposing messing with a currently relatively stable market to present more juicy unarmed freighter targets to losec folks. If you want more targets and to make money pirating you can already by ganking in hisec. This idea just means the targets come to you in losec where you won't be concorded afterwards.
If you want to pirate then why not hunt losec/null mission ratters? Surely they will bring more money?, you can even use your fleet to wipe out the rats afterwards and take the loot.
I still think this would mess with a currently balanced economy for no good reason (since I don't see providing easier targets for losec pirates as a good reason). It is not really about pirating, smart haulers know how to work around blockades. It is about: 1 diversifying and strengthening regional market hubs 2 importing consequence to where you live in high sec. by making travel between empire more difficult 3 creating more low sec routes between empire space to avoid choke points |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
224
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 15:10:00 -
[1248] - Quote
1: I believe it would isolate and alienate, plus be harmful to the new players trying out trade and also hinder new players on the cosmic/epic arc missions.
2: There is already consequence, If I remember rightly a guy pointed out in another thread that most ships are destoyed in hisec space, how safe is it again?
3: This might help entice people into losec, but not at the expense of cutting off the empires from one another.
I think th erisk of messing up the market and messing up new players freedom of travel would be too high a price but would support more routes into losec. |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2217
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 16:42:00 -
[1249] - Quote
1. New players need to be taught that low sec is not the gank paradise that they are told it is and shown to not be afraid of low sec. It would also help new players under stand something that every care-bear needs to learn, a ship is just a ship.
2. There is no more consequence for a player living in high sec in terms of ship loss than for any other area of space. But there is zero consequence for your racial decision and there should be, other wise there is no need for different races.
3. There is no reason the empires should be sandwiched together most are at war after all (relative to there number of allies) and again players need to be taught generally how to handle low sec and not that it is a bad area that needs to be avoided all the time at all costs. Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
238
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 16:59:00 -
[1250] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:1. New players need to be taught that low sec is not the gank paradise that they are told it is and shown to not be afraid of low sec. It would also help new players under stand something that every care-bear needs to learn, a ship is just a ship.
2. There is no more consequence for a player living in high sec in terms of ship loss than for any other area of space. But there is zero consequence for your racial decision and there should be, other wise there is no need for different races.
3. There is no reason the empires should be sandwiched together most are at war after all (relative to there number of allies) and again players need to be taught generally how to handle low sec and not that it is a bad area that needs to be avoided all the time at all costs.
That is not true at all. All low sec choke points are camped, all entries to busy low secs are camped. Low secs that separate the empires are the very definition of a choke point and would be camped 24/7, because people need to travel. Imagine Ammake, Rancer and Old Man Star all together in 1 system. These low secs would be the very places that people should avoid at all cost if they want to survive.
For older players almost nothing is going to change, because they will have the luxury of JF, younger players are a lot more limited (remains to be seen if that's bad or good and if newer players like more hardship in tee age of free to play and COD.). |
|
MoonglumX
Viaticus Consortium
1
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 18:22:00 -
[1251] - Quote
There are JF corps that could hop your trade goods over those lowsec jumps. That's what I usually do when I need something moved through lowsec. |
Your Dad Naked
State War Academy Caldari State
129
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 18:35:00 -
[1252] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:1: I believe it would isolate and alienate, plus be harmful to the new players trying out trade and also hinder new players on the cosmic/epic arc missions.
2: There is already consequence, If I remember rightly a guy pointed out in another thread that most ships are destoyed in hisec space, how safe is it again?
3: This might help entice people into losec, but not at the expense of cutting off the empires from one another.
I think th erisk of messing up the market and messing up new players freedom of travel would be too high a price but would support more routes into losec. 1) Major game design decisions should never be dumbed down for the sake of easing brand new players into the game. This isn't WoW in space, as we know.
2) I've never lost a hauling ship in high-sec and probably never will, because I know how to play EVE.
3) Perhaps, but I don't believe that point has been defend well up to now. I'm open to the idea that certain problems could arise that make it game-breaking, but I am yet to hear of it. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
685
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 18:42:00 -
[1253] - Quote
There are two kinds of people in this thread.
People who see opportunities, and people who see problems.
Who do you want to be?
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Catherine Laartii
Providence Guard Templis CALSF
89
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 20:13:00 -
[1254] - Quote
Will these lowsec buffer zones be accessable by all areas of lowsec in empire space? It would be very nice and interesting if they were 'corridors' that could be navigated for one to circumvent having to go through the highsec space of an empire that's not friendly with them, or they just have a bad sec status. |
Catherine Laartii
Providence Guard Templis CALSF
89
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 20:15:00 -
[1255] - Quote
Your Dad Naked wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:1: I believe it would isolate and alienate, plus be harmful to the new players trying out trade and also hinder new players on the cosmic/epic arc missions.
2: There is already consequence, If I remember rightly a guy pointed out in another thread that most ships are destoyed in hisec space, how safe is it again?
3: This might help entice people into losec, but not at the expense of cutting off the empires from one another.
I think th erisk of messing up the market and messing up new players freedom of travel would be too high a price but would support more routes into losec. 1) Major game design decisions should never be dumbed down for the sake of easing brand new players into the game. This isn't WoW in space, as we know. 2) I've never lost a hauling ship in high-sec and probably never will, because I know how to play EVE. 3) Perhaps, but I don't believe that point has been defend well up to now. I'm open to the idea that certain problems could arise that make it game-breaking, but I am yet to hear of it.
Excepting OP's map, I could see the Khanid Kingdom having lowsec buffers between it and amarr space, but not between it and caldari space. |
Dolorous Tremmens
The Scope Gallente Federation
120
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 20:23:00 -
[1256] - Quote
I like this idea Get some Eve. Make it yours.
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
238
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 20:40:00 -
[1257] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:There are two kinds of people in this thread.
People who see opportunities, and people who see problems.
Who do you want to be?
Opportunities? Exploiting players need to transport things and profiting from it by demanding sweet fares. Experiencing and watchingfirst hand how predictable players are, both on the dealing as well as receiving side. On a slightly more positive note: more sales in Amarr.
Problems? JF ganks in low sec level high secs near the low sec choke points. Exploding JF/jump fuel cost and exploitations of the sudden higher need (Hulkageddon, Ice Interdiction, anyone?). Drone/can ball camped low sec corridors to prevent cloaking. Higher effort to get certain limited commodities to your non-Jita/non-Caldari production sites.
--
Nothing is dumbed down if we leave the game as is, because nothing unreasonable changes.
|
JetStream Drenard
EVE University Ivy League
38
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 21:04:00 -
[1258] - Quote
current system: Jita is the gold standard for trade value. People will travel an hour round trip to save a few percent on their purchase. People neglect local markets because of this. Manufactured goods get shipped to jita because of this. Jita sucks. proposed system: local trade markets flourish, prices balance out on certain things but spread on others. loyalty and consequence. Solitude is perfect example. new bros learn how to negotiate low sec |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
860
|
Posted - 2014.02.28 23:36:00 -
[1259] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:
That is not true at all. All low sec choke points are camped, all entries to busy low secs are camped. Low secs that separate the empires are the very definition of a choke point and would be camped 24/7, because people need to travel. Imagine Ammake, Rancer and Old Man Star all together in 1 system. These low secs would be the very places that people should avoid at all cost if they want to survive.
Last few times I was in Amamake there wasn't even anyone on the gates, much less an actual camp.
|
JetStream Drenard
EVE University Ivy League
38
|
Posted - 2014.03.01 00:08:00 -
[1260] - Quote
Onictus wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:
That is not true at all. All low sec choke points are camped, all entries to busy low secs are camped. Low secs that separate the empires are the very definition of a choke point and would be camped 24/7, because people need to travel. Imagine Ammake, Rancer and Old Man Star all together in 1 system. These low secs would be the very places that people should avoid at all cost if they want to survive.
Last few times I was in Amamake there wasn't even anyone on the gates, much less an actual camp. rancer is dead too. Old man star is very active, but it is not chokepoint for anywhere except other low sec, just lot of people calling it home. |
|
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
860
|
Posted - 2014.03.01 02:19:00 -
[1261] - Quote
JetStream Drenard wrote:. Old man star is very active, but it is not chokepoint for anywhere except other low sec, just lot of people calling it home.
It is actually, if you have ever tried to get into Dodixe from further out OMS pretty much sits on every path into Sinq that doesnt require a ton of jumps. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
239
|
Posted - 2014.03.01 07:33:00 -
[1262] - Quote
Well, the stats for Ammamake suggest that it is very lively, Rancer is indeed a lot less active kill-wise than what I was expecting, but you still remember the older days, so you know what I mean. As replacements for this I would then suggest Tama and Aunenen or Hier (also a year ago or so when it hosted insta locking T3 camps with drones/cans spread around both constellation gates in the system).
My point, however, stands: People already camp low sec dividers and popular low sec entry systems and unavoidable passing through systems a lot and very effectively. These systems, however, are by far not as active as low sec systems would be that are then the only route between the empires.
Furthermore, I don't believe that every empire should be divided by low sec (has probably been stated already and often, but anyways): Amarr and Caldari are allies, no point for low sec there, Gallente and Minmatar are allies, but most of their direct routes are already lowsec routes. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
685
|
Posted - 2014.03.01 10:02:00 -
[1263] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:There are two kinds of people in this thread.
People who see opportunities, and people who see problems.
Who do you want to be?
Opportunities? Exploiting players need to transport things and profiting from it by demanding sweet fares. Experiencing and watchingfirst hand how predictable players are, both on the dealing as well as receiving side. On a slightly more positive note: more sales in Amarr. Problems? JF ganks in low sec level high secs near the low sec choke points. Exploding JF/jump fuel cost and exploitations of the sudden higher need (Hulkageddon, Ice Interdiction, anyone?)(such a change would give a sizable number of 00 dwellers even more incentive _NOT_ to stay in 00 and live in high sec instead to interrupt things there instead of their home in 00. And even more high sec people is surely what all of EVE wants and very vocally demands for all the time. ). Drone/can ball camped low sec corridors to prevent cloaking. Higher effort to get certain limited commodities to your non-Jita/non-Caldari production sites. -- Nothing is dumbed down if we leave the game as is, because nothing unreasonable changes.
You see? You're seeing this all as a problem rather than an opportunity. Lets look at it another way:
1. small, region-scarce high value items can be shipped between trade hubs in small fast (low skill) frigates. Young and older players can make some money by doing this fairly low risk activity.
2. w-space dwellers need fuel like anyone else. We buy it when we have a conveniently close trade hub and we're often too lazy to wait util it's near the cheapest one. You can make a profit by putting it near us and charging a premium.
3. Since there are no lowsec choke points (the OP specifically addressed this), making excess profits is actually low risk for any hauler with a scout and a reasonable ability to navigate.
4. If JF fuel prices increase, this strengthens the market in mining, which strengthens the market in hauling. This is good for you since you're a producer of value and therefore benefit in an inflationary economy.
5. People are predictable. We can confidently predict that they will pay you a premium to avoid the bother of moving goods themselves. Consumers of mission items want to mission, not haul. PVPers want to fight, not haul. They won't care that the item you've moved is 40% higher in their local trade hub than in the originating one. They'll buy anyway because hauling one item represents an opportunity cost to them, and hauling many of them is an opportunity to you.
6. Hulkageddon etc will happen anyway. It happens in hisec does it not? Just take precautions. Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
226
|
Posted - 2014.03.01 10:54:00 -
[1264] - Quote
This change benefits losec players yes? Not hisec players. Where is the risk reward in this change for hisec players? They already get ganked, and it takes skill in trading and bulk hauling to make the profits that are being mentioned. If it was so easy then every hi-sec player would be a multi-billionaire.
Reading between the lines this is a nerf to hisec trading and a buff to losec hunters. I ask again if it is more targets that you want why not run into null and find them there?
To pick up on an earlier point I agree that newer player need to be taught that losec isn't necessarily as bad as the general feeling is. The key there is that they need to be *taught* this. This would need to be through tutorials and missions in the first instance hence my suggestion for missions from hisec that drop you into losec via cyno and then leave you to make your own way back.
After this players can choose to join a corp or go it alone but they would then be making a choice based on learning and accepting the consequences. This proposal would force players into jumping through losec to do anything other than play in their own back yard.
As I have said this change would actually benefit me, but I would never want that to come at the expense of unbalancing the market or wrecking others playing style. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
241
|
Posted - 2014.03.01 11:17:00 -
[1265] - Quote
Because there is only problems and opportunities are dwarfed or nullified or outright turned against you in all cases.
- You are joking, right? Frigates, even more cheap T1 frigates, transporting high value stuff through low sec - low sec that is camped to hell with insta locking ships. This touted opportunity is a scam, nothing else. Loss: Malediction - Do you know how this one died? Due to an insta locking camp in a 00 transit system. These Thrashers where Remote Seboed to lock ships within a second and apply webs and scrams within a second. I have to admit that I made a mistake (miscalculating the situation due to the presence of only 2 frigs instead of the 4+ I've seen in other such camps) and try to warp instead of burning back to the gate; however, even if I had tried to burn back, scrams and webs make even the fastest ceptor a sitting duck. And these kind of camps will be on the low sec route between the empires, killing of frigates who try to smuggle good stuff through.
This is hurting players, who want to do that, more with the problem than benefiting with the opportunity.
- How can you put stuff near a WH? Plastering all low sec/00 sec/ high sec stations with fuel in the hopes that you drop by? Fuel is already widely available and also comparatively priced in all trade hubs and lesser hubs. Nothing is going to change for the better, instead, it's most likely going to be worse because people then would have to invest more money to bring fuel to other hubs, because you cannot mine Gallente ice in Amarr space, effectively making the product more expensive and nagging away slim margins.
Problems outdoing opportunities.
- Except for he does not. There are popular routes, which will always be camped, and as soon as campers notice a shift to a different route they simply and quickly switch over to that route or other campers take that opportunity. Also, as I constantly hear that in the MIMAF discussion, there are opportunity costs involved, which makes it unfeasible to always take the longer route to transport things around, especially in freighters. Just have a look into Courier contracts. Dozens of people put couriers there for 1k - 30k in rewards and multiple billions in collaterals. I don't fly my freighter the longer route and decrease my reward even further, that is simply uneconomical (besides that I don't accept these contracts anyways, they are an outrage!). People's mindset is just too stupid in regard to that things they don't want to do others should do for as little cost as possible, bearing all the risk and basically getting no rewards. That, to come back to the first sentence, rules the use of other routes out or makes it at least less feasible.
Problems overruling opportunities.
- Wonderful. And in turn it strengthens the spite of dull 00 dwellers over how easy high secers can make money, which in turn increases ganking, and in turn ship prices, and in turn mineral and fuel prices, and in turn the spite, and in turn ... you notice the catch 22?
Opportunities causing problems causing more opportunities causing more more problems causing more more opportunities ...
- They are predictable in so far that most do not do what you think they would do. Just look at the Courier contracts. PVPers want to fight, not haul - exactly. But PVPers do not care about haulers and miners, they just shot them, because they are easy targets. And they expect them to ferry their toy around for free. That is an universal constant, that is never going to change in big numbers, unless something really fundamental changes and shatters the universe. Disconnecting the empires with low sec is not such a thing, it just makes it easier for PVPers to get what they want on the shoulders of the rest of the game. Opportunities turned against you by problems.
- How do you take precautions against Hulkageddon? Not undocking and not mining? Wonderful, because that is exactly what the initiators of Hulkageddon and Ice Interdiction want, in order to fill their pockets with even more money. And yes, it only happens in high sec, no where else. Almost no one is actively hunting and hurting miners in low sec or 00 sec, who should be subject to the same logic.
I fail to see any opportunity here when you are forced to stay docked or move around constantly on an hourly basis to have 10 minutes of peace to mine some roids.
All in all: I only see problems outperforming, dwarfing, ruining and turning against you the mentioned opportunities. It happens now and it will only be worse with such a change. That is how people function and that cannot be compensated or changed with changes in the game. In the end it's alright. This is a sandbox, a playground for those who cannot live their inner sinister nature in real life. But please stop saying that you do not do that and that you do only want the best for the game. It is not the case, you only want your benefits and for your personal way to play. Other things and players do not matter for the most of you. |
Humang
Sefem Velox Swift Angels Alliance
42
|
Posted - 2014.03.01 11:36:00 -
[1266] - Quote
There was an alternative I posted many posts ago:
Yes, separate then main four empires with low-sec zones but retain a selection of high-sec "corridors" as someone mentioned before. The catch is that when using the regional gates (in the high-sec corridors) that mark the border between the empires, the player is charged a fee that is relative the ship size/class/type.
I don't have exact numbers but the idea is that it is "unprofitable" for smaller ships to go back and forth between empires, but less so as ships get larger. Plus it would be a good excuse to add content for drug runners; avoiding theses "policed gates" in favour of other, less secure entrances through low-sec.
It's not forcing big lumbering giants (like freighters) to wade through low-sec, but it should encourage smaller, more agile ships to use alternative routes to avoid having to pay the fee, and thus help expose people to the environment of low-sec.
However I know that there could be some issues with this, it would have repercussion in the marker, no getting around that, and I have no real place in that discussion, but I would think change is always a good thing. Another issue could be for newer or current players that have no experience with low security systems may find it frustrating, or not understand what happened when they get caught. So people need to be made aware of the repercussions that coincide the actions that they take.
So I would add a second topic to this if implemented, In that new players be introduced to low-sec systems, PVP situations and losing your ship, early on during the tutorial so that they can understand what's happening, why it happened and how to avoid it. They need to be show that low-sec is not as scary as they think.
TL;DR Don't force people into low-sec, give them a reason to go there; give people the choice and make them weigh up the risks/rewards for each path. Witty Comment Here |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1748
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 06:16:00 -
[1267] - Quote
Humang wrote: TL;DR Don't force people into low-sec, give them a reason to go there; give people the choice and make them weigh up the risks/rewards for each path.
I agree with this 100%. The developers don't seem to understand that carrots work better then sticks though.
If you want more people in low imo, you need to make low safer. What??? Safer??? Sounds bad for pvp'rs but safer = more targets = more kills if you're smarter and less if you're a lame unskilled camper.
If you want to make things safer
* do something with cyno's, they're too easy, too cheap, too overpowered.
* do something with gate spawning, spawning 15km from a gate is a guaranteed killmail for any decent camp. Scrams go out to 100km on an Arazu, 30+ km on a barge, 30+km infinite point on a hic... makes avoiding unprepared camps (that don't have the above ships) easier but also makes crashing the gate harder.
* do something with scanning - its trivial to scan someone down in less then 30 seconds.
* do something with the disparity between PVE based ships and PvP based ships. Perhaps have all npcs do omni damage, but leave the resistances to player damage the same. PvE fits are cake to PvP'rs, I think people would feel more comfortable PvE'ing in low if their tank could stand up to both rat and player damage equally. And instead of having 50 npcs why not one or two NPC's that behave more like pvp ships, scram, web and will switch to a player or 5 if they enter an engagement.
Just some things I've noticed that cause PvE in low to be pointless vs pve in high or null. Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
685
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 10:50:00 -
[1268] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote: points 1-5
Come counterpoints:
1. Trasporting high value goods without first sending a low-value pathfinder is simply asking for trouble. You can go around a gate camp if you know it's there, so send a scout first.
2. Just put pos fuel in each regional trade hub - we'll find it. We'll happily travel 6 jumps for it. Any more and it's too much of a chore - we'll wait for the next empire access. (Yes we do transport pos fuel through low sec and w-space frequently, amazingly without losing any ships - how do you think we manage that?).
3. Market forces will take care of collateral/reward ratios. People demanding too high a collateral for too low a reward will find that their stuff does not move. They will reconsider and raise the rewards eventually.
4. I see no difficulty with the idea that 0-sec dwellers are able to make more money than hi sec. They are after all taking on considerably more risk. This is as it should be.
5. PVPers who want their stuff moved will have to pay the going rate. If that rate rises due to increased perception of risk, that can only benefit haulers.
6. Avoiding hulkageddon is extremely simple. Live in 0-sec, low sec or w-space for a while and you learn to be vigilant. In w-space particularly there is no local, so you really do have to have scouts and be intelligent about what you do and when you haul and mine. In 0-sec or low sec its very easy. If there's anyone else in local you warp to a safe spot (previously made) or dock. Once in a safe you can check d-scan for probes while waiting for the threat to move on. It's a free, easy early warning system. Too easy. People who get ganked during hulkageddon, in 0-sec or lowsec were just being lazy.
You will remember that the purpose of hulkageddon is purely economic in nature - it's to drive up mineral prices to the benefit of those alliances who have been *stockpiling* excess resources. i.e. they have planned ahead. You as a privateer can benefit too. Simply stockpile your minerals until the next hulkageddon. Then release them onto the market. I fail to see the problem here, other than an inability to act in ones own long term interests.
All in all, with respect, you see problems because that seems to be your nature. This kind of thinking leads to a life of poverty and misery, both in eve and real life.
Infinity Ziona wrote: * do something with cyno's, they're too easy, too cheap, too overpowered.
Couldn't agree more. In my view the incoming ships should not land on the cyno, but some random (possibly large) distance from it.
Gate spawns: Unless you drop people 100km+ from a gate (and thereby eliminate the chance to get back to it) increasing the distance won't help because of the presence of arazus. What you need is a scout with a cloak. Nothing more, nothing less.
Scanning: 30 seconds is more than enough to see the probes on d-scan and move somewhere else. Scanning is fine.
PVE/PVP Disparity: You can do this yourself by doing pve in a pvp squad. Take some logistics along (2 exequerors or ospreys would be fine). The problem is actually that the mission rewards in low sec are not very much higher than hi sec so it does not feel cost-effective to do this. The other problem is that a hi-sec mentality stifles creativity in gameplay. Lowsec/w-space dwellers think up ways around the challenges. Since running w-space (cat 3) sites in a pvp squad for 2 years I have *never* lost a ship doing this, and have *often* been able to engage and kill trespassers. The most recent being a 2Bn isk tengu that was in a gang of 3 100mn tengus and a falcon operated by experienced pilots.
In general though, I agree that fewer NPC ships with better fittings and AI would be preferable, and less boring.
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
229
|
Posted - 2014.03.03 12:01:00 -
[1269] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
In general though, I agree that fewer NPC ships with better fittings and AI would be preferable, and less boring.
I'd go as far as to say this is necessary in at least some of the missions. As it is now PvE is a paper exercise of fitting the correct resists/dmg and off you go. I actually prefer to just roam through space with a more omni-fit (still PvE fit though not PvP) algos or myrm as it makes the anomalies more of a challenge. I would much prefer some missions that require PvP tactics to run them. This would be a great grounding in the basics for PvP and also far more interesting.
Perhaps this should be incorporated into new Epic Arc missions to keep them discrete at first, then it is very easy to back the change out should it not work as intended in practice. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
686
|
Posted - 2014.03.03 12:31:00 -
[1270] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:
In general though, I agree that fewer NPC ships with better fittings and AI would be preferable, and less boring.
I'd go as far as to say this is necessary in at least some of the missions. As it is now PvE is a paper exercise of fitting the correct resists/dmg and off you go. I actually prefer to just roam through space with a more omni-fit (still PvE fit though not PvP) algos or myrm as it makes the anomalies more of a challenge. I would much prefer some missions that require PvP tactics to run them. This would be a great grounding in the basics for PvP and also far more interesting. Perhaps this should be incorporated into new Epic Arc missions to keep them discrete at first, then it is very easy to back the change out should it not work as intended in practice.
I personally think that missions could be improved in a number of ways:
1. Server spawns each mission at a given interval with a base reward. Available to everyone on a "mission market". 2. every hour, the reward is increased to reflect the NPC corp's growing concern over the threat. 3. first capsuleer to claim the mission in given it, with the reward set to the current price. At this point the mission is removed from the mission market. It can be returned to the mission market if the capsuleer fails it. 4. some missions could be "track down this guy and blow up his ship/get some stuff" where "this guy" can be anything from an autonomous NPC frigate to an NPC fleet - able to jump and warp at will to evade/attack you.
Upshot of this? 1. easy hi sec missions will attract low bids because there are many takers. 2. same missions in low sec will have fewer takers, so pay more rewards as the timers tick up. 3. better hunter-killer missions offer more rewarding play for experienced players who like a challenge 4. capsuleers can always choose their favourite mission, leaving the less desirable ones until they pay enough to make it worthwhile.
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
|
Lloyd Roses
Blue-Fire
532
|
Posted - 2014.03.03 12:38:00 -
[1271] - Quote
Sentryguns would be a lot more influential if they did more damage than a T1 rifter. "I honestly thought I was in lowsec"
Moving pictures |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
245
|
Posted - 2014.03.03 12:52:00 -
[1272] - Quote
They used to be, but then people started complaining that they couldn't gate camp in low sec anymore. |
Henk Brombir
Elemental Souls Souls of Destruction
30
|
Posted - 2014.03.03 14:26:00 -
[1273] - Quote
I approve this |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
107
|
Posted - 2014.03.04 06:42:00 -
[1274] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: There shouldn't be a forced reason to go through losec, if a player chooses to stay hisec and trade between empires they should be able to do so. The empires in lore terms would not allow trade routes to be cut, and neither would CONCORD as trade routes will assist with stability of the regions.
AGAIN and AGAIN, nobody is being forced through low sec. Why should everyone be given free passage between each empire? What do you possibly need in each empire that you can get from one empire alone? Shouldn't going between each empire be a reward for traveling through low sec? What other MMORPG has all it's cities in safe walking distance between each other? The idea is really rediculous.
Rivr Luzade wrote:Nothing is dumbed down if we leave the game as is, because nothing unreasonable changes. The worst thing that can happen to EVE Online is to "leave the game as is."
Infinity Ziona wrote:Humang wrote: TL;DR Don't force people into low-sec, give them a reason to go there; give people the choice and make them weigh up the risks/rewards for each path.
I agree with this 100%. The developers don't seem to understand that carrots work better then sticks though. We're not getting rid of high sec, High sec will still exist. Nobody is being forced into low sec, it's still a choice you make to go into low or not to go. The carrot is visiting each empire, and the differences in markets at each place.
The only people this might significantly affect are high sec incursion runners. And seriously, high sec incursions just need to die anyways.
Rivr Luzade wrote:Problems? JF ganks in low sec level high secs near the low sec choke points. Exploding JF/jump fuel cost and exploitations of the sudden higher need (Hulkageddon, Ice Interdiction, anyone?)(such a change would give a sizable number of 00 dwellers even more incentive _NOT_ to stay in 00 and live in high sec instead to interrupt things there instead of their home in 00. And even more high sec people is surely what all of EVE wants and very vocally demands for all the time. I find it hilarious that some people are against this idea for the perceptions that "only jump freighters will be able to do hauling safely" and someone else is against this idea for the perception that "Jump freighters are going to be blown away constantly and null sec players will move back."
It's amazing, and shows you how bad the points are that you're trying to make. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
234
|
Posted - 2014.03.04 10:17:00 -
[1275] - Quote
Actually my point is that only cloaky haulers will be able to carry significant goods safely.
And again by splitting the empires you would be forcing those who trade by buying bulk goods in one empire that are not produced in the others and then hauling them there. This is destroying a currently valid playstyle as it destroys the profit by creating longer hisec routes (as the original OP suggested, not a full split) or by making the job something that cannot be accomplished by the lone player using trade to make their money. Many players fall into this category as they haven't the time to sit at their computer for hours hunting folks whilst dodging others.
Your 'carrot' is more profit for traveling through losec but that is already the case if you haul goods in that are in lo supply there yet people still don't. People need new and interesting reasons to go to losec, not a possible and unproven profit increase for presenting yourself as a nice big target.
And to answer your question as to what you can't get in one empire alone try mining white glaze in gallente space or blue ice in caldari, the ore types are split by empire space too so mineral prices would be impacted potentially too which then knocks on to every module and ship hull.
Look at real life, any market place that becomes isolated withers and dies.
I'm all for changes that would bring more people to losec but that has to be by choice not by force (and destroying a traders profit if they don't is forcing them to fly through losec).
Constructive changes the give people more reason to fly losec would be a much better approach in my opinion |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
686
|
Posted - 2014.03.04 10:28:00 -
[1276] - Quote
I think the OP and I would argue that by creating a disparity of supply, this creates market pressures which bring about opportunities for those who wish to take them.
Re cloaky haulers - my corp often takes fuel through lowsec and w-space in nothing more than a T1 industrial.
There are no barriers to human endeavour other than fear.
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
234
|
Posted - 2014.03.04 10:35:00 -
[1277] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:I think the OP and I would argue that by creating a disparity of supply, this creates market pressures which bring about opportunities for those who wish to take them.
Re cloaky haulers - my corp often takes fuel through lowsec and w-space in nothing more than a T1 industrial.
There are no barriers to human endeavour other than fear.
And there is the problem, create pressure on a stable market and you can very easily break it. By creating pressure on the market you also create pressure on those players reliant on it most likely resulting in single char players who play this way simply not bothering. This would also only really benefit those who are in groups large enough to protect large haulers on the way through which then simply pushes the lions share of profits up to bigger corps.
Totally agree about using t1 haulers, the freedom you feel when running through in a cheap crappy loot fit hauler and not worrying about losing it is great. However the cargo size is somewhat limited forcing you to carry higher value goods that way for the higher profit. I think that the risk to the market outweighs the rewards and player interaction would be better served by providing other reasons to enter losec by choice. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
421
|
Posted - 2014.03.04 14:14:00 -
[1278] - Quote
You are not going to convince these lazy ambush predators that what they want will not have the results they wish for. All they want is more meat delivered effortlessly to their own table, and it tastes better if it comes from someone else's plate.
They are fully aware they are talking out both sides of thier mouth. On one hand nobody will be adversely affected, on the other hand profits go up because risk (and obviously adverse occurances to prove that risk) goes up. Except profits dont come from empty space, but rather from the pockets of everyone now purchasing goods at a premium. Even locally produced goods will see a rise in pricing, despit no logical reason, because of general inflation.
Nevermind that in doing this they will hand the game entirely to the large alliances who will now cheaply and easily control all enter empire trade by closing off the pipes whenever they feel like it. They have the manpower and coordination to do it, and only a fool would think they wont when it serves their purpose.
Why should anyone be given free passage between empires? Because Sandbox? Thats the way it is now. By what reasoning should freedom be removed from those who wish to travel beween empires for whatever reason? Thats what this thread is about, removing freedom and options from the sandbox to suit a few lazy people who cant be bothered to create thier own opportunities despite all the tools to do so. You want to hunt juicy freighters you can... But there is a price of admission, you dont get to destroy the livelyhood of others for free.
At every turn, any objection is simply met with the attitude that other playstyles simply do not matter, and only being prey for pirates is sandbox. Haulers? Screw haulers, their money comes to easy and their time is worth less than ours. High sec incursions? Screw those guys, they make too much and high sec incursions should just die. Tourists? Screw those guys, they arent doing anything important anyway. Missioners? They dont need to travel who cares if they want to. Again and again... Anyone who disagrees is marginalized and discarded.
This thread has been functionally dead for ages. Its a poorly thought out, self serving and greedy idea that gets necro posted from the bottom of the heap where it belongs every so often, and hopefully will never get implemented without serious and sober thought put into how things will actually work out for the vast bulk of players |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
686
|
Posted - 2014.03.04 16:41:00 -
[1279] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:...a page of untestable assertions and rhetoric...
I think you'll find that the majority of players live in nullsec, where getting around safely is just part of a normal day, despite warp disrupt bubbles, gate camps, interceptors, roaming gangs and surprise attacks from w-space.
Take a moment to consider how all that zydrine and all those deadspace and officer mods, implants and pirate battleships find their way from nullsec to market hubs.
It's because people go into nullsec, liberate them from their owners and then transport them to a tradehub - through nullsec.
Miraculously, the market in deadspace gear and pirate ships remains bouyant. Both privateers and members of large corps do this.
And then all that sleeper T3 gear which is the source of all tech 3 cruisers... How do you think that arrives in Jita? People go into w-space, investing billions, in order to bring it safely to market so hisec and nullsec guys alike can enjoy it.
Whether we're wardecced or not, we still bring it (you do realise that during a wardec hisec is more dangerous than w-space, because of out-of-corp scouts and boosters, right?)
Respectfully, I believe your thinking is incorrect. I have no interest in ganking your freighter or hauler as it's not interesting to me.
If I really did want to take out your freighter I'd certainly suicide-gank it in hisec while you were AFK hauling and where the odds of getting the loot home are close to 100%, not in lowsec where someone else can steal it or engage my out-of-corp loot ship without consequence.
Haulers are in no more danger in lowsec than hisec. Arguably less because everyone is alert.
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
248
|
Posted - 2014.03.04 21:07:00 -
[1280] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:...a page of untestable assertions and rhetoric... I think you'll find that the majority of players live in nullsec, where getting around safely is just part of a normal day, despite warp disrupt bubbles, gate camps, interceptors, roaming gangs and surprise attacks from w-space. Take a moment to consider how all that zydrine and all those deadspace and officer mods, implants and pirate battleships find their way from nullsec to market hubs. It's because people go into nullsec, liberate them from their owners and then transport them to a tradehub - through nullsec. Miraculously, the market in deadspace gear and pirate ships remains bouyant. Both privateers and members of large corps do this. And then all that sleeper T3 gear which is the source of all tech 3 cruisers... How do you think that arrives in Jita? People go into w-space, investing billions, in order to bring it safely to market so hisec and nullsec guys alike can enjoy it. Whether we're wardecced or not, we still bring it (you do realise that during a wardec hisec is more dangerous than w-space, because of out-of-corp scouts and boosters, right?) Respectfully, I believe your thinking is incorrect. I have no interest in ganking your freighter or hauler as it's not interesting to me. If I really did want to take out your freighter I'd certainly suicide-gank it in hisec while you were AFK hauling and where the odds of getting the loot home are close to 100%, not in lowsec where someone else can steal it or engage my out-of-corp loot ship without consequence. Haulers are in no more danger in lowsec than hisec. Arguably less because everyone is alert.
Ceptors? You are dead in an insta lock camp that flourish lately.
Except for they don't; they get carrier or JF jumped out of 00 to the closest low sec to Jita ... and die there.
Except for they don't; they just wait for or find a suitable WH connection to high sec and move it out savely ... and die there to gankers in their Herons.
It might not be interesting to you, but there are numerous people out there who don't do anything else ... for various reasons.
They are in more danger because of certain camps. In high sec you only have to worry about gank squads, in low sec systems you have a plethora of other things to worry about. |
|
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
422
|
Posted - 2014.03.04 21:50:00 -
[1281] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:...a page of untestable assertions and rhetoric... I think you'll find that the majority of players live in nullsec, where getting around safely is just part of a normal day, despite warp disrupt bubbles, gate camps, interceptors, roaming gangs and surprise attacks from w-space. Take a moment to consider how all that zydrine and all those deadspace and officer mods, implants and pirate battleships find their way from nullsec to market hubs. It's because people go into nullsec, liberate them from their owners and then transport them to a tradehub - through nullsec. Miraculously, the market in deadspace gear and pirate ships remains bouyant. Both privateers and members of large corps do this. And then all that sleeper T3 gear which is the source of all tech 3 cruisers... How do you think that arrives in Jita? People go into w-space, investing billions, in order to bring it safely to market so hisec and nullsec guys alike can enjoy it. Whether we're wardecced or not, we still bring it (you do realise that during a wardec hisec is more dangerous than w-space, because of out-of-corp scouts and boosters, right?) Respectfully, I believe your thinking is incorrect. I have no interest in ganking your freighter or hauler as it's not interesting to me. If I really did want to take out your freighter I'd certainly suicide-gank it in hisec while you were AFK hauling and where the odds of getting the loot home are close to 100%, not in lowsec where someone else can steal it or engage my out-of-corp loot ship without consequence. Haulers are in no more danger in lowsec than hisec. Arguably less because everyone is alert.
You got me wrong, I am not a hauler. I am the mission runner that likes to travel. Other than the effects f inflation this will do little but annoy me.
Large alliances have already proven they can and will **** the market if it suits their purpose. Suddenly giving them the ability to cheaply stop inter-empire trade is unlikely to go unexploited. They do it now to a smaller extent, but if all trade must conveinently travel through weapons-free space or get lucky with wormholes they will control all of those market disparities.
I have been in Null Sec. Its not hard to get around. When big alliances decide to move stuff, they have the manpower, coordination and resources to make it almost as safe as logging off in a newbie system.
The markets for officer and deadspace gear are tiny compared to the wider markets of standard gear. Those modules may bear a high price tag, but are a drop in the bucket to the real markets of EVE.
Most serious haulers moving stuff in High Sec use NPC corps to avoid wardecs. I am sure those who bring things from the wilder areas of space often do the same, or trade it out with an alt once they reach high sec.
My untestable rhetoric is as valid as the OP, and probably the more likely outcome of the proposed changes given past history. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
107
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 00:01:00 -
[1282] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:You are not going to convince these lazy ambush predators that what they want will not have the results they wish for. All they want is more meat delivered effortlessly to their own table, and it tastes better if it comes from someone else's plate.
I am not a ganker or camper. I'm a null sec miner. I am very in favor of this idea for many reasons, gate camps are not my goal but they are an intrinsic part of eve online itself. This change doesn't "effortlessly deliver more meat to the table" of gate campers. People still have to choose to go into low sec.
You guys picture a bulldozer pushing carebears into the pit of low sec. But that's not accurate. You still have to take the plunge on your own. NOBODY IS BEING FORCED INTO LOW SEC. HIGH SEC WILL STILL EXIST IN HUGE SWATHS.
Rivr Luzade wrote:They are in more danger because of certain camps. In high sec you only have to worry about gank squads, in low sec systems you have a plethora of other things to worry about. You do realize the picture you posted is in Null sec right?
Mike Voidstar wrote: Large alliances have already proven they can and will **** the market if it suits their purpose. Suddenly giving them the ability to cheaply stop inter-empire trade is unlikely to go unexploited. They do it now to a smaller extent, but if all trade must conveinently travel through weapons-free space or get lucky with wormholes they will control all of those market disparities.
It would not be possible for any group of any size to completely stop inter-empire trade. The amount of people it would take would be... well... hard to even imagine much less the amount of discipline. And even beyond that, if you do manage to have assets on every possible route between empires then your forces would be divided into so many small units that they'd be susceptible to smaller groups over taking them. And then with all of that, what about their sov space? What if someone attacks that? Who's going to defend it?
Shutting down trade on a major scale take too much effort. The Ice interdiction worked because of the very limited ice fields and they limited that even further by targeting the ice of one empire. Anyone who had access to that type of ice got rich pretty quick because of the barrier to mine ice. With this idea there will be forever barriers between the different types of ice and empires. And it will always have a certain amount of profitability to move it across the lowsec barrier. Sorry if thats annoying with your arbitrary mission location changes. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
422
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 00:34:00 -
[1283] - Quote
Quote:You guys picture a bulldozer pushing carebears into the pit of low sec. But that's not accurate. You still have to take the plunge on your own. NOBODY IS BEING FORCED INTO LOW SEC. HIGH SEC WILL STILL EXIST IN HUGE SWATHS
The entire, clearly stated, goal of this change is to get people into low sec via market pressure. It seeks to reduce the ability of people to move goods from one empire to another without crossing through low sec systems. It wants to take an ability people have currently, so that they will have no other useful choice but to cross into the cross hairs of gate campers.
In other words it intends to use market forces to get people into low sec. You know... force them. As if with a bulldozer made of reduced profits.
It wants to take away some kid's shovel that he plays in the sandbox with and either leave him just using his hands or begging to use someone else's shovel.
Quote:It would not be possible for any group of any size to completely stop inter-empire trade. The amount of people it would take would be... well... hard to even imagine much less the amount of discipline. And even beyond that, if you do manage to have assets on every possible route between empires then your forces would be divided into so many small units that they'd be susceptible to smaller groups over taking them. And then with all of that, what about their sov space? What if someone attacks that? Who's going to defend it?
Shutting down trade on a major scale take too much effort. The Ice interdiction worked because of the very limited ice fields and they limited that even further by targeting the ice of one empire. Anyone who had access to that type of ice got rich pretty quick because of the barrier to mine ice. With this idea there will be forever barriers between the different types of ice and empires. And it will always have a certain amount of profitability to move it across the lowsec barrier. Sorry if thats annoying with your arbitrary mission location changes.
Sure it could be done. Nothing stops them from setting up Cyno ships to get back to their jump gate networks on a moments notice. They don't have to catch every ship to effectively stop trade. It would not take long before you had to arrange transport with them to move goods with a tax, and the more that knuckle under makes anyone not on the list easier to find and stop. CFC have how many thousands of people? The only people that would be able to challenge them would be another huge alliance, and they would probably welcome the distraction. |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
867
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 01:14:00 -
[1284] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Sure it could be done. Nothing stops them from setting up Cyno ships to get back to their jump gate networks on a moments notice. .
You do understand that jump drives have a limited range? Furthermore the shortest ranges are black ops and titans, and the portals for both is a mere 10LY that isn't far enough to cross a few regional gates. Much less jump from nullsec to high sec border areas.
....and you CAN'T INSTALL A JUMP BRIDGE OUTISIDE OF SOV SPACE.
You feel free to opine on matter that you obviously have not the faintest clue of how they work. |
JetStream Drenard
EVE University Ivy League
40
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 01:21:00 -
[1285] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:The entire, clearly stated, goal of this change is to get people into low sec via market pressure. It seeks to reduce the ability of people to move goods from one empire to another without crossing through low sec systems. It wants to take an ability people have currently, so that they will have no other useful choice but to cross into the cross hairs of gate campers.
In other words it intends to use market forces to get people into low sec. You know... force them. As if with a bulldozer made of reduced profits.
It wants to take away some kid's shovel that he plays in the sandbox with and either leave him just using his hands or begging to use someone else's shovel.. Nah. Your local market is a perfectly good place to buy and sell. And no amount of 'market pressure' is going to force you to go to Jita. In fact, why would you risk it without a damb good reason and the proper ships to make it happen? This would effect me negatively as well as I routinely travel 20 jumps between various systems. I still want it. Make the game harder. Make more consequences.
Mike Voidstar wrote:Sure it could be done. Nothing stops them from setting up Cyno ships to get back to their jump gate networks on a moments notice. They don't have to catch every ship to effectively stop trade. It would not take long before you had to arrange transport with them to move goods with a tax, and the more that knuckle under makes anyone not on the list easier to find and stop. CFC have how many thousands of people? The only people that would be able to challenge them would be another huge alliance, and they would probably welcome the distraction. a cyno alt tools around in noob ship. finds 'safe n quiet' system one off high sec and cyno up! Freigher out! This is how they already operate, i doubt they would even notice.. not that complicated. And this idea would have to come with improvements (buff) to blockade runners which is just **** now. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1026
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 01:33:00 -
[1286] - Quote
JetStream Drenard wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:The entire, clearly stated, goal of this change is to get people into low sec via market pressure. It seeks to reduce the ability of people to move goods from one empire to another without crossing through low sec systems. It wants to take an ability people have currently, so that they will have no other useful choice but to cross into the cross hairs of gate campers.
In other words it intends to use market forces to get people into low sec. You know... force them. As if with a bulldozer made of reduced profits.
It wants to take away some kid's shovel that he plays in the sandbox with and either leave him just using his hands or begging to use someone else's shovel.. Nah. Your local market is a perfectly good place to buy and sell. And no amount of 'market pressure' is going to force you to go to Jita. In fact, why would you risk it without a damb good reason and the proper ships to make it happen? This would effect me negatively as well as I routinely travel 20 jumps between various systems. I still want it. Make the game harder. Make more consequences. Mike Voidstar wrote:Sure it could be done. Nothing stops them from setting up Cyno ships to get back to their jump gate networks on a moments notice. They don't have to catch every ship to effectively stop trade. It would not take long before you had to arrange transport with them to move goods with a tax, and the more that knuckle under makes anyone not on the list easier to find and stop. CFC have how many thousands of people? The only people that would be able to challenge them would be another huge alliance, and they would probably welcome the distraction. a cyno alt tools around in noob ship. finds 'safe n quiet' system one off high sec and cyno up! Freigher out! This is how they already operate, i doubt they would even notice.. not that complicated. And this idea would have to come with improvements (buff) to blockade runners which is just **** now. Maybe I'm alone in this, but I would think greater JF dependance would be a bad thing. Nor do I think cloaky hauler's and JF's should be the only viable means of routinely transporting goods between empires.
And really, what makes local markets competitive now is the ease of both sellers and buyers to move between markets at will. I've gone 20 jumps to Jita to buy a kronos because of the 150mill isk difference in price between there and Dodixie. Shortly thereafter the difference was halved. Both my actions and the actions of those who either lowered prices after they didn't sell or imported from elsewhere to sell at higher margins helped equalize markets.
This will create stagnation as any restriction on free movement always does, and it will centralize trade even further as a far fewer number of individuals will be able to spread goods and decentralize it. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
687
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 01:38:00 -
[1287] - Quote
If the history of the world tells us anything, it is that people will find a way to trade and prosper no matter what the prevailing conditions.
When I was a kid, there was an active trade in getting Levi jeans into Moscow from the West, despite there being a damn great wall in the way. The politics of the day disallowed it. People traded Levis anyway - despite the strong disincentives.
If you put some lowsec in between the empires, trade will be disrupted for a few weeks until people learn the ropes.
That's how the world really works.
It's also true that in general, people who are comfortably off fear change.
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
JetStream Drenard
EVE University Ivy League
40
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 01:59:00 -
[1288] - Quote
Really the ONLY thing this game has going for it as apposed to other MMO's is the challenge. But it is not challenging enough, still very little thought involved for too many people. In fact, if I believe half of what I have heard and read, this game used to be a whole lot more challenging. But the more 'player friendly' you make the game the more of a decaying circle of **** all it becomes. Just like too many other games. I want you and me to have the knowledge and dedication of a real world military professional. I dont see 'casual play' as a valid reason for stupefying the game any further. Their are hundreds of casual games out there. But only one Eve!
I say it is time for more people to stand up and say, "CCP please make this game more challenging, more difficult, and take us back to your HTFU family values. Please continue to differentiate this game from all the other easy games once again. CCP, I know that we are asking a lot and we know we are asking you to loose some subscriptions, but we ask in good faith. We promise to kill all the things and put Eve on the front page news as often as we can. We want risk, effort and intensity to be the number one driving religion of Eve. We ask you to make it happen. Thank you!" |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
422
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 02:42:00 -
[1289] - Quote
Onictus wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:
Sure it could be done. Nothing stops them from setting up Cyno ships to get back to their jump gate networks on a moments notice. .
You do understand that jump drives have a limited range? Furthermore the shortest ranges are black ops and titans, and the portals for both is a mere 10LY that isn't far enough to cross a few regional gates. Much less jump from nullsec to high sec border areas. ....and you CAN'T INSTALL A JUMP BRIDGE OUTISIDE OF SOV SPACE. You feel free to opine on matter that you obviously have not the faintest clue of how they work.
I am perfectly aware of how they work.
Nothing stops them from setting up cyno ships in a chain to get them back into systems with their own jump networks. If they decided they wanted to, they could do it with ease. it would be a massive undertaking, but that's kinda what those guys do. If they found it to be worth their while, and for a few establishing an iron grip on all trade would indeed be worth it, they could do it. They have already proven they have no problem spending large sums of ISK, time and effort manipulating the markets on a large scale so long as they get more back. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1026
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 02:45:00 -
[1290] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:If the history of the world tells us anything, it is that people will find a way to trade and prosper no matter what the prevailing conditions.
When I was a kid, there was an active trade in getting Levi jeans into Moscow from the West, despite there being a damn great wall in the way. The politics of the day disallowed it. People traded Levis anyway - despite the strong disincentives.
If you put some lowsec in between the empires, trade will be disrupted for a few weeks until people learn the ropes.
That's how the world really works.
It's also true that in general, people who are comfortably off fear change. Trade won't be disrupted for a few weeks, it will permanently change in landscape. Whether for the better or worse is the current source of debate. And just because some people can find a way around a change, doesn't make it a good one. I don't forsee regional trade flourishing or markets equalizing, but rather the creation of objectively good and bad places to live in terms of markets. Even without travel obstacles we already see strong concentration of trade, do we expect barriers to somehow not exasperate this further? Or is it that there is simply no concern over it?
Sure, the world gets Levi's to Moscow, but in the same quantity and relative prices it gets to New York? That discrepancy works when you can't just blink over, when you can, it changes the equation. It's easy to cry fear in the face of opposition, even easier to just throw out that people will adapt, but it's harder to prove why a change should occur.
|
|
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
867
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 03:45:00 -
[1291] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Nothing stops them from setting up cyno ships in a chain to get them back into systems with their own jump networks. If they decided they wanted to, they could do it with ease. it would be a massive undertaking, but that's kinda what those guys do. If they found it to be worth their while, and for a few establishing an iron grip on all trade would indeed be worth it, they could do it. They have already proven they have no problem spending large sums of ISK, time and effort manipulating the markets on a large scale so long as they get more back.
Except you are missing the point that no one is going to bother trying to lock down FOUR full empires worth of trade routes. No one can even completely lock down Jita, and you KNOW where they are going to be currently. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1027
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 03:56:00 -
[1292] - Quote
Onictus wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:
Nothing stops them from setting up cyno ships in a chain to get them back into systems with their own jump networks. If they decided they wanted to, they could do it with ease. it would be a massive undertaking, but that's kinda what those guys do. If they found it to be worth their while, and for a few establishing an iron grip on all trade would indeed be worth it, they could do it. They have already proven they have no problem spending large sums of ISK, time and effort manipulating the markets on a large scale so long as they get more back.
Except you are missing the point that no one is going to bother trying to lock down FOUR full empires worth of trade routes. No one can even completely lock down Jita, and you KNOW where they are going to be currently. Locking down a highsec system isn't exactly feasible. This stems from the fact that locking down any highsec system isn't feasible because highsec doesn't allow open engagement without mandatory consequence. Lowsec doesn't abide by the same rule set. |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
867
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 04:01:00 -
[1293] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Onictus wrote:Mike Voidstar wrote:
Nothing stops them from setting up cyno ships in a chain to get them back into systems with their own jump networks. If they decided they wanted to, they could do it with ease. it would be a massive undertaking, but that's kinda what those guys do. If they found it to be worth their while, and for a few establishing an iron grip on all trade would indeed be worth it, they could do it. They have already proven they have no problem spending large sums of ISK, time and effort manipulating the markets on a large scale so long as they get more back.
Except you are missing the point that no one is going to bother trying to lock down FOUR full empires worth of trade routes. No one can even completely lock down Jita, and you KNOW where they are going to be currently. Locking down a highsec system isn't exactly feasible. This stems from the fact that locking down any highsec system isn't feasible because highsec doesn't allow open engagement without mandatory consequence. Lowsec doesn't abide by the same rule set.
That is easily enough worked around. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1027
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 04:07:00 -
[1294] - Quote
Onictus wrote:That is easily enough worked around. Should it need to be? Again, "can be worked around" alone is not the mark of a good idea. Also why would you? Unless you have some dependance upon a regional resource and are actually a gatherer of that resource, why bother living in the newly isolated areas? It makes more sense to live where trade, and thus commodities to consume, are abundant and leave the collection of regional resources to people with JF's. To ask again, why do we want more concentration around Jita?
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
249
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 07:09:00 -
[1295] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:They are in more danger because of certain camps. In high sec you only have to worry about gank squads, in low sec systems you have a plethora of other things to worry about. You do realize the picture you posted is in Null sec right?
I unfortunately have no picture of Hier from a year back or so; so this was the most recent one I took of such a camp. Does it matter in the end?
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Onictus wrote:That is easily enough worked around. Should it need to be? Again, "can be worked around" alone is not the mark of a good idea. Also why would you? Unless you have some dependance upon a regional resource and are actually a gatherer of that resource, why bother living in the newly isolated areas? It makes more sense to live where trade, and thus commodities to consume, are abundant and leave the collection of regional resources to people with JF's. To ask again, why do we want more concentration around Jita?
m0o |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
247
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 10:12:00 -
[1296] - Quote
I still haven't seen a compelling reason for this change. 'I don't like traders hauling lots of goods under CONCORD protection' and 'It would create more targets for pirates to make money' don't cut it. You can already gank freighters in hi-sec to be a pirate, and nobody has answered yet why losec folks don't fly to null and hunt ratters for there multi-billion ships instead? |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
249
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 11:07:00 -
[1297] - Quote
As for the low sec not hunting ratters in 00: because a large number of ratters in 00 behave like bots. As soon as they see a neutral in local, they hurry back to station or their POS.
As for the other statement: I fully support your stance there. The claims of pirates are hilarious sometimes. Almost as if they were entitled to get free kills in high sec, while those who live in high sec have no rights for protection. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
690
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 12:03:00 -
[1298] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:The claims of pirates are hilarious sometimes. Almost as if they were entitled to get free kills in high sec, while those who live in high sec have no rights for protection.
Are you able to provide an example of such a claim?
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
249
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 12:09:00 -
[1299] - Quote
This thread? |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2219
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 15:12:00 -
[1300] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:The claims of pirates are hilarious sometimes. Almost as if they were entitled to get free kills in high sec, while those who live in high sec have no rights for protection. You are under the false assumption that every supporter of this idea is a low sec pirate. Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
|
Sunai Karvinoinas
13
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 14:04:00 -
[1301] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:You are under the false assumption that every supporter of this idea is a low sec pirate. No. But I'm sure the supporters are guys, who have only benefits for their way to play the game.
Nowhere in this thread there comes up any compromise. Why? If CCP would like to divide the empire space routes, what major concessions for hisec only players are acceptable without killing lowsec gameplay? Can transit routes between hisec enclaves be handled another way than deepspace routes?
Let me suggest a 3-step compromise: (1) - PvE becomes more like PvP in order to reduce the need of completely different fittings and teach all players to pay more attention to the things they do. - Experienced players and developers create "NPC char skills" and usual fittings for T1/navy issued/Concord ships. - Concord become vincible but challenging. Navy shoud be vincible already. - Concord patrols "uplink" gates to higher sec space only with small a bit challenging fleets in sec state 0.4 and 0.3. - Concord does not roam in lowsec. - Concord patroles no "downlink" gates to lower or equal security space. - Concord needs a random time to replace a killed spawn. Time frame for replacement depends on sys sec state. - Concord will auto aggro only outlaws/criminals (<-5.0 players security state) - Temporary spawns of factional navy will appear like rat spawns in hisec but a bit more challenging. - Navy fleets will auto aggro factional enemies only. - "Downlink" gates will be temporary patroled by factional navy spawns (T1 or navy issued frigates/cruisers/bc). - From time to time a small navy scout spawns at gates, belts or factional NPC stations (within the own territory only). - A scout spawn stays a predefined time until it will go away. At gates navy scouts or fleets will stay much longer. - The max spawn count and size will be limited by system security state. - Borders between hostile races should be patroled more dense, than space between friendly races.
Nobody should be able permacamp a gate without having several smaller fights against NPC which maybe draw off the attention from transitting travellers possibly. Transitting travellers may have a slightly higher chance to escape.
(2) - There should be several routes with nearly the same hop count between the hisec areas. - Not only one permacamped route should be reasonable and/or possible. This should reduce the sense of permacamps.
(3) - Building player controlled hisec jump gates to charge toll. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
265
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 14:08:00 -
[1302] - Quote
All those ideas will push profit upwards to the larger groups away from the players who play trading games lone wolf due to their time commitments. I still hold that the only way to get people into losec is by their own choice and that can only be done by giving them better choices and reasons to do so than currently exist.
If you dropped people into losec deadspace to start a mission and then they had to fight their way free I'm pretty sure that would entice more people in to take a crack at them. These missions would be more reward than hisec but less than the losec combat anomalies etc to reflect the initial help in getting to the mission site |
JetStream Drenard
EVE University Ivy League
50
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 14:23:00 -
[1303] - Quote
Sunai Karvinoinas wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:You are under the false assumption that every supporter of this idea is a low sec pirate. No. But I'm sure the supporters are guys, who have only benefits for their way to play the game. Nowhere in this thread there comes up any compromise. Why? If CCP would like to divide the empire space routes, what major concessions for hisec only players are acceptable without killing lowsec gameplay? Can transit routes between hisec enclaves be handled another way than deepspace routes? Let me suggest a 3-step compromise: (1) - PvE becomes more like PvP in order to reduce the need of completely different fittings and teach all players to pay more attention to the things they do. - Experienced players and developers create "NPC char skills" and usual fittings for T1/navy issued/Concord ships. - Concord become vincible but challenging. Navy shoud be vincible already. - Concord patrols "uplink" gates to higher sec space only with small a bit challenging fleets in sec state 0.4 and 0.3. - Concord does not roam in lowsec. - Concord patroles no "downlink" gates to lower or equal security space. - Concord needs a random time to replace a killed spawn. Time frame for replacement depends on sys sec state. - Concord will auto aggro only outlaws/criminals (<-5.0 players security state) - Temporary spawns of factional navy will appear like rat spawns in hisec but a bit more challenging. - Navy fleets will auto aggro factional enemies only. - "Downlink" gates will be temporary patroled by factional navy spawns (T1 or navy issued frigates/cruisers/bc). - From time to time a small navy scout spawns at gates, belts or factional NPC stations (within the own territory only). - A scout spawn stays a predefined time until it will go away. At gates navy scouts or fleets will stay much longer. - The max spawn count and size will be limited by system security state. - Borders between hostile races should be patroled more dense, than space between friendly races. Nobody should be able permacamp a gate without having several smaller fights against NPC which maybe draw off the attention from transitting travellers possibly. Transitting travellers may have a slightly higher chance to escape. (2) - There should be several routes with nearly the same hop count between the hisec areas. - Not only one permacamped route should be reasonable and/or possible. This should reduce the sense of permacamps. (3) - Building player controlled hisec jump gates to charge toll. This is superficially a good idea. You probably dont realize that a highly skilled gang can fight both NPC aggro and still manage an effective gate camp. Back before concord was invincible a corp called m0o (credit Rivr) spent weeks tanking and killing concord on one hand and still effectively blockaded high sec gates with the other hand. So it is not plausible, unless CCP puts a lot more work into NPC capabilities, then it still might not work. It is worth a test try though, if CCP fixes NPC skill as NPC really should function more like real players anyway, with ship fitting and tactics. |
JetStream Drenard
EVE University Ivy League
50
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 14:41:00 -
[1304] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:All those ideas will push profit upwards to the larger groups away from the players who play trading games lone wolf due to their time commitments. I still hold that the only way to get people into losec is by their own choice and that can only be done by giving them better choices and reasons to do so than currently exist. I disagree and I am not pushing my own pirate or carebear agenda. I spend about 2/3 of time on lone industry stuff and I support this idea. I think most people assume that with lo sec border zones between factions that Jita will still be the mecca of trade. I believe that many people would avoid the low sec jump for the purpose of trade and therefore, start using their local markets and the prices would balance out. I say balance out here because Jita is an anomaly of low prices simply due to competition. Prices elsewhere are much more reliant on manufacturing cost. This would also decrease server load at Jita over time.
The OP did provide a method of free transport to help people resettle their stuff elsewhere. The Op also provides the basis for multiple low sec routes, not just one chokepoint. Finally, inter-faction trading hauling and trading would be more of a high end content for market players- risk vs. reward. Other then where they buy and sell, many high sec players would not really notice any difference after a short teething period.
With my main, I also frequently travel inter-factionally through high sec and it would definitely cause me to work harder and plan better to not get camped. I would probably be the victim at some point of my own support, and I still support it. I want the game to be harder, it is what sets it apart from all the rest. |
Bohneik Itohn
Universal Freelance CONSORTIUM UNIVERSALIS
10
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 14:53:00 -
[1305] - Quote
As someone who frequently travels into low sec and could care less about gate camps or pirates I would like to describe this idea in two ways.
1: Annoying. You'll just be concentrating the number of high sec players into smaller pockets. Travel through low sec won't increase significantly, we'll just end up with 4 Jitas, and a lot of traders training into Cloaking IV.
2: Counter-productive. The majority of people in low sec right now fall within two categories: People traveling through low sec to get somewhere else, and the pirates trying to catch those people traveling through. This does nothing to solve the problem that there is very little reason for any other type of player to bother with low sec. Making low sec unavoidable just means that this problem will be exacerbated, and the permanent population in low sec will remain largely unchanged, low sec will remain largely undesirable, and it will still be a bunch of gate campers out there playing grab-*** with no real purpose.
The problem isn't that it's easy to avoid low sec, it's that players have no motivation to go there other than niche activities like moon mining and FW. Fix that, and everything else will follow suit.
Fixing that does not mean nerfing high sec, either. For the love of god, stop trying to nerf high sec. The annoying player base there is enough punishment for anyone except equally damaged individuals to want to find a better alternative. Low sec is worse because they generally don't even need passable social skills since you can't pick and choose your bedfellows when you've only got a handful to work with.
People will follow the path of least resistance. The path of least resistance in this scenario already exists for them. Jita, Hek, Rens, Amarr, and Dodixie. |
WaterMarks
Khanid Armament
1
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 14:58:00 -
[1306] - Quote
i like and hate this idea...
one thing i do disagree with is people saying that multiple routes through this lowsec would counter th effect of ckoke points and camp spots...
there is enough eve players to camp as much low sec points as they can place... and they will camp those points -Fly Reckless- |
JetStream Drenard
EVE University Ivy League
50
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 15:05:00 -
[1307] - Quote
Bohneik Itohn wrote:As someone who frequently travels into low sec and could care less about gate camps or pirates I would like to describe this idea in two ways.
1: Annoying. You'll just be concentrating the number of high sec players into smaller pockets. Travel through low sec won't increase significantly, we'll just end up with 4 Jitas, and a lot of traders training into Cloaking IV.
2: Counter-productive. The majority of people in low sec right now fall within two categories: People traveling through low sec to get somewhere else, and the pirates trying to catch those people traveling through. This does nothing to solve the problem that there is very little reason for any other type of player to bother with low sec. Making low sec unavoidable just means that this problem will be exacerbated, and the permanent population in low sec will remain largely unchanged, low sec will remain largely undesirable, and it will still be a bunch of gate campers out there playing grab-*** with no real purpose.
The problem isn't that it's easy to avoid low sec, it's that players have no motivation to go there other than niche activities like moon mining and FW. Fix that, and everything else will follow suit.
Fixing that does not mean nerfing high sec, either. For the love of god, stop trying to nerf high sec. The annoying player base there is enough punishment for anyone except equally damaged individuals to want to find a better alternative. Low sec is worse because they generally don't even need passable social skills since you can't pick and choose your bedfellows when you've only got a handful to work with.
People will follow the path of least resistance. The path of least resistance in this scenario already exists for them. Jita, Hek, Rens, Amarr, and Dodixie. I agree with you completely and I still support low sec border zones. The reason is it just make the game more challenging, which is what sets Eve apart from all the other games. I would add one more type of reason to go to low sec - to kill the pirate gate campers. The tears from pirates when a "blob" * passes through their systems make me happy happy happy. * Any fleet of about 80%-120% of the gate campers seems to qualify as a blob to them. |
Sunai Karvinoinas
13
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 15:16:00 -
[1308] - Quote
JetStream Drenard wrote:This is superficially a good idea. You probably dont realize that a highly skilled gang can fight both NPC aggro and still manage an effective gate camp. Back before concord was invincible a corp called m0o (credit Rivr) spent weeks tanking and killing concord on one hand and still effectively blockaded high sec gates with the other hand. So it is not plausible, unless CCP puts a lot more work into NPC capabilities, then it still might not work. It is worth a test try though, if CCP fixes NPC skill as NPC really should function more like real players anyway, with ship fitting and tactics. I agree with this. There will be a lot of balancing needed. Especially in order to keep Concord strength or value in hisec. But maybe this way could be worth to be followed.
I think, paying attention to NPC A.I. could improve game experience for casual and power gamers. I spent only a few words, because this suggestion is already out there in this forum. Means: Make PvE more like PvP. Make it a challenge everywhere. Balance it well for hisec belt rats. Belt rats should become slightly to well experienced fighters. Factional navy gangs could spawn in hisec too. In example make it an inverted view against belt rats.
If there are huge gangs out there who can check all possible routes and all Concord spawns they are worth to control the routes. Give us (much) more routes between empire space, which are usable equally. ;)
My suggestion talks about distraction not to make lowsec to a further highsec. Also I want not make ultra high sec (0.8 and above) less secure. It's only thinking about smoother borders, but it's always a balancing issue of course.
Maybe we can find a way more in the middle. Getting a big picture instead of lonely pixels only. ;)
---
The topic sounds more like a suggestions what will paying profit to a group of players only. I cannot support a suggestion what not takes advantages for all players in any way. And all the discussion only shows a cold war between hostile parties. This might not be the case, but it looks like that. That's no cosntructive discussion so far. |
Roland Cassidy
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
73
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 15:20:00 -
[1309] - Quote
I'm a proponent of the idea that if an area has a valuable resource, people will go there and they will attempt to gather that resource in the manner that poses them the least amount of risk available given the opportunity and knowledge to do so.
This is why we have Cloaked and stabbed condors running LP sites in FW. Because its effective, relatively risk free and earns well. At the moment beyond FW areas there's no reason for a low to mid tier player to do anything but fight in Lowsec. And those low/mid tier players aren't lining up to lose ships to a off grid boosted gang. Non FW lowsec has nothing resembling an incentive as it stands. Even full time Pirate types have an extreme difficulty at the lowest end of SP because there are no small sites for low end frigates to work and consequently no reliable way to grind sec status back without the assistance of larger allies, eliminating opportunities to play the game at all in Highsec without an alt and no isk well from which they can use to replace their ships at this tier.
It's petty posturing and there's room to say "well being a fulltime pirate has to have drawbacks and the consequences of low sec status exist for a reason" but the point here is that there's no low end opportunities for newer players out there. A situation that is mirrored in Null as well. I think there should be content options for every section of space for all tiers of players. Not just in Highsec with Missions.
Give the people a reason to be in lowsec and that will be a nice start to improving the population, not ham handing a requirement to fly in these zones between empires. Better content not more restrictive content please. |
claritalia
SERUM OF TRUTH
2
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 17:51:00 -
[1310] - Quote
What an absolutely horrible idea.. I how in anyones mind would they think this to be good ? There are so many negatives to this. let me list just a couple
1. the pricing on everything would skyrocket. There is so much materials moved between the empires its stupid. This would cause a domino effect that would take years if at all for the market to adjust or compensate.
2. All those low sec system would become choke points....Rancer enough said.
3. it would literally empty out the other factions as long as jita continued to be the trade hub.
4. all this to improve one specific type of game play ? really ??? |
|
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
869
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 19:31:00 -
[1311] - Quote
claritalia wrote:What an absolutely horrible idea.. How in anyones mind would they think this to be good ? There are so many negatives to this. let me list just a couple 1. the pricing on everything would skyrocket. There is so much materials moved between the empires its stupid. This would cause a domino effect that would take years if at all for the market to adjust or compensate. 2. All those low sec system would become choke points....Rancer enough said. 3. it would literally empty out the other factions as long as jita continued to be the trade hub. 4. all this to improve one specific type of game play ? really ???
I don't belie that people haven't figured out Rancer yet. |
Sal Landry
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
211
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 20:24:00 -
[1312] - Quote
claritalia wrote: 2. All those low sec system would become choke points....Rancer enough said.
I've been through Rancer quite a few times in the last few months. Never died once, and I don't think there were ever more than 5 or 6 people in the system. One time I was literally the only one there. |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
869
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 23:57:00 -
[1313] - Quote
If I were king I'd pull concord out of all sub 0.8 sec systems. |
Humang
Sefem Velox Swift Angels Alliance
45
|
Posted - 2014.03.08 00:27:00 -
[1314] - Quote
Phaade wrote:Sitting in hi sec all day is horrible. Adding more low sec and more reasons for players to be in low sec is a great thing.
I'll point out that this is your point of view, and other might not share it; everyone has different play styles and desires for what they want to game to be, the challenge is accommodating for them all.
Though in saying that, there could be a very possible reason for people who live in high-sec to be so low-sec averse, they could have the entirely different picture of how low-sec is, ether through past experience with bad luck, or being given the wrong idea and never tested it for them selves.
Again, there should be a system in place that GIVES people a reason to visit low-sec, and not FORCE them to. (IE see my previous post a page back or so) This isn't the black and white issue that a lot of people are playing it as, each group will need to compromise to achieve a system that everyone/the vast majority is happy with. Witty Comment Here |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
265
|
Posted - 2014.03.08 10:19:00 -
[1315] - Quote
I like that this has turned into a reasoned discussion on both sides. The key thing I take from this is that there needs to be more of a *reason* for people to choose to go through losec. Some believe that is best served by splitting hisec, an equal number utterly disagree. I have a feeling that the silent group here will be the new characters (which I still think I am) who don't generally chat in these forums. They would be heavily impacted by separating hisec but would also benefit most by having good fresh reasons to visit losec
Imagine a new player being tutored into say a frigate after being given fitting clues in the mission brief to be dropped into losec, execute a PvP style NPC one on one, gather good loot then have to make there way clear of losec. The feeling of success the first time they manage it would almost certainly make them want to stay *and* want more of losec. I think that hybric missions are probably the best way to get people into losec. these could be brought in as part of the long needed PvE overhaul.
This kind of mission would be hi risk and hi reward for a new player (wait...I got loot worth 4 mil??? That would take me ages in the venture!) but not worth it for older players. The mission levels could introduce more and more risk/reward which ultimately would lead more players to sign up full time and travel through losec with dangerous intentions.
Other constructive suggestion on how to get people (older and newer players) to choose to cross the borders would be welcome :)
For me it has to be just that though, a choice. And not one forced on players by damaging the economy they work within to make it untenable otherwise. If player are forced into losec travel they will resent it, if they are given a new fresh reason to go they will love it. |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2223
|
Posted - 2014.03.08 10:47:00 -
[1316] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:If player are forced into losec travel they will resent it, if they are given a new fresh reason to go they will love it. Players are not forced into low sec right now and they resent it, so there would be no change in that mindset. Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
265
|
Posted - 2014.03.08 10:53:00 -
[1317] - Quote
Some players...I like losec for its opportunities but there will always be those who dislike every area. They won't change their minds and they won't change their playstyle and nor should they have too. I'm interested in more ways to get those players who would be interested to actually take the plunge (including new players with even just a weeks training). It doesn't take many people changing their habits to make a big difference. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1129
|
Posted - 2014.03.08 11:10:00 -
[1318] - Quote
Phaade wrote:
3. The whole premise is that there would now be multiple trade hubs, Jita would, for obvious reasons, be Caldari's trade hub only.
There are multiple trade hubs. The rest of your points are a joke or irrelevant. This whole proposal is just a 'nerf highsec' idea.
That said, the idea's about PvE more like PvP are good, of course CCP has already signed onto that general concept years ago and nothing has really changed. And that idea is independent of the nerf highsec crowd calling for more lowsec space. |
OSGOD
Siren's calll Fallen Defiance
13
|
Posted - 2014.03.08 12:14:00 -
[1319] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:GizzyBoy wrote:join test concord's not getting in the way of them hitting freighters 300 + so far? Sounds like extremely boring emergent gameplay. Wouldn't you rather be a pirate in a armada of warships trying to take down the caravan of cargo haulers? Or maybe you and a small band of frigates are cruising the space lanes looking for a lone trader who has stuffed his cargo hold with the federation navy stasis webs that are in short supply in jita. Instead of filling the freighter, setting destination, clicking autopilot, then halfway their you get your massive ship bumped like a tennis ball underwater while a group of ships 1 shot you which interrupts you watching tv. I wanna be a pirate, not some guy who runs around looking for asshats running missions to gank or to play grabass with other so called "pirates". I wanna be a adventurous trader looking to make my fortune using my wits to navigate dangerous deep space without pouring over data tables and spread sheets trying to manipulate prices by moving **** from homogenous trade hub to trade hub.
LMAO then get a ******* freighter and make runs out to nullsec , or better take your ******* idea and go join that fuckhead soundwave |
Sunai Karvinoinas
13
|
Posted - 2014.03.09 11:12:00 -
[1320] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:There are multiple trade hubs. The rest of your points are a joke or irrelevant. This whole proposal is just a 'nerf highsec' idea.
That said, the idea's about PvE more like PvP are good, of course CCP has already signed onto that general concept years ago and nothing has really changed. And that idea is independent of the nerf highsec crowd calling for more lowsec space. I can sign this. We need no further "Nerf the highsec" thread in new clothes only. There are a huge amount of players who not want the highsec nerfed or changed. Maybe they never respond here, because it's a f****** stupid idea and they hope, CCP will ignore.
I'm a casual hisec only player. With the given options and the hard cutted border between high and low I have no reason to go there. I want not get forced to change my (lazy, unattentive and chilling) gameplay for. I want not get forced in any way to do anything.
I would not change my gameplay and leaving highsec, if lowsec borders would be set up. I had a smaller amount of room to play. If it's getting boring more, I'd leave the game. I'm sure a lot of guys will do that earlier than running lowsec. In this case I do not think about economy anymore. Because it will affect CCPs RL economy so far.
You may leave the idea, EvE would be a PvP only game anymore. I would not play it, if it still would be.
So stop creating "nerf the highsec" threads and start improving the game with fresh ideas, worth to talk about for all players instead a group of them searching for singlesided advantages only. |
|
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
691
|
Posted - 2014.03.09 11:28:00 -
[1321] - Quote
Sunai Karvinoinas wrote:
I would not change my gameplay and leaving highsec, if lowsec borders would be set up. I had a smaller amount of room to play. If it's getting boring more, I'd leave the game. I'm sure a lot of guys will do that earlier than running lowsec. In this case I do not think about economy anymore. Because it will affect CCPs RL economy so far.
Do I understand you correctly? Are you saying that the only reason you play eve is because hisec is big and largely uninterrupted?
May I ask how many systems you habitually visit in hisec?
I ask this because it seems to me that on the whole people generally visit 4 trade hubs and one or two mission/mining hubs in hisec and that's about it. Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2226
|
Posted - 2014.03.09 12:00:00 -
[1322] - Quote
I'm trying to figure out how people are thinking this is a nerf high sec thread. Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
AmISeb
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2014.03.09 12:36:00 -
[1323] - Quote
I like it.
It-Ķs quite strange that there are 4 factions at war but their core spaces are border on border without any problems at all. The space between them should be more of a space with constant fights instead of the peaceful nothing it is now. |
Dave Stark
4478
|
Posted - 2014.03.09 12:54:00 -
[1324] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:I'm trying to figure out how people are thinking this is a nerf high sec thread.
because it just makes it more of a pain in the arse to get around in high sec, and doesn't really solve any thing.
it's basically the same as removing jump bridges for null, doesn't stop you doing anything but it makes things more inconvenient. a lot of effort just to make the game less enjoyable. |
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
677
|
Posted - 2014.03.09 13:25:00 -
[1325] - Quote
Rather than completely change or destroy the entire hs structure (depending on your views) why not wait for the promised new space, and carve that up instead. HS is not just for beginners, people choose to use it either full time or when their gametime is limited and they need a short and predictable play experience.
Why does all of eve need to be a full on intense combat fest. (Or risk of one) All the people who have an hour before putting kids to bed, time between classes, or lunch hours unsubscribe and you are on your own. Let them play too. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
261
|
Posted - 2014.03.09 13:40:00 -
[1326] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:Rather than completely change or destroy the entire hs structure (depending on your views) why not wait for the promised new space, and carve that up instead. HS is not just for beginners, people choose to use it either full time or when their gametime is limited and they need a short and predictable play experience.
Why does all of eve need to be a full on intense combat fest. (Or risk of one) All the people who have an hour before putting kids to bed, time between classes, or lunch hours unsubscribe and you are on your own. Let them play too.
Shush! How dare you to suggest such heresy! You must not play EVE casually or when you cannot devote yourself to full combat gameplay! That ruins the game. You should feel bad for thinking those people should be allowed to play!
Disclaimer: /s |
Elvis Preslie
NRDS Securities Apocalypse Now.
58
|
Posted - 2014.03.09 14:58:00 -
[1327] - Quote
Yes, and you can pay about 500 million for your next battlecruiser while you're at it, since you just made it impossible for any regular hauler to get anywhere and a JF isnt going to go there either without setting up pos's on the routes, which would take two just to get from jita to dodixie - one for dodixie to jita and the other for jita to dodixie.
The game is already balanced; the shortest route is the low security and the longer, safer is the high security routes. LEAVE IT BE. You could add more high security routes on the safe route though, to entice people to go through the low security more.
Why do idiots that dont trade or know how the game works ENTIRELY, in relationship to EVERY role someone can play - why do these idiots get more attention in their posts versus well thought out, BALANCED suggestions? I'll never get this! |
Phaade
Perimeter Defense Systems Templis CALSF
154
|
Posted - 2014.03.09 16:15:00 -
[1328] - Quote
Humang wrote:Phaade wrote:Sitting in hi sec all day is horrible. Adding more low sec and more reasons for players to be in low sec is a great thing. I'll point out that this is your point of view, and other might not share it; everyone has different play styles and desires for what they want to game to be, the challenge is accommodating for them all. Though in saying that, there could be a very possible reason for people who live in high-sec to be so low-sec averse, they could have the entirely different picture of how low-sec is, ether through past experience with bad luck, or being given the wrong idea and never tested it for them selves. Again, there should be a system in place that GIVES people a reason to visit low-sec, and not FORCE them to. ( IE see my previous post a page back or so) This isn't the black and white issue that a lot of people are playing it as, each group will need to compromise to achieve a system that everyone/the vast majority is happy with.
Agreed. When I started playing Eve I was terrified of Low Sec. Now I'm in there constantly with little fear, only excitement. All it takes is an understanding of how it works.
You can escape almost every gate camp with nothing but a MWD, anyway. |
Phaade
Perimeter Defense Systems Templis CALSF
154
|
Posted - 2014.03.09 16:17:00 -
[1329] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Imagine a new player being tutored into say a frigate after being given fitting clues in the mission brief to be dropped into losec, execute a PvP style NPC one on one, gather good loot then have to make there way clear of losec. The feeling of success the first time they manage it would almost certainly make them want to stay *and* want more of losec. I think that hybric missions are probably the best way to get people into losec. these could be brought in as part of the long needed PvE overhaul.
This kind of mission would be hi risk and hi reward for a new player (wait...I got loot worth 4 mil??? That would take me ages in the venture!) but not worth it for older players. The mission levels could introduce more and more risk/reward which ultimately would lead more players to sign up full time and travel through losec with dangerous intentions.
THIS.
Why CCP hasn't done this in the past 10 years is beyond me.
Use PvE to facilitate PvP..... |
Phaade
Perimeter Defense Systems Templis CALSF
154
|
Posted - 2014.03.09 16:22:00 -
[1330] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Phaade wrote:
3. The whole premise is that there would now be multiple trade hubs, Jita would, for obvious reasons, be Caldari's trade hub only.
There are multiple trade hubs. The rest of your points are a joke or irrelevant. This whole proposal is just a 'nerf highsec' idea. That said, the idea's about PvE more like PvP are good, of course CCP has already signed onto that general concept years ago and nothing has really changed. And that idea is independent of the nerf highsec crowd calling for more lowsec space.
How does any of this nerf hi sec? At all?
There are not other systems equivalent to Jita; you are wrong.
This would, for obvious reason, improve the value of trade. I would love for you to explain to me how I am wrong.
Increasing the number of entrances to low sec would, obviously, help alleviate problems with gate camps on hi sec entrances. Explain to me how I am wrong.
A greater number of low sec systems decreases the distribution of players in low sec, thus lowering risk as a whole. Explain to me how I am wrong.
I know you can't; humor me.
|
|
Phaade
Perimeter Defense Systems Templis CALSF
154
|
Posted - 2014.03.09 16:30:00 -
[1331] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:I'm trying to figure out how people are thinking this is a nerf high sec thread.
it's not; people are dumb. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
265
|
Posted - 2014.03.09 17:21:00 -
[1332] - Quote
Let's see:
Quote:There are not other systems equivalent to Jita; you are wrong.
Partly wrong on both sides. Jita is the only hub for big trade volumes and affordable of important moon minerals. No other hub can compete there. And such a change would very likely not change that fact, because it is difficult to distribute them. Jita also functions as a centralized market that everyone uses for regular trade, while the other trade hubs are mostly enjoy purchases for immediate needs. None of the other trade hubs is equivalent to Jita, that is just proving the "people are dumb" point: Trade happens in other hubs, but the volume is a whole lot smaller. Is this going to change with low sec between high sec systems? It certainly can, because people cannot simply go to Jita any more to buy mission fits for their missions in Domain, Kador or Genesis, so they need to buy in Amarr, for instance. But it can (and that's what I think is more likely, because "people are dumb") go the other way, due to the worse availability of moon minerals in other empires than Caldari, which hampers production of T2 items.
Quote:This would, for obvious reason, improve the value of trade. I would love for you to explain to me how I am wrong.
It would certainly make the transportation across space a more required service, but if you are cut off from your much needed supplies of components and materials, trade falls apart. You cannot trade what you don't have and what you cannot bring to your preferred trade location.
Quote:Increasing the number of entrances to low sec would, obviously, help alleviate problems with gate camps on hi sec entrances. Explain to me how I am wrong.
How many entrances to low sec do you have in mind? 6? 7? 8 per empire? Then you would have a point, but as you can see on the current map, there are very few low sec entrances across regions. And introducing new regions/region-like space is the proposal of the OP, isn't it? That, in turn means, there cannot be a lot of low sec region gates, because that would invalidate the point of low sec between belligerent empires, wouldn't it? So, even if there are regions like The Bleak Lands between the empires with a lot of system-system low sec entrances, there are still only a limited number of region cross points. And before you start pointing out that TBL has a lot of region gates: they all lead to different regions, you can take off the region gates to Devoid because they are still Amarr - that reduces the number of important region gates to 3. What also is limited is the number of constellation gates that lead to these region gate systems, which are even easier to camp.
Quote:A greater number of low sec systems decreases the distribution of players in low sec, thus lowering risk as a whole. Explain to me how I am wrong.
That is a wrong assumption.Campers of important and popular routes don't disperse around just because there are more low sec systems around. Hier is a prime example for that: It is the choke point to deeper Aridia and when TEST was living there and used this route to get to Fountain it was this system that was constantly camped and no other system, because this system promises the best chances to catch a lot of people and get kills. That is what people want, nothing else. More low sec just means that more people potentially can live there and camp more gates more effectively.
Quote:I know you can't; humor me.
|
Your Dad Naked
State War Academy Caldari State
151
|
Posted - 2014.03.09 20:46:00 -
[1333] - Quote
I'm sorry, but why do traders have to trade across alliance lines? Why is that a requirement? Signing up to play EVE does not mean you should be able to safely access all of high-sec.
Risk/reward needs to be implemented here. If you trade within your own region, less risk and less reward. If you trade outside your region, more risk and more reward.
To say, "But it would be so hard to pass through lowsec!" as a reason to not implement this is absurd. It's supposed to be hard. That's the point.
By making it hard you allow local resources to sell at it's cheapest in the local region, where as bringing these resources to any other region will almost always sell better. Traders still have a choice to trade within their own markets. Those willing to take the risk get rewarded or burned. That's balanced and in line with every other mechanic in the game for the most part.
EDIT: And there's still Wormholes to cross through, so not like you're even forced into low-sec. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
266
|
Posted - 2014.03.09 21:11:00 -
[1334] - Quote
You cannot access all high sec safely even today. Study the map better.
There is already enough risk vs. no reward in this sector. Yay, we need even more of that.
You forget over your local resources that you need resources from all over the universe to produce things. That is CCP's way to balance things in industry already, Making it even harder to bring them to other regions is unnecessary. Besides, local resources already sell cheap; what matters are resources that are not local and that cannot be made locally. |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
871
|
Posted - 2014.03.09 22:46:00 -
[1335] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:You cannot access all high sec safely even today. Study the map better.
There is already enough risk vs. no reward in this sector. Yay, we need even more of that.
You forget over your local resources that you need resources from all over the universe to produce things. That is CCP's way to balance things in industry already, Making it even harder to bring them to other regions is unnecessary. Besides, local resources already sell cheap; what matters are resources that are not local and that cannot be made locally.
There is way to much reward.
|
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
445
|
Posted - 2014.03.09 23:05:00 -
[1336] - Quote
It's not the reward that keep people in HIghsec, it's the constant hassle of low sec.
Turns out people don't like playing the victim, and that nature of EVE PvP turns those interested in PvE activities into victims.
The costs associated with being able to effectively and productively operate in low sec are too annoying and completely unfun for the kind of people that pirates like to victimize. It's not even about the ISK cost... it's about the sit around with a fleet of escorts doing whatever, waiting to be attacked. It's dumb.
EVE PvP forces people not interested in doing it to stop playing the game until those that are interested in it decide to stop holding their gameplay hostage. EVE is a game. Games are meant to be fun. For the sort of people that pirates like to hunt, being a victim isn't fun. So we don't do it, and won't do it regardless of the rewards for doing so. The vast majority would rather quit and find another game to play than be forced to play helpless victim or ship spin until the pirates go away. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
266
|
Posted - 2014.03.10 07:19:00 -
[1337] - Quote
Onictus wrote:There is way to much reward.
No, there certainly is not. Many posts in this topic demonstrate that very clearly. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
107
|
Posted - 2014.03.10 07:45:00 -
[1338] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:It's not the reward that keep people in HIghsec, it's the constant hassle of low sec.
Turns out people don't like playing the victim, and that nature of EVE PvP turns those interested in PvE activities into victims.
The costs associated with being able to effectively and productively operate in low sec are too annoying and completely unfun for the kind of people that pirates like to victimize. It's not even about the ISK cost... it's about the sit around with a fleet of escorts doing whatever, waiting to be attacked. It's dumb.
EVE PvP forces people not interested in doing it to stop playing the game until those that are interested in it decide to stop holding their gameplay hostage. EVE is a game. Games are meant to be fun. For the sort of people that pirates like to hunt, being a victim isn't fun. So we don't do it, and won't do it regardless of the rewards for doing so. The vast majority would rather quit and find another game to play than be forced to play helpless victim or ship spin until the pirates go away.
To be honest, there's really not much to do in low sec outside of the FW systems. Everything else is just meh. L5 missions don't matter to most people because of the requirements to do it. The mining is lame and extra risky. Basically nothing for a solo pilot to do except maybe some PI?
So currently going through low sec is a hassle because there's nothing there. Going to low and surviving and coming back is pretty lame. Most of the time there's nobody around anyways. And if there is usually its just a gate camp or someone docked up.
This is the reason low sec is a hassle. It's out of the way and there's nothing to do there. But if you put the empires around it, you'll find a good dynamic for low sec. A place where you have to brave for some goal. And getting across it is a success and there's a bit of exhilaration especially for a new player just going through it. No more deep plunge of no return for going into lowsec, you'll now have a light at the end of the tunnel.
There is one question i'd like to ask all the Doomsayers in this thread. A lot of you are saying that a change like this will make other people unsub, however which of you personally will be one of these unsubbers?
The only victims in eve are the people who don't learn from their mistakes. They are victims of their own hubris. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
107
|
Posted - 2014.03.10 07:47:00 -
[1339] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Onictus wrote:There is way to much reward.
No, there certainly is not. Many posts in this topic demonstrate that very clearly.
There is way too much reward in high sec he's saying. At least the ratio is way too high on reward/risk. Maybe you haven't heard of incursions? |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
3018
|
Posted - 2014.03.10 08:03:00 -
[1340] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:It's not the reward that keep people in HIghsec, it's the constant hassle of low sec.
Turns out people don't like playing the victim, and that nature of EVE PvP turns those interested in PvE activities into victims.
The costs associated with being able to effectively and productively operate in low sec are too annoying and completely unfun for the kind of people that pirates like to victimize. It's not even about the ISK cost... it's about the sit around with a fleet of escorts doing whatever, waiting to be attacked. It's dumb.
EVE PvP forces people not interested in doing it to stop playing the game until those that are interested in it decide to stop holding their gameplay hostage. EVE is a game. Games are meant to be fun. For the sort of people that pirates like to hunt, being a victim isn't fun. So we don't do it, and won't do it regardless of the rewards for doing so. The vast majority would rather quit and find another game to play than be forced to play helpless victim or ship spin until the pirates go away.
People successfully PVE in lowsec, nullsec, and wormhole space every day. It's not a hassle if you put a little *gasp* effort into learning how to play.
It's not about the existence of mechanics that allow you poor little lambs to get shot at, btw, it's the fact that you are simply not up to the task of actually bothering to defend yourselves, or fitting and flying your ships correctly.
And that's because highsec exists, so you never have to learn to do it right, ever, because the all powerful space police will defend you instead. Same reason why people cry about getting ganked there, because they think that they shouldn't have to get shot at if they don't want to. Well, you're wrong.
Oh, and EVE is a PvP game first, last, and always. If you don't like that, feel free to go play Star Trek, because that game doesn't let the special snowflakes get shot at. If you're going to pretend like you're playing a single player game anyway, might as well do it in a game that facilitates that kind of malapropism. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á
Psychotic Monk for CSM9.
|
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
267
|
Posted - 2014.03.10 08:33:00 -
[1341] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Oh, and EVE is a PvP game first, last, and always. If you don't like that, feel free to go play Star Trek, because that game doesn't let the special snowflakes get shot at. If you're going to pretend like you're playing a single player game anyway, might as well do it in a game that facilitates that kind of malapropism.
It is not. Stop saying that, it's completely untrue. PVP is a part of it, but not the biggest. That is only what people like you want to think. EVE is a simulation with many different aspects, not a shooter like you want to believe. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
266
|
Posted - 2014.03.10 10:04:00 -
[1342] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Oh, and EVE is a PvP game first, last, and always. If you don't like that, feel free to go play Star Trek, because that game doesn't let the special snowflakes get shot at. If you're going to pretend like you're playing a single player game anyway, might as well do it in a game that facilitates that kind of malapropism.
And trading, manufacture and PI are all parts of that PvP. PvP isn't purely about shooting people, how about out producing them? Getting your goods to the best market place before others do? Manipulating markets to gain the best profit or price for your feedstocks?
Those who believe that making money from trade and manufacture is effortless probably don't do it much. Sure you can make isk with minimum effort in some cases, but then you make minimum profit. It is only when you put effort in (beyond pressing F1 when your tackle has trapped some unfortunate) that you you gain real profit. Exactly the same as the real profit for gankers comes to those who actively track their targets, pick the right victim at the right time and spring their trap flawlessly.
Dismissing any of the facets that make Eve what it is is daft, they are all interlinked and all are required to keep the game rich.
As for those who believe that the separate hubs would grow from splitting hisec I believe that to be delusional. Jita is the goto hub right now, if you suddenly make it far more risky to travel to other areas then Jita would likely become the *only* hub anybody bothered to travel to. If you want trade spread around more then you need to encourage that trade by spreading the regions where moongoo, T2 items, mission goods etc are traded to and from. I firmly believe the only way to do this is to improve and increase the quality and number of PvE aspects and place them around the other hubs too. If necessary manipulate the frequency that such PvE missions occur around areas that you want to increase traffic. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
691
|
Posted - 2014.03.10 10:08:00 -
[1343] - Quote
I think it's important to focus on the purpose of the proposal. It has nothing to do with increasing PVP. It is only about creating disparity of supply and thus driving incentives to trade.
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Elvis Preslie
NRDS Securities Apocalypse Now.
61
|
Posted - 2014.03.10 11:19:00 -
[1344] - Quote
Phaade wrote:[quote=Nevyn Auscent][quote=Phaade]
This would, for obvious reason, improve the value of trade. I would love for you to explain to me how I am wrong.
you was proven wrong 2 posts before your post, in my own. If you want to increase value of trade, you make the highsec routes between hubs 2 jumps longer and the lowsec routes 2 jumps shorter - that would make a huge scale tip!
You cannot make it impossible to get from trade hub to trade hub through at least ONE high sec route - with solitude being an exception. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
266
|
Posted - 2014.03.10 12:03:00 -
[1345] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:I think it's important to focus on the purpose of the proposal. It has nothing to do with increasing PVP. It is only about creating disparity of supply and thus driving incentives to trade.
To drive trade you need to increase demand rather than manipulate the prices, to increase demand you must give people the incentive to use more of the goods. That's why I am so strongly favouring increasing PvE (which then drives PvP). More ships, mods and ammo will be used in PvE, more will be ambushed in PvP, more moongoo etc will be required, more goods will be shipped etc etc. Done correctly this would improve new player experience also and hopefully improve player retention.
So specifically in response to the original proposal I believe that the change would stifle trade and simply increase the load at Jita since if you have to travel through losec you would only want to do that as few times as possible, you would only buy and sell at the current most busy system. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
3026
|
Posted - 2014.03.10 12:16:00 -
[1346] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
And trading, manufacture and PI are all parts of that PvP. PvP isn't purely about shooting people, how about out producing them? Getting your goods to the best market place before others do? Manipulating markets to gain the best profit or price for your feedstocks?
I didn't say they weren't. Or the rest of this stuff you're going on about me supposedly ignoring.
What I said was, that people need to stop acting like they're entitled to be left alone, to pretend like other players don't exist. And if they do want those things, then they are playing the wrong game.
Quote:As for those who believe that the separate hubs would grow from splitting hisec I believe that to be delusional. Jita is the goto hub right now, if you suddenly make it far more risky to travel to other areas then Jita would likely become the *only* hub anybody bothered to travel to. If you want trade spread around more then you need to encourage that trade by spreading the regions where moongoo, T2 items, mission goods etc are traded to and from. I firmly believe the only way to do this is to improve and increase the quality and number of PvE aspects and place them around the other hubs too. If necessary manipulate the frequency that such PvE missions occur around areas that you want to increase traffic.
You have no idea why Jita became the primary hub, do you? Here, I'll even link you the wiki entry.
"Better PvE"? As if such a thing is anything but a waste of time, for us and the developers. They've REMOVED those things from Jita itself. There are no belts, no rats, no missions. Those cute little "aspects" do not exist in Jita, "PvE" has not one damn thing to do with the existence of that trade hub where it is.
It's history aside, right now what keeps the trade hub there is the bother to move so much stock and so much inventory around, and the desire to squeeze the last penny by that system's population.
It's there because it's there. Force of momentum. As the wiki puts it, Bandwagon Effect. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á
Psychotic Monk for CSM9.
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
266
|
Posted - 2014.03.10 12:34:00 -
[1347] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
blah blah
I didn't say they weren't. Or the rest of this stuff you're going on about me supposedly ignoring. What I said was, that people need to stop acting like they're entitled to be left alone, to pretend like other players don't exist. And if they do want those things, then they are playing the wrong game. Quote:more of my blather. You have no idea why Jita became the primary hub, do you? Here, I'll even link you the wiki entry. "Better PvE"? As if such a thing is anything but a waste of time, for us and the developers. They've REMOVED those things from Jita itself. There are no belts, no rats, no missions. Those cute little "aspects" do not exist in Jita, "PvE" has not one damn thing to do with the existence of that trade hub where it is. It's history aside, right now what keeps the trade hub there is the bother to move so much stock and so much inventory around, and the desire to squeeze the last penny by that system's population. It's there because it's there. Force of momentum. As the wiki puts it, Bandwagon Effect.
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
268
|
Posted - 2014.03.10 12:49:00 -
[1348] - Quote
Quote:What I said was, that people need to stop acting like they're entitled to be left alone, to pretend like other players don't exist. And if they do want those things, then they are playing the wrong game.
Can you then please stop acting like you are entitled to force players into player interaction 100% of the time people play this game, to pretend that there always must be player interaction to play this game correctly. And if people do want these things, they are playing the wrong game.
Quote:It's history aside, right now what keeps the trade hub there is the bother to move so much stock and so much inventory around, and the desire to squeeze the last penny by that system's population.
It's there because it's there. Force of momentum. As the wiki puts it, Bandwagon Effect.
Oh, and this "bother" is naturally going to changed and be easier to manage if there is more low sec and more insecure space between the hubs. Amarr and Dodi, for instance, usually have the better prices, yet not more traders flock to neither Amarr nor Dodi and exploit the better margins. Why? Because no one wants to move. Will this change if there is even more hassle and bother?
Quote:"Better PvE"? As if such a thing is anything but a waste of time, for us and the developers. They've REMOVED those things from Jita itself. There are no belts, no rats, no missions. Those cute little "aspects" do not exist in Jita, "PvE" has not one damn thing to do with the existence of that trade hub where it is.
Cherry picking and then even doing it wrongly.
Your quoted text states clearly "around the [other] hubs", including Jita into the other part. Osmon is "around" and very close to Jita, and so are other important mission hubs for Caldari NPC corps. PVE might not be a reason why Jita is nowadays what it is, but it certainly helps to create and foster new hubs today. If you don't believe me then have a look at the Hek - Lanngisi and Apanake - Sanctum constellation/Dodixie trade relationships.
Quote:"Better PvE"? As if such a thing is anything but a waste of time, for us and the developers.
And here you go again, wholly ignoring other gameplay styles and other players who don't fit into your hidebound view of the world. You seem to feel very much entitled to represent the majority of the game and the players with your views, when this is clearly not the case. Your sense of entitlement makes you blind for every player and way to play this game that you don't like or don't want to like out of principle. You should stop that, or you should stop requesting that other players should not feel entitled to play the sandbox the way they want and how they get the most fun out of it. |
Katas Strophe
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
17
|
Posted - 2014.03.10 13:45:00 -
[1349] - Quote
-1 Bad idea
The civilized world (Highsec) should be extended instead of regress. |
Sunai Karvinoinas
13
|
Posted - 2014.03.10 14:43:00 -
[1350] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:Sunai Karvinoinas wrote:I would not change my gameplay and leaving highsec, if lowsec borders would be set up. I had a smaller amount of room to play. If it's getting boring more, I'd leave the game. I'm sure a lot of guys will do that earlier than running lowsec. In this case I do not think about economy anymore. Because it will affect CCPs RL economy so far. Do I understand you correctly? Are you saying that the only reason you play eve is because hisec is big and largely uninterrupted? May I ask how many systems you habitually visit in hisec? I ask this because it seems to me that on the whole people generally visit 4 trade hubs and one or two mission/mining hubs in hisec and that's about it. One of the reasons I play EvE is the possibility to travel a huge amount of highsec systems without passing lowsec and keeping life and equipment easily. I'm a lazy guy not willing to scan and watch around before I engange my engines always. Whatever I do, I do it all around the highsec. And it's no tradehub hopping at all. Splitting highsec would affect my way to play EvE a lot. I'm not settled down anywhere.
Of course I could do that all within a smaller area too. If hisec would be split into empire islands, I'd try to do my job within the smaller part left. Should this become more boring I'd rather quit playing EvE than passing lowsec. I'm not alone with this opinion. That is all, what I said.
In 2006 I tried EvE the first time and left after a few days, because it was about a PvP only game. In 2012 it has been improved into a much more interesting game for gamers who are not interested in PvP only. You should not try to turn back the clock. Provide a compromise to highsec players instead of depreciating their playstyle only. Splitting highsec contains no compromise but singlesided advantages only.
|
|
Mardock Deum
I See Red People
1
|
Posted - 2014.03.10 17:05:00 -
[1351] - Quote
I agree with this would make being a pirate actually interesting and hauling more of a challenge |
Mardock Deum
I See Red People
1
|
Posted - 2014.03.10 17:12:00 -
[1352] - Quote
Sunai Karvinoinas wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:Sunai Karvinoinas wrote:I would not change my gameplay and leaving highsec, if lowsec borders would be set up. I had a smaller amount of room to play. If it's getting boring more, I'd leave the game. I'm sure a lot of guys will do that earlier than running lowsec. In this case I do not think about economy anymore. Because it will affect CCPs RL economy so far. Do I understand you correctly? Are you saying that the only reason you play eve is because hisec is big and largely uninterrupted? May I ask how many systems you habitually visit in hisec? I ask this because it seems to me that on the whole people generally visit 4 trade hubs and one or two mission/mining hubs in hisec and that's about it. One of the reasons I play EvE is the possibility to travel a huge amount of highsec systems without passing lowsec and keeping life and equipment easily. I'm a lazy guy not willing to scan and watch around before I engange my engines always. Whatever I do, I do it all around the highsec. And it's no tradehub hopping at all. Splitting highsec would affect my way to play EvE a lot. I'm not settled down anywhere. Of course I could do that all within a smaller area too. If hisec would be split into empire islands, I'd try to do my job within the smaller part left. Should this become more boring I'd rather quit playing EvE than passing lowsec. I'm not alone with this opinion. That is all, what I said. In 2006 I tried EvE the first time and left after a few days, because it was about a PvP only game. In 2012 it has been improved into a much more interesting game for gamers who are not interested in PvP only. You should not try to turn back the clock. Provide a compromise to highsec players instead of depreciating their playstyle only. Splitting highsec contains no compromise but singlesided advantages only.
So you would rather a whole profession be unvaiable than have a scout and your valuables would increase in value with a new and improved demand. What about have one highsec connection but having an import tax when you move goods through that system. Would fix both problems
|
Astera Zandraki
Stillwater Corporation
83
|
Posted - 2014.03.10 17:21:00 -
[1353] - Quote
+1
Sounds like an awesome idea, representing the Empires losing power to the capsuleers... also more targets! |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
272
|
Posted - 2014.03.10 17:29:00 -
[1354] - Quote
Mardock Deum wrote: So you would rather a whole profession be unvaiable than have a scout and your valuables would increase in value with a new and improved demand. What about have one highsec connection but having an import tax when you move goods through that system. Would fix both problems
Many players don't have more than one account or multiple computers running the game at once and play solo due to time constraints. Having one connection would simply concentrate gank attacks on one gate and a tax is effectively drifting into 'nerf hisec profit' areas. I think that hisec is fine the way it is and seems to be stable with a healthy economy. I still don't see the benefit of bringing this change in and as I have said previously I believe this would simply push most trade into the current largest hub (Jita) which would exacerbate the load issues there and then also strangle the other hubs as nobody would bother going through losec to get to an also-ran trade centre.
In terms of people runnning across the losec areas all that would happen is that smaller producers would fly in blockade runners to bridge the gap making multiple runs to load up a bigger hauler on the other side. Bulk goods would stop moving or be contract hauled. I can't see there being any real increase in targets for pirates and why should there be an increase in juicy easy freighter targets gifted to one group of players? If pirates want to blow them up they already can by ganking them. If the pirate players want to get the best targets they have to outplay the other gankers which seems to work fine right now.
|
Apol Regyri
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2014.03.10 19:28:00 -
[1355] - Quote
-1 No thanks |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
872
|
Posted - 2014.03.10 23:41:00 -
[1356] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Oh, and EVE is a PvP game first, last, and always. If you don't like that, feel free to go play Star Trek, because that game doesn't let the special snowflakes get shot at. If you're going to pretend like you're playing a single player game anyway, might as well do it in a game that facilitates that kind of malapropism.
It is not. Stop saying that, it's completely untrue. PVP is a part of it, but not the biggest. That is only what people like you want to think. EVE is a simulation with many different aspects, not a shooter like you want to believe.
Which is why I can gank you anytime you undock.
Its a PvP game. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
107
|
Posted - 2014.03.11 09:40:00 -
[1357] - Quote
Katas Strophe wrote:-1 Bad idea The civilized world (Highsec) should be extended instead of regress.
Why don't we just make all space "(Highsec)" and nobody can legally shoot anyone at any time ever.
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
269
|
Posted - 2014.03.11 10:50:00 -
[1358] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Katas Strophe wrote:-1 Bad idea The civilized world (Highsec) should be extended instead of regress. Why don't we just make all space "(Highsec)" and nobody can legally shoot anyone at any time ever.
Because that is entirely not the point. If you don't understand how the game works, please leave or at least don't post in this kind of discussions.
"Apol Regyri " wrote:Which is why I can gank you anytime you undock.
Its a PvP game.
Give it a try, just try a bit harder than usual not to make fools of yourselves, okay? |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
273
|
Posted - 2014.03.11 11:49:00 -
[1359] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Katas Strophe wrote:-1 Bad idea The civilized world (Highsec) should be extended instead of regress. Why don't we just make all space "(Highsec)" and nobody can legally shoot anyone at any time ever.
I've seen many people suggest homogenizing space as all lo or null sec before. Setting aside the fact I think yours was a tongue in cheek response I think any changes to the current system would be bad and very destabilizing. That isn't from fear of change itself but rather because I believe a stable balance exists currently and should be built upon rather than amended to suit certain playstyles.
My belief is that more PvE content should be introduced in the upcoming releases. Dinsdale Pirhana's idea for null regions popping up is fantastic and could lead to a whole new area of lore expansion too. I also would love to see more missions and mission arcs that drive cross border interaction. These should be both combat and S&I missions. Give people the reason to croos the borders and the initial help to do so (my choice would be to cyno them in, gives people the option to at least get to the mission site safely but also teaches them about a useful game mechanic.
I really think that expanding the PvE elements in this kind of way would drive both PvE *and* PvP as people would become less averse to travelling losec and much more likely to do so in future. |
Voxinian
32
|
Posted - 2014.03.11 13:46:00 -
[1360] - Quote
Stop forcing PvP inciting mechanics/game structure on EVE while there are tons of PvE/high-sec players, players that pay for their sub and buy plexes. High sec keeps EVE alive and brings in the new players. What I mostly see in EVE is old pvp vet players dictating how EVE should be and everyone that has a different playstyle and different goals and reasons for playing EVE should conform to their wishes. EVE needs more high sec, more and better PvE. I mean when Star Citizen comes out then all EVE has to lure in new players is high sec and PvE, PvE that is dated and not in line to modern gaming standards. Some players here also don't realize that there are a lot of EVE players that despise the lame gate camps and blobs (which is not a skill thing) and mostly play EVE for the space immersion and the PvE interaction. Those people might leave and go play SC. The loud and demanding vets that CCP listens to will be CCP's own downfall, it keeps them in 1999 instead of 2014. |
|
Harrison Kion
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
11
|
Posted - 2014.03.11 13:58:00 -
[1361] - Quote
I live in low sec and I have never lost a industrial when I was hauling. I feel safer in low than high. |
Sintiar Loffwagea
The Scope Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2014.03.11 14:31:00 -
[1362] - Quote
it's very Brilliant idea i really like it and it's very reasonable. |
MoonglumX
Viaticus Consortium
1
|
Posted - 2014.03.11 14:41:00 -
[1363] - Quote
No one is forcing you to travel in the low sec boarder systems. You can live in hi sec just as you previously had before. Am I missing something? |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
273
|
Posted - 2014.03.11 14:53:00 -
[1364] - Quote
MoonglumX wrote:No one is forcing you to travel in the low sec boarder systems. You can live in hi sec just as you previously had before. Am I missing something?
It would force traders and manufacturers into losec as it would destroy profit margins without doing so. The larger groups could easily control the faster routes and therfore undercut the smaller producers thus destabilizing the market. So it would force people into losec to be easy targets for those who live there. Would you not prefer changes that got people to enter losec by choice in ships fitted for fighting? Surely that would be more fun than shooting unarmed haulers? |
Sunai Karvinoinas
16
|
Posted - 2014.03.11 17:00:00 -
[1365] - Quote
Mardock Deum wrote:So you would rather a whole profession be unvaiable than have a scout and your valuables would increase in value with a new and improved demand. No. I'm in doubt about piracy becomes *unavailable* while not changing the current status.
Yes, I reiterate again. But it seems nobody takes notice of it. This thread has been created in order to provide advantages to a part of community while providing disadvantages to another part only. There are no discussed compromises yet. So I only can say: No. Bad idea. CCP would be afraid of loosing subscribers this way.
Mardock Deum wrote:What about have one highsec connection but having an import tax when you move goods through that system. Would fix both problems This sounds like one compromise what's able to be discussed.
Another compromise could be to make lowsec transit routes between highsec enclaves in 0.4/0.3 noticable more secure in any way.
|
Lokar Griman
Revenant Tactical
10
|
Posted - 2014.03.11 18:49:00 -
[1366] - Quote
-1 bad idea that makes harder for ppl who live in whs and depend on paticular high sec exits. plus it messes up the main market hubs |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
872
|
Posted - 2014.03.11 23:35:00 -
[1367] - Quote
Lokar Griman wrote:plus it messes up the main market hubs
Yeah, that is the idea, specifically. |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2232
|
Posted - 2014.03.12 02:28:00 -
[1368] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:It would force traders and manufacturers into losec as it would destroy profit margins without doing so.
It would actually make cross-hub trading a meaningful profession with good profits.
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: The larger groups could easily control the faster routes and therfore undercut the smaller producers thus destabilizing the market. So it would force people into losec to be easy targets for those who live there.
This already happens, so there is no change. As far as being easy targets, a while back there was a thread crying for a nerf to the Epithal because the ship is nearly uncatchable when fit properly. Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
274
|
Posted - 2014.03.12 03:45:00 -
[1369] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:It would force traders and manufacturers into losec as it would destroy profit margins without doing so.
It would actually make cross-hub trading a meaningful profession with good profits.
It is now but this change would mean far fewer people bothering to go cross hub due to the difficulties imposed by the forced separation of the hisec areas. Nobody would make multiple runs between areas of losec when they could just make one run to jitas to sell manufactured stuff and buy feedstocks. This change would polarize the trade areas for the worse.
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: The larger groups could easily control the faster routes and therfore undercut the smaller producers thus destabilizing the market. So it would force people into losec to be easy targets for those who live there.
This already happens, so there is no change. As far as being easy targets, a while back there was a thread crying for a nerf to the Epithal because the ship is nearly uncatchable when fit properly.[/quote]
Ista-lock gate camps and the like will take down an epithal pretty easily., but if you have that proper fit to hand I'd like to see it |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
873
|
Posted - 2014.03.12 04:37:00 -
[1370] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
It is now but this change would mean far fewer people bothering to go cross hub due to the difficulties imposed by the forced separation of the hisec areas. Nobody would make multiple runs between areas of losec when they could just make one run to jitas to sell manufactured stuff and buy feedstocks. This change would polarize the trade areas for the worse.
Yup, again that is the idea
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: The larger groups could easily control the faster routes and therfore undercut the smaller producers thus destabilizing the market.
Even better. |
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
270
|
Posted - 2014.03.12 08:01:00 -
[1371] - Quote
"Onictus " wrote:Yup, again that is the idea
I was under the impression that less polarization and less concentration to Jita and more trade in other empires to create similar first class trade hubs there is one of the goals of this change. I am not sure if more polarization can achieve that, but I might be wrong. |
Liafcipe9000
Critically Preposterous
18229
|
Posted - 2014.03.12 08:56:00 -
[1372] - Quote
basically taking the "suicide" out of "suicide ganking"
...
Frostys Virpio > CCP: Continously Crying Playerbase
I like to gank it, gank it!
|
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
107
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 19:31:00 -
[1373] - Quote
Liafcipe9000 wrote:basically taking the "suicide" out of "suicide ganking" ...
I must have missed the part where we want to remove concord from high sec. I believe even after this change "ganking" someone in high sec would still be considered "suicide ganking" as concord will still blow up your ship. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
107
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 21:10:00 -
[1374] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:"Onictus " wrote:Yup, again that is the idea I was under the impression that less polarization and less concentration to Jita and more trade in other empires to create similar first class trade hubs there is one of the goals of this change. I am not sure if more polarization can achieve that, but I might be wrong.
There are already similar first class trade hubs. Jita is just the top because of it's location (a crossroad just like any other major trade hub in any game and real life). The current state of High Sec Empire is equivalent to that of a continuous land mass. And Jita and the other trade hubs can be correlated to urban centers (cities) in real life. So we are going to see the "Push Pull Phenomenon" of urbanization in the game with trade and manufacturing etc of people moving from remote systems towards the trade hubs.
Now here's the catch. Because of the continuous landmass (with insignificant exceptions) of High Sec Empire, all of the Trade hubs will have a pull on all of space. Now because Jita is the biggest trade hub, we can consider it the most "Urbanized" and in that relation it will have the largest pull effect overall. So over time people will continue to migrate to Jita from less urbanized areas. And since everything is less urbanized than Jita, it has a pull even on the inhabitants other trade hubs to an extent.
By separating the Empires with a barrier such as low sec (Real life examples would be: mountains,deserts and bodies of water) there will then be less of a draw from Jita on the other Empires. Each Empire will have it's own trade hub and they'll probably remain the same as it's hard to break people from habits. And the new players that join will be more likely to migrate to their local trade hub than another one elsewhere initially at least.
So I'm assuming when you sarcastically talk about "more polarization" you're getting that idea on the assumption that people will concentrate themselves in the Caldari Empire. Because that would be the only way to increase the level of polarization we see now. But if that did happen there would be a lot of opportunity outside of Caldari space in high sec to make a better income because of the things you cannot obtain in caldari space alone. This would create a draw of people and a draw of income out of caldari space (since non-caldari goods will be sold at a better premium in this "polarized" market). And that income/person draw would create a greater need and profit for local trade.
Thus that prediction also comes with it's own self-depolarizing system.
Separating the empires would definitely cause depolarization on the large scale. Each Empire itself will still be polarized around their trade hub. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
107
|
Posted - 2014.03.27 07:40:00 -
[1375] - Quote
this cannot die! |
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
295
|
Posted - 2014.03.27 07:48:00 -
[1376] - Quote
Lokar Griman wrote:-1 bad idea that makes harder for ppl who live in whs and depend on paticular high sec exits.
As a WH Pilot myself i cant agree with this Statement, as long static highsec WH still leads you in Highsec the only difference would be that you have to guard your moves outside of WH when moving Fuel and Loot, but that apply to anyone so it would simply buff T2 Indus which would be a good thing. |
per
Terpene Conglomerate
8
|
Posted - 2014.05.03 09:57:00 -
[1377] - Quote
love this idea, yes pls |
oohthey ioh
Republic University Minmatar Republic
12
|
Posted - 2014.05.03 10:33:00 -
[1378] - Quote
making ganking easyer :P |
Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
19
|
Posted - 2014.05.03 12:21:00 -
[1379] - Quote
Encouraging localised manufacturing of everything is a noble, noble goal. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |
Gawain Edmond
Angry Mustellid
80
|
Posted - 2014.05.03 12:37:00 -
[1380] - Quote
for all the people saying it affects profits or messes up the hubs you're all wrong. It makes each hub more important and would reduce dependence on jita, how many posts have we all seen moaning about lag in jita? If anything it would incease profits for the people who manufacture locally and only reduce it for people who ship things all over eve for selling |
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
475
|
Posted - 2014.05.03 12:52:00 -
[1381] - Quote
That's all nice and dandy, but how do I get moon mineral (and products from them) for a reasonable price in Amarr or other Hubs, let alone border regions? How do I get combat booster stuff to Amarr for a reasonable price? How reasonably priced rare minerals? I do produce in Domain and I do produce only for Amarr market, but I need Jita and the cheap prices there to be competitive. If I'd use Amarr's premium prices for the materials and components, I could not produce at all. And dividing the empires with Low sec and thus making it near impossible to get the required rare stuff for an affordable price into other regions, would not help to foster production there, it would in my opinion rather hamper it a lot.
Some people would certainly bring their moon mineral products to other hubs more frequently, but they would also ask for a higher price, which reduces on the one hand the producers profits and subsequently on the other hand the seller's turnover and he would leave the market again. |
Gawain Edmond
Angry Mustellid
80
|
Posted - 2014.05.03 12:59:00 -
[1382] - Quote
moon minerals are only avalible in low and null so they wouldn't be affected as they're already able to be moved through low sec drugs too as far as i remember. Minerals that are only avalible in one empire will be cheaper in that empire and exported to the other hubs for selling, there are also mining sites that spawn the none local minerals in all the empire regions. Remember that everyone has to deal with the market and other people if you're not able to get competative prices that's your own fault not the games. Higher prices does not reduce profits if everyone is paying the same higher prices it increases the cost of the finished product. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
475
|
Posted - 2014.05.03 13:11:00 -
[1383] - Quote
They would be affected because they need to be moved into various regions, which would be a harder, but people would either have to do it to keep their turnovers or producers would need to export from the still unbroken hub into other regions and lose money.
I of course keep in mind that prices simply should rise if production gets more expensive, but that is not consistently the case. Not everyone pays the same higher prices, there are punks from other regions who produce for cheaper and just undercut you or throw the market into an irregular rollercoaster, simply because minerals and moon stuff is more expensive in your region - and this could be influenced quite easily into locking out an entire region from domestic trade and production. And don't say, this can never happen - it is a 100% certainty that it WILL happen, because this is EVE. Not really good outlook in my opinion. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
136
|
Posted - 2014.05.04 10:13:00 -
[1384] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:but I need Jita and the cheap prices there to be competitive
This needed to be pointed out specifically.
Currently in Amarr you need the cheap prices from Jita to be competitive. Why?
Because due to the lack of boundaries Amarr and Jita are in direct competition for all resources.
If there was a separation you would no longer be competing with Jita prices, you'd be competing with local prices. Thus you would actually be very minimally affected by a change like this. You would just pass on the change in prices to your consumers. And they will pay the price difference because they won't have direct access to Jita. And anyone that moves goods from Jita to Amarr will also have to increase their prices and pass them on to the consumer.
Does this make sense?
Now having said that, there's another point to make.
The trade hubs will not be competing with each other, until the price disparity is great enough that it's worth the risk/cost to move goods from one hub to another. Thus the Trade hubs will have a normalizing force as well.
Not bad huh? |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
475
|
Posted - 2014.05.04 10:21:00 -
[1385] - Quote
I don't see that happening, exactly for the reasons I pointed out accompanying this quote. |
Gawain Edmond
Angry Mustellid
80
|
Posted - 2014.05.04 10:33:00 -
[1386] - Quote
rivr you're wrong.
I feel this is enough to count as content as he has been told the right answer and refuses to listen, it's like he's left handed 50 years ago no matter how you tie him down he just won't stop using his demon left hand (being wrong) in favour of his good honest right hand (being right) |
I Have 18Accounts
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2014.05.04 12:40:00 -
[1387] - Quote
Why would traversing low-sec be difficult? This is the part I don't understand. You are crossing a borderzone, which I'm assuming means you can setup a cyno in a low-sec system neighbouring a high-sec system on the other side. You can jump into a cyno at a safe with your JF, warp to the gate, and jump through.
By splitting the empires like this, those willing to actually play the game can still trade properly while those who wish to autopilot or take 0 risk will be confined to trading local commodities. It's more balanced IMO. If there is a demand for certain products in outside regions, you will see pilots who don't mind the risk take advantage of such opportunities. Markets will become more dynamic, and trading/hauling will become less of a chore and more of an experience. |
Talon Kane
Commando Muad'Dib
20
|
Posted - 2014.05.05 20:40:00 -
[1388] - Quote
+1, I love this idea ! -― I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer -+.
Have a look at my character appraisal service! ----+ [TIPS] Titan Industry Pricecheck Service |
Goatman NotMyFault
NorCorp Shipyards The Predictables
114
|
Posted - 2014.05.05 23:06:00 -
[1389] - Quote
why not even make the different region be on Brinck of war and Close Down all border gates from time to time, that will choke the flow even more. |
Whittorical Quandary
The Asteroid is Depleted Cucarachas Enojadas
8
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 00:20:00 -
[1390] - Quote
I like the idea,
IMO it is a massive change to the economy either way, and there would be a huge disruption of all markets initially that could make the game unplayable for some. It would stabilize eventually, but the repercussions could damage some ppl's ability to play. IE Think "Burn Jita" on a multi region scale.
Not that this would all be bad, as it would make the game even more fun if it could be deployed successfully.
I don't think the current sec between hubs should be changed but I think this would be an awesome feature to an expansion. As you open up brand new economic possibilities but with that you will have many, many destabilizing glitches to be taken advantage of.
Hmm... Sounds familiar... A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.
-Douglas Adams |
|
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
138
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 05:39:00 -
[1391] - Quote
Goatman NotMyFault wrote:why not even make the different region be on Brinck of war and Close Down all border gates from time to time, that will choke the flow even more.
hmmmm, shutting down gates?
A very simple yet very intriguing idea.
Not sure if i'm for or against it yet. I'll have to do some thinking to figure out the possible implications.
+1 for brain storming |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
138
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 05:42:00 -
[1392] - Quote
Whittorical Quandary wrote:I like the idea,
IMO it is a massive change to the economy either way, and there would be a huge disruption of all markets initially that could make the game unplayable for some. It would stabilize eventually, but the repercussions could damage some ppl's ability to play. IE Think "Burn Jita" on a multi region scale.
Not that this would all be bad, as it would make the game even more fun if it could be deployed successfully.
I don't think the current sec between hubs should be changed but I think this would be an awesome feature to an expansion. As you open up brand new economic possibilities but with that you will have many, many destabilizing glitches to be taken advantage of.
Hmm... Sounds familiar...
Hmmm, not sure how it would damage some ppl's ability to play. I don't see how you can relate it to "Burn Jita".
What are these destabilizing glitches you're talking about? Like glitches in the code?
Are these just things you made up or are there real concepts behind them? Please when you start spouting off propaganda at least try to back them up with the idea you have in some way. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
462
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 05:47:00 -
[1393] - Quote
I'm still totally against this idea. It basically still forces those who have no wish to travel through losec to do so if they want realistic profits. Trade and business os something requiring stability and in my view hisec should be optimized for this. Want more player mobility? Make the regions better st different things and people will travel between them whilsf those who don't wish to won't have to. All that will happen is that hisec will bdcome a group of impoverished ghettos. Bad for players and bad for the game |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
138
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 06:09:00 -
[1394] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:I'm still totally against this idea. It basically still forces those who have no wish to travel through losec to do so if they want realistic profits. Trade and business os something requiring stability and in my view hisec should be optimized for this. Want more player mobility? Make the regions better st different things and people will travel between them whilsf those who don't wish to won't have to. All that will happen is that hisec will bdcome a group of impoverished ghettos. Bad for players and bad for the game Again, it doesn't "force" anyone to do anything. Can you please quantify the pharse you used "realistic profits". In the current High Sec Pangea we have now can you really assume there are "realistic profits" to be made? For all we know there will be the same climate for local markets to make the same types of profits as there are now for all of High sec.
Trade and business stabilize themselves. They don't need to be optimized by anyone. Currently there are things that make different regions better at different things, such as faction LP, ice and ore composition. There's nothing stopping anyone from traveling between them or anything incentivising them not to travel. Having empires right now is basically just arbitrary. The empires mean absolutely **** outside of lore. We don't really care about player mobility, we just care about people having choices to make.
These points of yours are all just pure speculation and assumption. They are not backed up with anything resembling facts.
The idea that high sec will become a group of impoverished ghettos is literally Fox News. That comment is literally just doomsaying to scare people instead of coming up with a good arguement against the point.
Maybe i can say that if we don't get the separation of High Sec into it's empires split by Low Sec, then the game will become just one big high sec impoverished ghetto. Bad for the players and bad for the game.
But what i said can actually be seen today as true so i guess it's not the same.... |
zen zubon
Asteroid Bluez S I L E N T.
1
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 06:29:00 -
[1395] - Quote
MORE lowsec that is not in FW would be nice, more cruisers in low would be nice. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
478
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 06:35:00 -
[1396] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Text.
And since we play EVE, every doom-saying is more likely then not to happen.
Besides, with denying (and yes, for many people it is a denial) free travel between empires (Amarr and Caldari are even allied, so low sec would not be easily explained anyways, your ignorance for the lore gracefully ignored.) you take away a lot of choice and force people to take a permanent choice and then live with it. |
eliminator2
Moretsu pirates
3
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 08:08:00 -
[1397] - Quote
i do like this idea low-sec is fairly dead and allways has been, this would bring low-sec a new life and it would allso bring new jobs or help jobs in eve such as
anti-pirates: these would be more useful in eve as there would be a increase of pirates across one plain
Hauler protection: with the new skiff buff coming people payed to protect a group of miners etc wont be needed much anymore this would give them a new lease on life as protectors
like you mentioned indy pilots have blockade runners that are very easy to break through camps very easy, freighters would have to be guarded and made worth the haul meaning they would fill to top instead of 1 item or so in a freighter because it is that safe, each trade hub would be more specialized making buying things more "ohhh i need this dodixie/amarr/jita/rens" does it for cheaper ill go there instead" instead of the current "ohhhh i need this ill go jita".
would allso mean that players would be more scattered around eve instead of in the set systems making ganking harder and releasing stress on servers for the allready crowded systems |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
138
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 08:29:00 -
[1398] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:
And since we play EVE, every doom-saying is more likely then not to happen.
This makes absolutely no sense..... please cite an example where some doom-saying came to pass in EVE.
Rivr Luzade wrote: Besides, with denying (and yes, for many people it is a denial) free travel between empires (Amarr and Caldari are even allied, so low sec would not be easily explained anyways, your ignorance for the lore gracefully ignored.) you take away a lot of choice and force people to take a permanent choice and then live with it.
So are you saying that I ignored my own ignorance? what?
If lore is coming into question, then i hope you've been keeping up with everything. There have a been a lot of things in the last couple of years to start putting strain on relations with each other. I linked all the pieces earlier in this thread, maybe i'll dig them out later if you decide you cannot live without them.
Either way, If you don't keep up with the Lore then you shouldn't try to use the Lore to make a point when it clearly contradicts the point you are trying to make. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
478
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 09:19:00 -
[1399] - Quote
Doom-saying: m0o
Cite me events that strained the relationship between Amarr and Caldari. I don't care for the others, to be honest, but give me a couple of examples for deteriorating relations between Amarr and Caldari.
No, I ignore your ignorance for the lore. |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2336
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 10:09:00 -
[1400] - Quote
The chances of another m0o happening would be slim, chocking down one system is a lot different than chocking down hundreds of systems across the entire universe.
Rivr Luzade wrote: Nothing would change. The Low sec, which is dead today, is also going to be dead after such a change; nothing would change for Aridia, Solitude, Devoid, Derelik, Molden Heath, Khanid or other not important Low sec areas. Only a very select few systems between the empires would be busy with gankers looking for easy kills.
Only the shortest routes would be camped, just like it is right now, but with more low-sec some players might be mroe inticed to venture into low sec because the chances of being cought are lower. -á --á |
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
478
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 10:39:00 -
[1401] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:The chances of another m0o happening would be slim, chocking down one system is a lot different than chocking down hundreds of systems across the entire universe.
Burn Jita, anyone? PL gate camps in Amamake? The former glory of Rancer? Tama? Oulley? Hier in Aridia when TEST was in Fountain? PF-? Torrinos? Even Niarja and Uedama... There are countless examples of what is already happening and what would see a massive increase with this change - for the worse of the game. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
462
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 10:40:00 -
[1402] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote: Again, it doesn't "force" anyone to do anything. Can you please quantify the pharse you used "realistic profits". In the current High Sec Pangea we have now can you really assume there are "realistic profits" to be made? For all we know there will be the same climate for local markets to make the same types of profits as there are now for all of High sec.
Trade and business stabilize themselves. They don't need to be optimized by anyone. Currently there are things that make different regions better at different things, such as faction LP, ice and ore composition. There's nothing stopping anyone from traveling between them or anything incentivising them not to travel. Having empires right now is basically just arbitrary. The empires mean absolutely **** outside of lore. We don't really care about player mobility, we just care about people having choices to make.
These points of yours are all just pure speculation and assumption. They are not backed up with anything resembling facts.
The idea that high sec will become a group of impoverished ghettos is literally Fox News. That comment is literally just doomsaying to scare people instead of coming up with a good arguement against the point.
Maybe i can say that if we don't get the separation of High Sec into it's empires split by Low Sec, then the game will become just one big high sec impoverished ghetto. Bad for the players and bad for the game.
But what i said can actually be seen today as true so i guess it's not the same....
Actually it would force players to traverse losec who act as traders. Time is money, jumps is time, adding in more jumps for a safe hisec route therefore costs more money/eats into profits. To maintain profits means jumping through losec and incurring losses at some point diminishing profits further.
If you have read my comments here and in many other threads I am always making suggestions that I believe could improve the game. As for doomsaying have you not seen how many hisec players have argued against this idea? That's just those in the forums and hisec players are notorious for not paying attention here.
I'll also point out that most of my work is done in losec so I have no intrinsic need for hisec as is, but I see breaking it up as harming others gameplay which is also bad for the game.
Oh, an example of doomsaying coming to pass? What effect do you think the increased refining, improved or and buffing/expansion of nullsec industrial capability is going to do to hi and losec S&I? I'm relatively new and can see ways to abuse the new system to kill competition so those far better than me at S&I will already have many options ready to do so.
I see the whole shift towards pushing players to null as a bad thing, having the different areas all thrive would be far better for gameplay, and far more accessible to new and still newish players. |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2336
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 11:04:00 -
[1403] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:The chances of another m0o happening would be slim, chocking down one system is a lot different than chocking down hundreds of systems across the entire universe. Burn Jita, anyone? PL gate camps in Amamake? The former glory of Rancer? Tama? Oulley? Hier in Aridia when TEST was in Fountain? PF-? Torrinos? Even Niarja and Uedama... There are countless examples of what is already happening and what would see a massive increase with this change - for the worse of the game. Plus, there ARE NO hundreds of systems to camp, that is a lie to make your dream seem more feasible. There are and would not be hundreds of ways to traverse Low sec to get from one hub to another. Because if that was the case, it would to a large extent defeat the purpose of the Low sec as a border between warring nations; and for the players it would not provide sufficiently easily accessible PVP choke points. Apparently you missed the part where new systems and regions should be added to minimize the amount of choke points. Esay to miss when you only want to look at one aspect of this.
Commander Ted wrote:So why not add more lowsec between the 4 empires.
Again most all of your examples are camping one system, not systems all over the universe at the same time.
Hundreds of systems would not defeate the purpose, there would allways be a shorter way through; which would cause some to take the extra risk for a shorter trip. -á --á |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
139
|
Posted - 2014.05.07 04:00:00 -
[1404] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Doom-saying: m0oCite me events that strained the relationship between Amarr and Caldari. I don't care for the others, to be honest, but give me a couple of examples for deteriorating relations between Amarr and Caldari. http://community.eveonline.com/news/news-channels/world-news/empress-jamyl-i-becoming-increasingly-erratic-reports-say/?_ga=1.222501212.635705671.1388274349
"Additionally, the empress has been notably silent on several matters, such as the political strife inside the Caldari State. While she had previously not hesitated to offer support to the Empire's allies, she has recently shown a cold shoulder even while the Caldari and Amarr militias struggled to maintain their positions."
Here's the post i made a while back with the rest of the links to straining relationships between the empires. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4237066#post4237066
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Actually it would force players to traverse losec who act as traders. Time is money, jumps is time, adding in more jumps for a safe hisec route therefore costs more money/eats into profits. To maintain profits means jumping through losec and incurring losses at some point diminishing profits further.
Oh, an example of doomsaying coming to pass? What effect do you think the increased refining, improved or and buffing/expansion of nullsec industrial capability is going to do to hi and losec S&I? I'm relatively new and can see ways to abuse the new system to kill competition so those far better than me at S&I will already have many options ready to do so.
I see the whole shift towards pushing players to null as a bad thing, having the different areas all thrive would be far better for gameplay, and far more accessible to new and still newish players.
First, you obviously don't know what the word "force" means. Nobody is going out there and piloting your ship directly into low sec for you, you have to decided to go into low sec. The word you're looking for is "Incentivize". It will strongly Incentivize traders to move through low sec. And you've got the wrong idea of where profits come from as well. You think profits are a game mechanic set in stone by the Devs? No, they're a function of a very dynamic economy based on supply and demand. The profits will build themselves into the system. Players won't move things from place to place just because it's a thing to do. They will only do it for the right amount of profit.
Second, you can't use the mining/industry changes as an example of "Doomsaying coming to pass" because.... THEY HAVEN'T COME TO PASS YET! Seriously do you buy your own BS? And then you counter your own credibility by saing you're relatively new. Really?
There has always been a push on players into null sec, it's just that the mechanics they've used have all had a limited period of effectiveness. Changing a mechanic like the one in this post would have a great impact on the ability for Low sec to thrive and would also impact some of the less than very profitable professions (if you can even call them that at this point) in high and low sec.
____________ Seriously, What is the great divide in the community about this Idea?
What I've come to understand is that some people believe it will help the market and other believe it will ruin the market. Is that really all there is to it? |
King Fu Hostile
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
86
|
Posted - 2014.05.07 04:19:00 -
[1405] - Quote
CCP please note that this is the #1 most wanted feature in EVE and would improve the game immensely.
|
Jur Tissant
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
33
|
Posted - 2014.05.07 04:41:00 -
[1406] - Quote
Ehhh. It's an interesting idea but I still feel like we should be able to choose to live in high-sec. Low-sec should be rewarding but optional. Besides, with Jita being the huge market it is, this would ultimately ravage the resources of Caldari space. Even if, as you propose, people still diversify and do their business in the other three empires, you're still giving a disadvantage to players who want to play in Caldari space because their competition will be much higher. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
139
|
Posted - 2014.05.07 05:51:00 -
[1407] - Quote
Jur Tissant wrote:Ehhh. It's an interesting idea but I still feel like we should be able to choose to live in high-sec. Low-sec should be rewarding but optional. Besides, with Jita being the huge market it is, this would ultimately ravage the resources of Caldari space. Even if, as you propose, people still diversify and do their business in the other three empires, you're still giving a disadvantage to players who want to play in Caldari space because their competition will be much higher. First, you will always have the choice to live in high-sec. What in the world makes you believe that this choice is being taken away?
Second, does it really give a disadvantage to players in Caldari space to do this? Wouldn't they initially have an advantage that would slowly fade and normalize throughout new eden as the markets spread out? |
Sgt Smeagol
Viziam Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2014.05.07 06:13:00 -
[1408] - Quote
this thread belongs in the The 'one-line bad idea' thread worst idea ever. and it should have been locked back in 2012.11.20 when the op made it. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
486
|
Posted - 2014.05.07 06:36:00 -
[1409] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:The chances of another m0o happening would be slim, chocking down one system is a lot different than chocking down hundreds of systems across the entire universe. Burn Jita, anyone? PL gate camps in Amamake? The former glory of Rancer? Tama? Oulley? Hier in Aridia when TEST was in Fountain? PF-? Torrinos? Even Niarja and Uedama... There are countless examples of what is already happening and what would see a massive increase with this change - for the worse of the game. Plus, there ARE NO hundreds of systems to camp, that is a lie to make your dream seem more feasible. There are and would not be hundreds of ways to traverse Low sec to get from one hub to another. Because if that was the case, it would to a large extent defeat the purpose of the Low sec as a border between warring nations; and for the players it would not provide sufficiently easily accessible PVP choke points. Apparently you missed the part where new systems and regions should be added to minimize the amount of choke points. Esay to miss when you only want to look at one aspect of this.
Then please train your reading comprehension to IV, at least. For the time being, I highlighted the part where I not missed that point.
--
Erutpar Ambient wrote:http://community.eveonline.com/news/news-channels/world-news/empress-jamyl-i-becoming-increasingly-erratic-reports-say/?_ga=1.222501212.635705671.1388274349 "Additionally, the empress has been notably silent on several matters, such as the political strife inside the Caldari State. While she had previously not hesitated to offer support to the Empire's allies, she has recently shown a cold shoulder even while the Caldari and Amarr militias struggled to maintain their positions." Here's the post i made a while back with the rest of the links to straining relationships between the empires. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4237066#post4237066
The Empress is silent on a lot of matters, also due to her particular nature. It may be a sign of less support for Caldari politics, but economically both empires are more entrenched and active than any other. The strain that you describe - compared to the hostile relationships between Gallente-Caldari and Amarr-Minmatar - is not yet nearly enough for destabilizing and removing security from the borders between the historical allies.
But as I know CCP and as it is just fiction anyways, they can easily spin something into your favor's direction anyways.
Interesting read in any case. |
Arronicus
Ravens' Nest Outlaw Horizon.
946
|
Posted - 2014.05.07 07:19:00 -
[1410] - Quote
Neither something the game needs, nor something that makes much sense. Not to mention the amount of highsec playerbase this would create hell for.
two thumbs way down. |
|
Dave Stark
5348
|
Posted - 2014.05.07 08:02:00 -
[1411] - Quote
King Fu Hostile wrote:CCP please note that this is the #1 most wanted feature in EVE and would improve the game immensely.
no, it wouldn't. |
Tar'z
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2014.05.07 08:39:00 -
[1412] - Quote
If you've ever setup trading outposts in highsec islands, you know how lucrative and somehow exciting this sort of thing can be. If everything were a highsec island, it would add a whole new dynamic to the trading game.
The highsec island markets are much more dynamic and of course more volatile if you don't play your cards right. Outside of the islands the markets however are rather homogenous; prices don't vary much between different places. This is honestly quite boring.
Seperating empires with low-sec also provides a nice boost to the risk/reward model in regards to trading. Imagine a high-sec group in Minmatar space with a whole slew of POS. They want the Caldari tower in their case as they do lots of research. In the current setup, they can acquire the Caldari Fuel Blocks from Jita quite easily or the local market for a bit more ISK. It therefore becomes the obvious choice to go with the Caldari tower; all research POS are Caldari as a result. In the new system however, Caldari Fuel Blocks are slim pickings in Minmatar space or are quite pricey. You have to head into Caldari space to get enough for your POS at a decent price. Now you have a choice: Go with a Caldari tower and risk jumping through low for fuel, or go with a Minmatar tower at the cost of a less efficient POS setup.
This is only one of many new scenarios that would exist if the OP's idea came to be.
+1 |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
462
|
Posted - 2014.05.07 10:56:00 -
[1413] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote: First, you obviously don't know what the word "force" means. Nobody is going out there and piloting your ship directly into low sec for you, you have to decided to go into low sec. The word you're looking for is "Incentivize". It will strongly Incentivize traders to move through low sec. And you've got the wrong idea of where profits come from as well.
This change would deny players current playstyle to them and would require them to either invest much more time in traversing space (which many don't have) or they would have (yes that is have as in 'be forced to') to travel losec. Those players averse to doing so simply never would. Such a change would be a nerf to hisec profits for no good reason. All this change would do is ';incentivize' those players who have no wish to use losec into losing more ships (i.e. losing profit which they simply won't choose to do) or the lesser evil of greater travel time.
Those who do travel losec (which I do often) will simply switch to BR's (and that isn't BS which I don't deal in) and you would simply never even see them in losec barring any mistakes.
I know exactly where my profits come from thanks, they pay for 3 alts already so I'm doing well enough I think. This change would simply be to present more targets for losec gatecampers since trade ships are unarmed. Maybe the change should be to add more incentive for *combat* ships to go to losec. Or does that not fit with the easy trader target model people seem to want? It wouldn't work anyway as those who send afk haulers would just send more to deal with the extra journey time, those who are active pilots will just use BR's instead to hop across the losec divide. Pointless waste of devs time, they should work on more pressing things instead. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
141
|
Posted - 2014.05.13 03:49:00 -
[1414] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: This change would simply be to present more targets for losec gatecampers since trade ships are unarmed. Maybe the change should be to add more incentive for *combat* ships to go to losec. Initially yes, this could/would present more targets for low sec gate campers. However this change would ALSO add more incentive for combat ships to go to low sec too, ironically either to gate camp, or to combat the gate camps. One thing that's pretty consistent in eve is, if there's someone that's ready to fight, there's someone looking to fight them back. This change would make it easier for the anti-gate campers to find the gate campers too. This is the key idea of this change, the market stuff is all secondary. Currently the game mechanics for pirates are poor. However the mechanics for anti-pirates are even worse.
To go along with this change there really needs to be a complete overhaul in the way security rating works. I think that if you shoot someone that has a negative security rating in low sec, you should not be penalized. They have a negative security rating for a reason. In fact, going along the same lines as some of the recent changes to how security rating changes, you could build the system to give you positive rating for attacking/killing negative security status pilots. You gain a miniscule amount of security rating every 20 min if you kill someone with a negative security rating. It'll add up over time but it won't be a quick way to increase your security rating.
With a system like this, you can look at a glance at people's color. If they're +sec rating they probably won't kill you for no reason. If they're -sec rating they're probably a pirate. Would be easier for pirates and anti-pirates who stumble upon each other engaged to come together to help each other out too.
Think about how dynamic and populated low sec would be with a system like this.
Quote: I have argued previously that hisec should be the home of trade and science, losec should be the home of moongoo and T2 production and such, null for raw material production and WH's for T3/gas. This would really make people be more mobile and increase trade in all areas for different reasons. I have also argued that missions and PvE should be used to 'incentivize' players to move into other regions. This would have a far greater effect at enticing those on the brink of the jump to other sec regions to do so whilst leaving those with absolutely no wish to do so with a valid and valuable role in the game.
This is a really very narrow slice of the population. This idea is not good because it narrows things down even further. What do you even mean by "raw material production" for null sec?
The real difference between High sec and Null currently is required activity. If you're in High Sec, you don't have to do anything if you don't want to, you can be lazy as much as you want. You have no obligations. Null sec on the other hand, either you have rent to pay so you have to spend a minimum amount of time doing stuff, or you have to protect your sov by participating in pvp activites which are generally mandatory. With high sec incursion income, that's really the only disparity between the 2 places. Low sec is either FW or effectively empty. And WH space is still T3 heaven.
The big question really is, what is low sec? Is it really just a buffer between high sec and null sec? |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
475
|
Posted - 2014.05.13 07:23:00 -
[1415] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:my blurb...
Initially yes, this could/would present more targets for low sec gate campers. However this change would ALSO add more incentive for combat ships to go to low sec too, ironically either to gate camp, or to combat the gate camps. One thing that's pretty consistent in eve is, if there's someone that's ready to fight, there's someone looking to fight them back. This change would make it easier for the anti-gate campers to find the gate campers too. This is the key idea of this change, the market stuff is all secondary. Currently the game mechanics for pirates are poor. However the mechanics for anti-pirates are even worse.
To go along with this change there really needs to be a complete overhaul in the way security rating works. I think that if you shoot someone that has a negative security rating in low sec, you should not be penalized. They have a negative security rating for a reason. In fact, going along the same lines as some of the recent changes to how security rating changes, you could build the system to give you positive rating for attacking/killing negative security status pilots. You gain a miniscule amount of security rating every 20 min if you kill someone with a negative security rating. It'll add up over time but it won't be a quick way to increase your security rating.
With a system like this, you can look at a glance at people's color. If they're +sec rating they probably won't kill you for no reason. If they're -sec rating they're probably a pirate. Would be easier for pirates and anti-pirates who stumble upon each other engaged to come together to help each other out too.
Think about how dynamic and populated low sec would be with a system like this.
I like the idea for being free to shoot those with -ve sec rating. Thinking more into this I simply don't think that this would increase losec traffic as people believe. If there is a hisec route open between hubs the people who already afk freight stuff will simply accept the longer flight as they don't care, those who fly manually would probably switch to red frog instead aas that is a more profitable use of their time since they don't want to fly losec. That's the key point I think, those who do not wish to fly losec absolutely will not do it and if you completely split the hisec areas with losec then those players would resent it and rightly so as it is an arbitrary destruction of their playstyle for no reason.
Those who do venture into losec would be manual pilots, and they would now fly BR's as standard so you would never even see them and so still no more targets in losec. Pilots need incentives to enter losec, I really like the CONCORD capsuleer proposal in another thread. Give capsuleers the option to provide 'private security' ops for concord in losec and I think you'll find many hunters giving it a go. Ideas like thia and improved PvE aspects would much better serve losec in my opinion.
This is a really very narrow slice of the population. This idea is not good because it narrows things down even further. What do you even mean by "raw material production" for null sec?
The real difference between High sec and Null currently is required activity. If you're in High Sec, you don't have to do anything if you don't want to, you can be lazy as much as you want. You have no obligations. Null sec on the other hand, either you have rent to pay so you have to spend a minimum amount of time doing stuff, or you have to protect your sov by participating in pvp activites which are generally mandatory. With high sec incursion income, that's really the only disparity between the 2 places. Low sec is either FW or effectively empty. And WH space is still T3 heaven.
The big question really is, what is low sec? Is it really just a buffer between high sec and null sec?[/quote]
By raw materials I mean that null has the best ore resources, the best PI output, and moongoo in the greatest quantities (not even available in hisec/WH's). I would model things along the lines of RL, Hisec being the stable industrial countries producing goods, losec being areas under contention and dangerous to enter. Good resources can be gained due to the breakdown in law and order, but the risk is there if you choose to go for those resources. Null would be the wild areas full of goodies to gather for those brave enough to do so. These areas would be anathema to stable industry though as nobody would place multi-billion research centres etc there as a business decision. Those who do would need a private army to defend the area and even then the instability would be a huge handicap. Wh's are just crazy places, navigable Bermuda triangles of space with valuable stuff to find if you know how.
The problem I see is the fact you point out, hisec is used by those with little available playtime (not necessarily lazy, just time constrained). Those players deserve a playstyle choice that can provide them a valuable income just as much as those with more spare time. As for risk/reward those players who choose AFK options *are*taking risk that their ships will go pop. The CODE monkeys pop miners all the time. The rewards are income for little effort, though low rewards at the best of times compared to that which an active player can earn. Is this somehow invalid risk? Not in my mind.
I agree completely that losec needs some incentives adding to draw players in, I just don't see that this idea would do that in any significant way. losec would be the perfect place to work as a staging and proving ground for players before they move to null, currently it seems to b skip |
Drak d'Amral
ZERO T0LERANCE RAZOR Alliance
6
|
Posted - 2014.05.13 08:48:00 -
[1416] - Quote
i like it |
Anthar Thebess
REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN
405
|
Posted - 2014.05.13 08:59:00 -
[1417] - Quote
Drak d'Amral wrote:i like it Like most of the people, still CCP will not do it. Summer 2014 - Carrier Split
|
erg cz
Sliperer
67
|
Posted - 2014.05.13 11:19:00 -
[1418] - Quote
1 . Make borders between Minmatar and Gallente or between Caldary and Amarr simple low sec, but any other borders must be FW war zones !!!
2. Make Jita FW zone between Caldary and Gallente!
That would have great impact on the game. And I like it. |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Mordus Angels
895
|
Posted - 2014.05.14 00:59:00 -
[1419] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
And what about financial risk? Those trading in hisec have to risk larger sums comparatively to make the same profits as the amounts risked by those in losec or null. Is that not risk too? PvP trading is just as brutal as firing anti-matter, just there's no graphics for it. Risk/Reward is always referred to in terms of shooting each other, but that is far from the only risk in Eve. All should be catered for and rewarded.
lol hardly
|
w3ak3stl1nk
Hedion University Amarr Empire
6
|
Posted - 2014.05.14 01:08:00 -
[1420] - Quote
Why hold back? make it null sec |
|
erg cz
Sliperer
68
|
Posted - 2014.05.14 07:50:00 -
[1421] - Quote
w3ak3stl1nk wrote:Why hold back? make it null sec
Only if those null sec will be new regions, added to the map. Not that Jita will sudenly become null sec... |
Doreen Kaundur
118
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 08:30:00 -
[1422] - Quote
bump
good idea
|
Tyrone Alyeh
Dark Matter Specialists
1
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 09:39:00 -
[1423] - Quote
Absolutely great idea.
My first month playing the game I lost a Corax to a low sec gate camp! I was so afraid of low sec after that, and a few days later my buddy and I went off into a low sec exploration and made about 10-20M per hour and it was SO MUCH FUN.
Now I see people who probably have never entered low sec for more than 10 minutes in 5 years of play. For shame, you risk-averse pussies!
I LOVE the idea of Eve being a place where players can actually be pirates! There is literally no reason not to do this idea other than "legacy," as I don't count "people's tears" as legitimate reasons.
So many people have complained of low sec gate camps -- I don't follow. If you're traveling low sec gate-to-gate, how are they supposed to attack you if not at a gate? Duh. Furthermore, what's with the people saying that pirates are afraid of "fair fights?" Are you serious?
Did IRL pirates attack enemy Navies? NO. They attacked MERCHANT SHIPS. You call them PIRATES, not DUELISTS. They're SUPPOSED to gank you!
A very neat expansion on this idea would be if there were some sort of semi-sov implementation in these low sec systems, such that the lowsec PvP pirate bigshots can take sov of the system and get minor perks. Then you'd have some merchant organizations straight up paying those pirate corps to let them travel through their space. Wow, the possibilities. Seriously, that's more epic than sov-null is even.
Make your own Gundista faction. Really cool idea. |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2347
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 10:33:00 -
[1424] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:The chances of another m0o happening would be slim, chocking down one system is a lot different than chocking down hundreds of systems across the entire universe. Burn Jita, anyone? PL gate camps in Amamake? The former glory of Rancer? Tama? Oulley? Hier in Aridia when TEST was in Fountain? PF-? Torrinos? Even Niarja and Uedama... There are countless examples of what is already happening and what would see a massive increase with this change - for the worse of the game. Plus, there ARE NO hundreds of systems to camp, that is a lie to make your dream seem more feasible. There are and would not be hundreds of ways to traverse Low sec to get from one hub to another. Because if that was the case, it would to a large extent defeat the purpose of the Low sec as a border between warring nations; and for the players it would not provide sufficiently easily accessible PVP choke points. Apparently you missed the part where new systems and regions should be added to minimize the amount of choke points. Esay to miss when you only want to look at one aspect of this. Then please train your reading comprehension to IV, at least. For the time being, I highlighted the part where I not missed that point. There are currently about 220 entry points into low sec from high sec, once into those areas you can get just about anywhere. By adding in even more systems the number of entry points would only go up.
Edit: The points that were counted were only points that did not dead end. -á --á |
Aiyshimin
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
11
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 10:41:00 -
[1425] - Quote
+1 this needs to happen!
|
Tavin Aikisen
Revenent Defence Corperation Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
265
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 15:20:00 -
[1426] - Quote
I really like the possibilities from this idea. Remember this. Trust your eyes, you will kill each other. Trust your veins, you can all go home. -Cold Wind |
Kaivar Lancer
Biological Mechanical Unlimited
504
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 15:39:00 -
[1427] - Quote
I approve. +1. |
Fabio Bittar
The Scope Gallente Federation
75
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 15:49:00 -
[1428] - Quote
I approve and support this idea. |
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy
601
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 16:04:00 -
[1429] - Quote
posted many times.. not really that great an idea. what you'd end up with is everyone buying, selling, and living near Jita and the vast alternate racial empire empty for the more part. No one will want to start in other areas because of the high prices and isolation from others. -á-á- remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not-á "afk" cloaking-á-
[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG] |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
502
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 16:08:00 -
[1430] - Quote
Barbara Nichole wrote:posted many times.. not really that great an idea. what you'd end up with is everyone buying, selling, and living near Jita and the vast alternate racial empire empty for the more part. No one will want to start in other areas because of the high prices and isolation from others.
Don't try it, they won't see reason. |
|
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
802
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 16:18:00 -
[1431] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Barbara Nichole wrote:posted many times.. not really that great an idea. what you'd end up with is everyone buying, selling, and living near Jita and the vast alternate racial empire empty for the more part. No one will want to start in other areas because of the high prices and isolation from others. Don't try it, they won't see reason.
I think the very fact that a great many people regularly travel into lowsec, nullsec and w-space for nothing more than the fun of it gives the lie to this position.
Not to mention the disparity of supply of gas, sleeper loot, ice, high grade minerals and so on.
What would actually happen is that people would get used to it.
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
132
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 16:32:00 -
[1432] - Quote
Barbara Nichole wrote:posted many times.. not really that great an idea. what you'd end up with is everyone buying, selling, and living near Jita and the vast alternate racial empire empty for the more part. No one will want to start in other areas because of the high prices and isolation from others.
Do you really believe, especially given the new manufacturing changes, that the higher profit potential would attract manufacturers to the less populated empires?
Obviously we can't say one way or the other with absolute certainty, but I believe a change like this would have a much greater chance of dissipating the market, rather than centralizing it further. |
BJ McGreaves
Lost Dawn Chaos
53
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 17:36:00 -
[1433] - Quote
I like this idea. |
Bronson Hughes
The KAOS Holdings Group
1
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 18:07:00 -
[1434] - Quote
One need only look at the "Ships Lost in the Past Hour" stat for Niarja, Madirmilire, and Kaaputenen to realize that this change is largely unnecessary. With a 0.5 sec system (an chokepoint with no stations no less) on the main trade route between Jita and Amarr, suicide ganks are pretty common.
Also, see Burn Jita and gank efforts at other trade hubs, and I think the current layout of systems is working as intended.
EDIT: Also, posting in an ancient thread. Win. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
502
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 19:51:00 -
[1435] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote: I think the very fact that a great many people regularly travel into lowsec, nullsec and w-space for nothing more than the fun of it gives the lie to this position.
Not to mention the disparity of supply of gas, sleeper loot, ice, high grade minerals and so on.
What would actually happen is that people would get used to it.
Please keep on ignoring the reality. You compare apples and lemons here, but that's ok. |
Benar Ellecon
Card games on MOTORCYCLES
24
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 19:53:00 -
[1436] - Quote
I have liked this idea from the first post and it is good to see it back on the first page.
Reading through the ideas, I believe one was to just have the lowsec areas between rival empires. In addition, I have always thought it would open up another profession for corps to provide escorts for protecting haulers for a small fee. This would definitely make it more viable and give more opportunities for PvP. Of course, any corp could send ships of their own to escort the haulers, but for individuals that is not so much an option.
All in all it seems this would be a good idea and encourage more interaction/cooperation and PvP, which is always a good thing! Fly with your hair on FIRE! |
w3ak3stl1nk
Hedion University Amarr Empire
8
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 20:42:00 -
[1437] - Quote
If this does happen there should be multiple routes to each region, like a border zone... like caldari border zone... if it was actually low sec. |
w3ak3stl1nk
Hedion University Amarr Empire
8
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 20:45:00 -
[1438] - Quote
Or maybe it can be like and Outer ring for each faction and be Sansha based... never ending incursions in those zones. |
Axe Coldon
Coldon Enterprises Axion Bionics
28
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 21:54:00 -
[1439] - Quote
Interesting idea. (forgive me for not reading all 72 pages)
what if instead of changing the current map (I don't care one way or another) and expand the universe in this fashion. Have the Empires colonize some of the near area's of the universe and put low sec between them and null around it.
To be honest the universe is getting kind of crowded. I know many will disagree..but its true.
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
482
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 07:37:00 -
[1440] - Quote
Axe Coldon wrote:Interesting idea. (forgive me for not reading all 72 pages)
what if instead of changing the current map (I don't care one way or another) and expand the universe in this fashion. Have the Empires colonize some of the near area's of the universe and put low sec between them and null around it.
To be honest the universe is getting kind of crowded. I know many will disagree..but its true.
Actually that could be interesting, especially if the hisec island was to have an empire controlled gate accessing new space. Run a series of live event style missions to gather and build the required components and in return the player delivering the items gets access tags for the new gate.
if nothing else it woulld test player willingness to traverse losec with frieght of some kind. I don't for one second believe the hisec players in general would want to, but what would come out of it is statistuics on players willing to risk losec for good rewards in a new hisec region |
|
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
804
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 08:01:00 -
[1441] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote: I think the very fact that a great many people regularly travel into lowsec, nullsec and w-space for nothing more than the fun of it gives the lie to this position.
Not to mention the disparity of supply of gas, sleeper loot, ice, high grade minerals and so on.
What would actually happen is that people would get used to it.
Please keep on ignoring the reality. You compare apples and lemons here, but that's ok.
I think to be rational about this, before we can argue what is reality, we have to first provide evidence of our position.
Of course since this change has not happened, we cannot use empirical analysis. So we need a model.
Would it be reasonable to argue that for the residents, nullsec sov systems are a little like trade hubs, with large wild spaces separating them from jita?
If so, there is already a large community of players who happily deal with the situation that the OP is suggesting we create.
Would that be reasonable? Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
482
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 08:14:00 -
[1442] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote: I think to be rational about this, before we can argue what is reality, we have to first provide evidence of our position.
Of course since this change has not happened, we cannot use empirical analysis. So we need a model.
Would it be reasonable to argue that for the residents, nullsec sov systems are a little like trade hubs, with large wild spaces separating them from jita?
If so, there is already a large community of players who happily deal with the situation that the OP is suggesting we create.
Would that be reasonable?
I would say not actually since the players who mainly live in hisec are those without the time to devote to typical nullsec activities and politics. The two areas are very different and cater for very different players. I think both areas are generally working as intended and agree that losec needs some love, but making it bigger isn't the way as that just creates more space for players to avoid or ignore in respective cases.
The reasons to enter losec need to be improved via PvE, increased player interaction somehow, attractive reasons for those teetering on the edge of jumping in to actually do so. This would still only be a small %age of hisec players though. If losec is relatively empty perhaps it would make more sense to condense losec by removing systems from it (make them hi/null) which would bring losec folks into much more contact and create much more friction |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
804
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 09:01:00 -
[1443] - Quote
Q: why do people go into wormholes? A: money
Q: why do people go into nullsec? A: fun and money
Q: why do people stay in hisec? A: easy money
Q: why do people go to lowsec? A: fun
What's missing?
In my view lowsec ought to be bigger. It has a good role for pve and pvp because warp bubbles are not allowed there so fights can be truly dynamic.
Incursions should be altered so that all the high value encounters are in lowsec or null to close off the risk-free money tap.
Wormholes should be one-way and short lived, forcing explorers to take everything they need with them. Allowing people to live in w-space as easily as hisec just creates inflation and makes t3's too common.
Lowsec needs pve content that pays very well, requires a small fleet and has no gates.
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
482
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 09:22:00 -
[1444] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:Q: why do people go into wormholes? A: money
Q: why do people go into nullsec? A: fun and money
Q: why do people stay in hisec? A: easy money
Q: why do people go to lowsec? A: fun
What's missing?
In my view lowsec ought to be bigger. It has a good role for pve and pvp because warp bubbles are not allowed there so fights can be truly dynamic.
Incursions should be altered so that all the high value encounters are in lowsec or null to close off the risk-free money tap.
Wormholes should be one-way and short lived, forcing explorers to take everything they need with them. Allowing people to live in w-space as easily as hisec just creates inflation and makes t3's too common.
Lowsec needs pve content that pays very well, requires a small fleet and has no gates.
People go where they go for their own reasons, the above is your personal view. Many people have a different view on what is fun but because it doesn't match others views that doesn't make either side right or wrong. Eve caters for most playstyles and is better for it. Increasing the size of losec just makes more empty space, it needs more people in the existing space to improve things. Also I thought level V missions required a small fleet and paid well. There must be some reason people don't run them therefore a different approach is required to entice people in.
Turn the idea on it's head (by way of example, I'm not suggesting this) and make losec smaller and more hisec systems. Those PvP folks living there could of course continue in PvP activities but with the risk of being CONCORD'd. Those that don't want that are *effectively* forced to change their way of playing or move systems into a smaller less lucrative area of space. This is the flipside of the OP and would be just about as welcomed by the losec folks as the OP would by those in hisec. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
804
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 09:34:00 -
[1445] - Quote
Level 5 missions occur in a very limited number of systems, they are boring and half of them have gates. The other half are farmed by people in carriers.
This is not content.
Sending people on adventures with a purpose is content, giving them opportunities to work together and overcome difficulties is content.
Incursions were a start but they are formulaic and have just become money farms.
How about a mission to hunt down and eliminate a small fleet of elite npc's? The npc's travel through lowsec and fly ships fitted with faction and pirate gear, with good pilot ai?
The reward for killing them? Loot from the wrecks plus LP. The npc's should be able to warp, jump, retreat and set traps when they know they are being pursued.
Build that and watch them come....
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
482
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 09:39:00 -
[1446] - Quote
That sounds much more workable to increase losec folks and I have proposed similar before in other threads, harder more interesting and varied missions to bring people in and introduce people to more PvP style game mechanics. |
Tornii
The Scope Gallente Federation
75
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 10:01:00 -
[1447] - Quote
Yes please. We desperately need a shakeup of how EVE universe is built and functioning from geographical as well as sovereignty points of view, all the way from empire space to 0.0. And this to me sounds like a great idea. Patience is a virtue. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
502
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 11:50:00 -
[1448] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote: I think the very fact that a great many people regularly travel into lowsec, nullsec and w-space for nothing more than the fun of it gives the lie to this position.
Not to mention the disparity of supply of gas, sleeper loot, ice, high grade minerals and so on.
What would actually happen is that people would get used to it.
Please keep on ignoring the reality. You compare apples and lemons here, but that's ok. I think to be rational about this, before we can argue what is reality, we have to first provide evidence of our position. Of course since this change has not happened, we cannot use empirical analysis. So we need a model. Would it be reasonable to argue that for the residents, nullsec sov systems are a little like trade hubs, with large wild spaces separating them from jita? If so, there is already a large community of players who happily deal with the situation that the OP is suggesting we create. Would that be reasonable?
Not in the slightest. What you try to use as base for a model (both your Low sec as well as your 00 sec analogy) are vastly different space types from what the OP wants to create. In those, nearly no one cares about sparsely traveling though people (the number of people who do is negligible). That is entirely different space from Low sec areas, which connect trade hubs of large magnitude with each other. In this kind of space, that is the only thing what people care about. (I refuse to repeat my previously mentioned examples, which prove exactly that.)
In this kind of Low sec area you could not even do what you probably mean with "traveling in [that areas] for nothing more than fun". There is hardly any fun in trying to evade nearly unavoidable gate camps for the majority of people; there is no fun for people who want to use these Low sec areas for Exploration or missions, which they cannot do because of camps and combat probing; there is no fun in being forced to go through there or having to circumvent it with expensive JFs to get direly needed goods for your activities outside the main tradehub of the game (which ever this is going to be after such a change took place); there is no fun in having to deal with jojo-ing markets; there is no fun in running missions that would constantly lead to Low sec, which you cannot run because of camps; there is not even a lot of fun involved for PVP when the only thing campers do is running away in case someone actually managed to muster a sizable fleet to roam that Low sec or counter a camp.
|
Axe Coldon
Coldon Enterprises Axion Bionics
28
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 17:31:00 -
[1449] - Quote
[quote=Besides, as you already mentioned: We already have large communities living and having fun in Low sec and 00 sec. They should fill up that space and make it space worthwhile living and wasting time for first, before we should think about adding more of that kind of empty space to the game.[/quote]
You can't fill up Low and Null. It doesn't work that way. Everyone wants to kill you. So the only way you can do non-pvp activities is have some fairly quiet space. Its easy to say have people guard you..but unless there are lots of kills no one wants to have the boring job of sitting on the gate while you do stuff in systems. And if its that hot enough nuets will get through that you can't do non-pvp. (mining, ratting)
To me null is too crowded and we need more universe to play in. I would like to see so much space that it can't be controlled by the super-coalitions. I don't know how to accomplish it..but I miss the days a small alliance could claim sov in parts of the universe that no one wanted but other small allainces and they would duke it out without getting hot dropped by a super-coaltion.
As eve has grown and the number of people in caps have grown..the universe is smaller in a way.
And low..well it will always be what it is. High Sec'ers avoid it because to easy to die. Risk/Reward hasn't been worth it. Nullers avoid it because there is more benefit to them to play in their Sov's. And there are standings hit for killing in Low. Maybe remove that. I know a lot of nullers don't want to roam in low to mess up their sec status.
I do know that when the new covert mining ship is out a number of high miners (brave souls) plan to use them to get the rarers ores they need in low as opposed to buying them in Jita. That should liven things up some in low. Some will be easy to kill and some will be crafty and take some effort.
|
Sean Crees
Sean's Solo Incursion Corp.
0
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 18:08:00 -
[1450] - Quote
You make highsec 100% safe, no ganking allowed (make concord response time so quick that it just won't be possible anymore), and remove the ability to attack war targets in highsec space (could have concord come to your rescue in highsec), and i'll be all for adding manditory lowsec space travel between the 4 highsec regions.
Just as long as theres at least 3 different paths to travel between each highsec zone, so people can't just all gate camp one system like Niarja and Uedema is now. And the distance through lowsec isn't more than 6 jumps.
You get your pvp ganking zones, and i get to know where i'm safe and secure, and i get to choose when to take a risk to go someplace else.
You could even build it into the lore. Capsuleers are pushing against the empires. Empires have to retreat back into their space, and give up the edges of their domain to capsuleers.
I'd also like to see more high sec to high sec wormholes in general. On the wormhole note, i personally think we should get a wormhole to every incursion site from highsec to highsec, as well as from highsec to the lowsec and nullsec incursions. Could be a random highsec location every time. Then people might actually run lowsec and nullsec incursions, since the logistics of getting ships to the incursion zones is the biggest hurdle. |
|
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
146
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 20:40:00 -
[1451] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: The problem I see is the fact you point out, hisec is used by those with little available playtime (not necessarily lazy, just time constrained). Those players deserve a playstyle choice that can provide them a valuable income just as much as those with more spare time.
Lazy and/or time constrained. Why do people with less time and/or effort deserve a play style that provides income equal to those with extra time and/or effort to spend?
Actually, on the contrary, the reason high security activities are valued the way they are is because the number of people doing the low effort, low time sink activities is very high. So the value of their rewards is low. Missioning, in fact, is a great choice to provide income that doesn't scale down to a great extent with increased player activity. High sec already has that, and with increased effort it can be more profitable than someone not putting in the effort.
Quote: I agree completely that losec needs some incentives adding to draw players in, I just don't see that this idea would do that in any significant way. losec would be the perfect place to work as a staging and proving ground for players before they move to null, currently it seems to b skip
I don't believe low sec should be a staging and proving ground for players before they move to null. Low sec and Null sec are very very different places. It's probably a bigger step from High sec to Low sec than high sec to null. The cultures are already very much different as well as the play style and mechanics. Low sec already has an identity, it just needs more content. The lack of content is based on the lack of incentives and the counter-incentive mechanics of security rating.
The idea in this thread addresses lots of different issues at the same time. It deals with the stale environment of High-sec. It makes Low-Sec an integral part of New Eden instead of just a no-man's land between High sec and Null sec. It creates a climate conducive to player interaction at the borders of empires, which would literally be the center of New Eden. It breaks up the polarized market. It dramatically increases racial Identity. (Since initially leaving your Race's empire is now a big step for new players)
Adding in the Security Rating changes I have suggested would further increase the dynamics. No longer would low-sec pvp be "negative-sec pvp".
Maybe with additional low-sec activities, it'd take a lot of pressure off of people hassling high sec bears. Everybody wins? |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
146
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 21:02:00 -
[1452] - Quote
Barbara Nichole wrote:posted many times.. not really that great an idea. what you'd end up with is everyone buying, selling, and living near Jita and the vast alternate racial empire empty for the more part. No one will want to start in other areas because of the high prices and isolation from others.
Rivr Luzade wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote: I think the very fact that a great many people regularly travel into lowsec, nullsec and w-space for nothing more than the fun of it gives the lie to this position.
Not to mention the disparity of supply of gas, sleeper loot, ice, high grade minerals and so on.
What would actually happen is that people would get used to it.
Please keep on ignoring the reality. You compare apples and lemons here, but that's ok. Actually, the reason people live in null/low/wh space is because it's profitable. That profitability also allows them to have high level, high expensive pvp, and if they consider it such fairly regularly fun.
The awesome part about the risk stuff is that you can already observer it with other systems through parallels. So when people say this idea is good and that it will work, it's because they have something to go by.
On the other hand, though, when people come up with radical counter arguments, such as everyone will confine themselves to jita, or everyone in high sec is going to un-sub, trade will suffer etc etc, it's really hard to understand what your reasoning is based on and it's really hard to not be skeptical of what you're saying. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
502
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 21:23:00 -
[1453] - Quote
Quote:Actually, the reason people live in null/low/wh space is because it's profitable. That profitability also allows them to have high level, high expensive pvp, and if they consider it such fairly regularly fun.
The awesome part about the risk stuff is that you can already observer it with other systems through parallels. So when people say this idea is good and that it will work, it's because they have something to go by.
Well, apparently it it is neither profitable enough nor riskfree enough for a lot of people who "live" there. Go figure. |
wicked cheese
Imperial Research Inovations
2
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 22:55:00 -
[1454] - Quote
i can only see good from this. each empire will probably have its on large trade hub and a few minor. it also make faction warfare more believable. id be very interested to see the effect this would have on highsec. certainly worth a look after 11 years isnt it |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
483
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 03:43:00 -
[1455] - Quote
wicked cheese wrote:i can only see good from this. each empire will probably have its on large trade hub and a few minor. it also make faction warfare more believable. id be very interested to see the effect this would have on highsec. certainly worth a look after 11 years isnt it
It would stagnate hisec in my opinion. Anyone interested in traveling losec already does, those not interested simply wouldn't do no matter what. They would simply move to Jita and you would end up with one super hub. The other hubs would shrink and end up only supplying minimal stuff (comparatively) for their specific faction. Losec could do with a boost but this isn't it. |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2349
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 05:46:00 -
[1456] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:wicked cheese wrote:i can only see good from this. each empire will probably have its on large trade hub and a few minor. it also make faction warfare more believable. id be very interested to see the effect this would have on highsec. certainly worth a look after 11 years isnt it It would stagnate hisec in my opinion. Anyone interested in traveling losec already does, those not interested simply wouldn't do no matter what. They would simply move to Jita and you would end up with one super hub. The other hubs would shrink and end up only supplying minimal stuff (comparatively) for their specific faction. Losec could do with a boost but this isn't it. High sec is already stagnating this would help shake things up, in a good way. A super hub would be impractical with upcoming changes to industry, causing Jita to become all but impossible to make any profit my manufacturing within The Forge region. -á --á |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
483
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 05:59:00 -
[1457] - Quote
If hisec is stagnating how come people complain about the profits there? It is a thriving trade area right now. The upcoming changes will potentially break that and certainly at the very least change it drastically. It will be interesting to see how it shakes down but this is enough change to hisec right now. It'll take at least 6-12 months for things to stabilize after the changes to s&i. Better to look at the ideas here for improving losec rsther than changing hisec more. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
146
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 18:19:00 -
[1458] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:If hisec is stagnating how come people complain about the profits there? It is a thriving trade area right now. The upcoming changes will potentially break that and certainly at the very least change it drastically. It will be interesting to see how it shakes down but this is enough change to hisec right now. It'll take at least 6-12 months for things to stabilize after the changes to s&i. Better to look at the ideas here for improving losec rsther than changing hisec more. High sec is stagnant, that is why people complain about the profits there. All there is to do in high sec to make money currently is basic missioning and mining. To make money trading you either have to get into a freighter or once you've made enough money you can play the .01 isk buy/sell game. Oh and of course Incursions, in which the current culture is self limiting on the number of people who are able to part take in this, who are going to tend to be older players.
By breaking up the Empires, first and foremost, you will not impede Missioning and Mining at all. Everyone will still have mining and the same levels of missions available without ever venturing out into low sec. Second, with the discontinuity of free travel the local trade hubs in each empire will grow with the exception of Jita. There will definitely be price differences between each trade hub and they will be able to grow to fairly large margins. This will give people the ability to haul, at a risk, between each empire for a profit without having to first skill into flying a freighter. Thought moving things from the edges of empires to the central trade hub will no doubt remain similar in profitability for freighters. As for the .01 isk buy/sell game.... to be honest, i have no idea how this will be impacted if it is impacted at all, though i'm not too worried about it for some reason. And the Incursion players, well all 50 to 100 of them will probably be the least happy about a change like this. Their profession requires the most mobility across high sec, but also provides them with the greatest rewards with basically no risk. For them, this change would better reflect how things should be. They should not be making 250mil/hour in high sec with no risk. Having to traverse low sec to get to the next incursion, in my opinion, should be a minimal resistance to their over the top reward/risk ratio.
I know you'll continue to disagree, but please explain your logic and reasoning for your perspective. If you're point, as in the post i quoted, is that it'll be a drastic change and that we should wait and see how things go for now. Then that's fair. But to never do it, now i very much will disagree with that stance. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
484
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 20:10:00 -
[1459] - Quote
I think it is healthy to disagree, its the only way to wither develop a good idea or avoid a bad one.
In terms of the idea, it would be pointless to increase the distance through hisec as afk freighters don't care and others would use redfrog. Breaking hisec apart completely with lose basically wrecks many players playstyle unfairly. As for the trade hubs I believe that most players will simply move to jita for missioning etc. S&I is way up in the air but any industry person needing to move stuff will use the frogs or BR's so no more targets for losec there.
I think it would be a waste of time to make the proposed change and wreck the game for many players unfairly. More empty space in losec would help it less than doing nothing. Encouraging more players to enter losec by giving them true incentive (not forcing them to if they wish to maintain current trade profits) would be the best way to enhance losec.
As for the isk trading game if people do that in the same hub without undocking how would that change if losec space was inserted between hubs? It would simply be more reason for those players never to undock. I see no problem with being able to make profit in hisec (my profits come from losec right now btw). The profits in hi are low compared to null anyway, and possibly will become lower with the new changes. I firmly believe these changes have to bed in before any other changes should be considered. I also firmly believe that more losec space isn't the answer to losec's issues, enticing people in by choice is. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1166
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 21:08:00 -
[1460] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:...with the discontinuity of free travel the local trade hubs in each empire will grow with the exception of Jita. There will definitely be price differences between each trade hub and they will be able to grow to fairly large margins. This will give people the ability to haul, at a risk, between each empire for a profit without having to first skill into flying a freighter. With the heightened danger of low sec hauling becomes more prohibitive than before. The act of rendering freighters unfeasible for the task will slow the flow of goods further since smaller solutions would be the only way to move goods. It works to emphasize JF's much the way hauling promotes freighter usage now, meaning the bar for effectiveness in both training and cost moves further up.
Even on the small scale blockade runners become the new go to over t1 haulers. There is nothing friendly towards newer haulers/traders in this suggestion. Raising the bar of risk will always favor more capable older players.
There is also the likely negative effect that those other trade hubs degrade due to the lack of flowing goods from Jita. If people center in caldari space, which is already largely the case, to avoid paying the margins brought about by isolation of the markets it largely defeats the purpose of the change.
Erutpar Ambient wrote:And the Incursion players, well all 50 to 100 of them will probably be the least happy about a change like this. Their profession requires the most mobility across high sec, but also provides them with the greatest rewards with basically no risk. For them, this change would better reflect how things should be. They should not be making 250mil/hour in high sec with no risk. Having to traverse low sec to get to the next incursion, in my opinion, should be a minimal resistance to their over the top reward/risk ratio. 2 words, jump clones. Again, another reason this is trivialized for older wealthy players who can afford high value redundant assets in various areas of space. |
|
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
146
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 21:15:00 -
[1461] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:I think it is healthy to disagree, its the only way to wither develop a good idea or avoid a bad one.
In terms of the idea, it would be pointless to increase the distance through hisec as afk freighters don't care and others would use redfrog. Breaking hisec apart completely with lose basically wrecks many players playstyle unfairly. As for the trade hubs I believe that most players will simply move to jita for missioning etc. S&I is way up in the air but any industry person needing to move stuff will use the frogs or BR's so no more targets for losec there.
I think it would be a waste of time to make the proposed change and wreck the game for many players unfairly. More empty space in losec would help it less than doing nothing. Encouraging more players to enter losec by giving them true incentive (not forcing them to if they wish to maintain current trade profits) would be the best way to enhance losec.
As for the isk trading game if people do that in the same hub without undocking how would that change if losec space was inserted between hubs? It would simply be more reason for those players never to undock. I see no problem with being able to make profit in hisec (my profits come from losec right now btw). The profits in hi are low compared to null anyway, and possibly will become lower with the new changes. I firmly believe these changes have to bed in before any other changes should be considered. I also firmly believe that more losec space isn't the answer to losec's issues, enticing people in by choice is.
Please explain how this change will wreck anyone's playstyle and to what extent. And then please explain what you mean by "playstyle" because, based on our continuing disagreements, I'm not sure that we agree on what that means.
Please also explain why you believe people will move to Jita for missioning. And if they do that, then what happens to the prices of items bought with LP for the other factions? Are you saying that nobody will live in the other empires and those LP items will no longer be accessible? If this is true then why do people live in Null Sec, or Wormhole space?
Using Redfrog or Blockade Runners is fine, I'm not sure what point this is making. By the sound of it, it appears that you agree a change like this will increase the necessity of Redfrog and using Blockade Runners. This is exactly what we want to happen. With more opportunity for hauling maybe we'll see competition with RedFrog and an increase in use of Blockade Runners. This is a good thing.
Currently trade profits are nothing, which is why you need a freighter to actually make a reasonable profit for trading. With this change, those profits wouldn't go down, in fact there would be new incentive to cross low sec for increased profits for smaller volumes and potentially shorter routes.
I'm not sure how the isk trading game would see any change because of exactly what you stated, they never undock. But there is one thing that might be an issue with this. If the trade hubs are split up that means one person with a lot of isk could much more easily buy-out and corner the market on an item that people need. This may empower isk traders, however this would also be a great empowerment for the cross market traders because these people artificially inflating the value of an item in only one area and the cross market haulers can just haul them in and eat up some of the profits of this power buyer.
In any case, i'm still trying to understand who's playstyle this will ruin (other than incursion runners to a certain extent) and why you believe that will happen. Please explain your position with some logic and reasoning instead of just restating what you believe will happen.
I do understand that you believe bad things will happen. But i want to know why you think those things will happen. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
146
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 21:40:00 -
[1462] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:With the heightened danger of low sec hauling becomes more prohibitive than before. The act of rendering freighters unfeasible for the task will slow the flow of goods further since smaller solutions would be the only way to move goods. It works to emphasize JF's much the way hauling promotes freighter usage now, meaning the bar for effectiveness in both training and cost moves further up.
Even on the small scale blockade runners become the new go to over t1 haulers. There is nothing friendly towards newer haulers/traders in this suggestion. Raising the bar of risk will always favor more capable older players.
There is also the likely negative effect that those other trade hubs degrade due to the lack of flowing goods from Jita. If people center in caldari space, which is already largely the case, to avoid paying the margins brought about by isolation of the markets it largely defeats the purpose of the change.
So you are also in the camp of "everyone will move to Caldari space" i take it. If we use this as a baseline to view the changes then you're correct, this would have a negative impact on the game.
However, is it really realistic to assume that everyone, or even a large % of people will decide to live in Caldari space because of the shift in market? What items could possibly cause the degradation of trade hubs due to lack of flow? Maybe racial specific items like LP goods and ice? But everything else that can be manufactured will instead either be either hauled or locally supplied. It's going to be the differences in the local supply and demand that will cause the price changes. With the exception of the racial specific goods of course.
And I never said anything about this change being friendly to "newer" haulers and traders. In fact this change is mostly for the people to pick up hauling and trading and then have nowhere to go with it. Currently there is nothing too friendly for newer haulers and traders, but there's also nothing for experienced haulers and traders. Training into a freighter and then auto piloting from one trade hub to another is not really content. Flying through dangerous space in a hauler or even a Blockade Runner etc etc, now that, i would say is actual content. There will still be local hauling to be done of course. The profits will be similar to what hauling has now so you won't lose that. There will just be additional content for people or corps wanting to take hauling to the next level.
The problem with Jump Freighters, they consume fuel. This means that, based on the price of fuel, to move goods from one market to another with a JF requires a minimum amount of profit to cover the cost of fuel. And the more this is utilized the more fuel is going to be used, the more fuel is used the greater the demand on fuel, the greater the demand on fuel the greater the price of fuel..... AND the greater the price on fuel, the greater the minimum profit of trading goods from one market to another with a JF will be. How's that for a self governing mechanic?
Quote:2 words, jump clones. Again, another reason this is trivialized for older wealthy players who can afford high value redundant assets in various areas of space. That's fine, however, anything that makes doing high-sec incursions less trivial now matter how minimal it is a great thing in my opinion. With this they'll need to have at least 4 clones, 4 ships and 4 sets of implants to be as effective as they are now, minimum. It's not like any new players can really get into high sec incursions with the current culture anyways. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1166
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 22:32:00 -
[1463] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:So you are also in the camp of "everyone will move to Caldari space" i take it. If we use this as a baseline to view the changes then you're correct, this would have a negative impact on the game.
However, is it really realistic to assume that everyone, or even a large % of people will decide to live in Caldari space because of the shift in market? What items could possibly cause the degradation of trade hubs due to lack of flow? Maybe racial specific items like LP goods and ice? But everything else that can be manufactured will instead either be either hauled or locally supplied. It's going to be the differences in the local supply and demand that will cause the price changes. With the exception of the racial specific goods of course. That depends on materials being ubiquitously available. Considering that importing resources outside of highsec is benefited by chasing market velocity rather than minor fluctuations in raw isk. This means that unless Jita was dethroned overnight there would remain a large emphasis on trade there, which means higher resource availability and as such lower potential build costs. It becomes a bad idea to become a producer elsewhere unless no one near you has heard of Jita and courier contracts. A boon for JF's, but not for local activity of anything save consumables.
Quote:And I never said anything about this change being friendly to "newer" haulers and traders. In fact this change is mostly for the people to pick up hauling and trading and then have nowhere to go with it. Currently there is nothing too friendly for newer haulers and traders, but there's also nothing for experienced haulers and traders. Training into a freighter and then auto piloting from one trade hub to another is not really content. Flying through dangerous space in a hauler or even a Blockade Runner etc etc, now that, i would say is actual content. There will still be local hauling to be done of course. The profits will be similar to what hauling has now so you won't lose that. There will just be additional content for people or corps wanting to take hauling to the next level. So the idea is to cut content for smaller scale haulers in favor of larger scale ones and somehow hope there is something left for the smaller ones to to do?
Quote:The problem with Jump Freighters, they consume fuel. This means that, based on the price of fuel, to move goods from one market to another with a JF requires a minimum amount of profit to cover the cost of fuel. And the more this is utilized the more fuel is going to be used, the more fuel is used the greater the demand on fuel, the greater the demand on fuel the greater the price of fuel..... AND the greater the price on fuel, the greater the minimum profit of trading goods from one market to another with a JF will be. How's that for a self governing mechanic? Hardly notable unless highsec hauling by JF winds up largely eclipsing other uses for jump fuel. That said, if the difference in price between 2 hubs is significant, it makes more sense to buy it in the lesser and have it hauled. Another reasons why markets with disparity will stagnate.
Quote:That's fine, however, anything that makes doing high-sec incursions less trivial now matter how minimal it is a great thing in my opinion. With this they'll need to have at least 4 clones, 4 ships and 4 sets of implants to be as effective as they are now, minimum. It's not like any new players can really get into high sec incursions with the current culture anyways. The solution to an issue with a high bar of entry is never to raise that bar higher unless you want there to be some gulf in participation. Using that fact that there is already one as an excuse to widen it when it's not intended or desirable is missing the forest for the trees. |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2352
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 22:37:00 -
[1464] - Quote
In regards to jump clones, there is almost 0 chance that a pod will get caught when not on auto pilot. There is of course a few niche situations where they can be caught as always but not enough to be considered standard. -á --á |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
146
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 04:55:00 -
[1465] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:That depends on materials being ubiquitously available. Considering that importing resources outside of highsec is benefited by chasing market velocity rather than minor fluctuations in raw isk. This means that unless Jita was dethroned overnight there would remain a large emphasis on trade there, which means higher resource availability and as such lower potential build costs. It becomes a bad idea to become a producer elsewhere unless no one near you has heard of Jita and courier contracts. A boon for JF's, but not for local activity of anything save consumables. By this you're painting the picture that Jita is the only viable trade hub currently, this is completely not the case. The only real difference between Jita and the other trade hubs is the amount of goods, not the availability. The statement that Jita must be "dethroned" for a change like this to work is completely erroneous.Quote:So the idea is to cut content for smaller scale haulers in favor of larger scale ones and somehow hope there is something left for the smaller ones to to do? Where do you get the idea that content will be cut for smaller scale haulers? What this change will do is create another venue for haulers. This doesn't remove the current hauling content (if you can even call it content) it just adds another level to it. With this change larger scale hauling will actually be possible.Quote:Hardly notable unless highsec hauling by JF winds up largely eclipsing other uses for jump fuel. That said, if the difference in price between 2 hubs is significant, it makes more sense to buy it in the lesser and have it hauled. Another reasons why markets with disparity will stagnate. I'm not sure how much JF hauling would increase with a change like this. However i know that there will be an increase for sure because there is no JF hauling for this particular practice as it would be a waste of effort and isk and you'd be going out of your way because you can't jump into highsec directly. So this change will affect the price of isotopes even if one person decides to jump their stuff and that's it. To what extent that will actually happen will really be determined by the profitability of using it. It will eventually reach equilibrium.Quote:The solution to an issue with a high bar of entry is never to raise that bar higher unless you want there to be some gulf in participation. Using that fact that there is already one as an excuse to widen it when it's not intended or desirable is missing the forest for the trees. 'Missing the forest for the trees" That little Idiom would more accurately describe how the changes to Incursion play style are not the focus of this thread. My point is that I have no sympathy for the players who focus solely on this aspect of the game. It's already an exclusive game feature, who cares if it gets even more exclusive? |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1167
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 05:19:00 -
[1466] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:By this you're painting the picture that Jita is the only viable trade hub currently, this is completely not the case. The only real difference between Jita and the other trade hubs is the amount of goods, not the availability. The statement that Jita must be "dethroned" for a change like this to work is completely erroneous. Actually, no, it's an acknowledgement of trade concentration and the fact that easy transport between enpires helps other trade hubs rather than harming them since nothing hinders good from flowing. Having large price desparity due to barriers being erected doesn't help hubs thrive. Either way, a place with greater resource availability is a place that is better for manufacturers to get materials to produce.
Quote:Where do you get the idea that content will be cut for smaller scale haulers? What this change will do is create another venue for haulers. This doesn't remove the current hauling content (if you can even call it content) it just adds another level to it. How would it not? Right now interempire trade is easily accomplished on a small scale with a T1 hauler. Those limited to those vessels would have a much harder time competing with JF/blockade runner capable individuals. Regular freighter pilots need not even apply. This further constricts the supply of good moving back and forth to equalize hubs as well, which contributes to stagnation of hubs with significantly higher pricing.
Quote:I'm not sure how much JF hauling would increase with a change like this. However i know that there will be an increase for sure because there is no JF hauling for this particular practice as it would be a waste of effort and isk and you'd be going out of your way because you can't jump into highsec directly. So this change will affect the price of isotopes even if one person decides to jump their stuff and that's it. To what extent that will actually happen will really be determined by the profitability of using it. It will eventually reach equilibrium. This is a given, though not likely in my opinion to fluctuate once that equilibrium is reached in the manner you suggest. Individual markets would need massive swings of a very inconsistant and sporadic nature to keep items moving enough to matter, yet be spaced apart enough time wise to create fluctuations in isotope prices for any sort of jump fuel regulation to work.
Quote:That little Idiom would more accurately describe how the changes to Incursion play style are not the focus of this thread. My point is that I have no sympathy for the players who focus solely on this aspect of the game. It's already an exclusive game feature, who cares if it gets even more exclusive? I was simply addressing the point you brought up, but that aside chosing to ignore an unhealthy mechanic or entranch the unhealtheir portions is stilla poor idea even if you personally chose not to care. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
146
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 05:43:00 -
[1467] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Actually, no, it's an acknowledgement of trade concentration and the fact that easy transport between enpires helps other trade hubs rather than harming them since nothing hinders good from flowing. Having large price desparity due to barriers being erected doesn't help hubs thrive. Either way, a place with greater resource availability is a place that is better for manufacturers to get materials to produce. I think you misunderstand why the trade hubs exist. The hubs exist simply because people use them. Trade hubs are nothing more than a consistent trend of human actions. What causes them to thrive are the increasing demands and supplies of the locals. Easy transport between trade hubs doesn't really help or harm each trade hub. The difficulty of local transport however will have an impact. We definitely don't want to mess with that.
Quote:How would it not? Right now interempire trade is easily accomplished on a small scale with a T1 hauler. Those limited to those vessels would have a much harder time competing with JF/blockade runner capable individuals. Regular freighter pilots need not even apply. This further constricts the supply of good moving back and forth to equalize hubs as well, which contributes to stagnation of hubs with significantly higher pricing. I'd venture a guess that most small scale T1 hauling isn't going to be between trade hubs at current. The prices along all of the trade hubs are very normalized. The only way to make a viable profit is with a freighter. Most T1 small scale hauling is going to be from areas around an empire to the major trade hub in the area. This won't change at all.
Quote:This is a given, though not likely in my opinion to fluctuate once that equilibrium is reached in the manner you suggest. Individual markets would need massive swings of a very inconsistant and sporadic nature to keep items moving enough to matter, yet be spaced apart enough time wise to create fluctuations in isotope prices for any sort of jump fuel regulation to work. What this equilibrium will do is limit the viability of JF hauling. Meaning that there will always be stuff for smaller haulers to move at a profit. But there is also a limit on the amount of JF hauling that can be done before the act itself causes the isotope prices to rise. This means you can't JF haul everything all the time. This leaves plenty of profits up to the little guys and/or corps.
Quote:I was simply addressing the point you brought up, but that aside chosing to ignore an unhealthy mechanic or entranch the unhealtheir portions is stilla poor idea even if you personally chose not to care. The only reason i brought this point up is to show a game mechanic that will definitely be "negatively' affected by the change proposed in this thread. I'm only ignoring it because it doesn't directly pertain to the topic. Incursions really need to be changed/limited but this isn't the thread for that. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1167
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 06:03:00 -
[1468] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:I think you misunderstand why the trade hubs exist. The hubs exist simply because people use them. Trade hubs are nothing more than a consistent trend of human actions. What causes them to thrive are the increasing demands and supplies of the locals. Easy transport between trade hubs doesn't really help or harm each trade hub. The difficulty of local transport however will have an impact. We definitely don't want to mess with that. That doesn't make sense. If ease of transport doesn't affect trade hubs removing that ease can't either. And while local demand does help a hub, it only does so with respect to global prices. If demand is high enough compared to supply and price differentials increase much beyond the cost to move an item people will seek other sources of supply. What confuses me in this is the assumption that local hub price differentials will magically settle at a point where trade will be greatly more incintivised yet somehow that differential won't be enough to cause local demand to seek cheaper outside supply.
Quote:I'd venture a guess that most small scale T1 hauling isn't going to be between trade hubs at current. The prices along all of the trade hubs are very normalized. The only way to make a viable profit is with a freighter. Most T1 small scale hauling is going to be from areas around an empire to the major trade hub in the area. This won't change at all. That reasoning seems anecdotal at best, but even if most don't, doing so will be feasible for none when compared to alternatives if the suggested change is made.
Quote:What this equilibrium will do is limit the viability of JF hauling. Meaning that there will always be stuff for smaller haulers to move at a profit. But there is also a limit on the amount of JF hauling that can be done before the act itself causes the isotope prices to rise. This means you can't JF haul everything all the time. This leaves plenty of profits up to the little guys and/or corps. Unless JF fees become prohibitive in some form or fashion, which carries with it a number of other implications making this change even more questionable, that's going to make the lower profits worth questionable returns compared to the risks. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
146
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 06:28:00 -
[1469] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:That doesn't make sense. If ease of transport doesn't affect trade hubs removing that ease can't either. And while local demand does help a hub, it only does so with respect to global prices. If demand is high enough compared to supply and price differentials increase much beyond the cost to move an item people will seek other sources of supply. What confuses me in this is the assumption that local hub price differentials will magically settle at a point where trade will be greatly more incintivised yet somehow that differential won't be enough to cause local demand to seek cheaper outside supply. Local demand is the reason there is a hub. CCP didn't create the hubs, players did. Maybe our disconnect is on what we consider "thriving" in regards to a trade hub. I don't consider competitive pricing a testament to a trade hub's "thriving". Just it's functionality.
The whole thing about the price differentials and seeking other sources of supply..... This is the whole point! This is where the profit comes from for the hauling profession. If the local price increases enough, then there is an incentive to move that product from another trade hub to fill in the demand at a profit. When i talk about trade, i'm talking about the grand scale, not just each trade hub individually. This is why trade happens in the real world, not just EVE.
Quote:That reasoning seems anecdotal at best, but even if most don't, doing so will be feasible for none when compared to alternatives if the suggested change is made. There will always be cheap stuff for sale at the border systems of an empire by lazy people. And haulers will always be able to take advantage of that by moving that cheap stuff to a more centralized buy order for a profit. Why would you think this will change?
Quote:Unless JF fees become prohibitive in some form or fashion, which carries with it a number of other implications making this change even more questionable, that's going to make the lower profits worth questionable returns compared to the risks. What do you mean by JF fees becoming prohibitive? What i'm saying is that it costs X amount of isotopes to jump from one empire to another. X amount of isotopes costs Y amount of isk. So before you make any profit on your JF hauling you have to cover Y amount of isk. Haulers won't JF things from trade hub to trade hub at a loss. So the price of fuel is the limiting factor of JF hauling.
I think you're under the impression that price differentials are bad for trade hubs. They are in fact a great thing. They create movement and content. They make for a dynamic economy and dynamic game. Stagnation is when everything is the same everywhere and it doesn't matter where you buy anything. That's pretty much what we have now. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1169
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 07:18:00 -
[1470] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Local demand is the reason there is a hub. CCP didn't create the hubs, players did. Maybe our disconnect is on what we consider "thriving" in regards to a trade hub. I don't consider competitive pricing a testament to a trade hub's "thriving". Just it's functionality.
The whole thing about the price differentials and seeking other sources of supply..... This is the whole point! This is where the profit comes from for the hauling profession. If the local price increases enough, then there is an incentive to move that product from another trade hub to fill in the demand at a profit. When i talk about trade, i'm talking about the grand scale, not just each trade hub individually. This is why trade happens in the real world, not just EVE. Local demand only stays local when there is incentive to do so. If the price differential for a given item is wide enough and trade doesn't bring it closer to equilibrium it won't just be the traders that look elsewhere, it will be the end buyers. That is a major factor in capping trade profits and a major difference from real world trade. Moving goods will still be just as easy for the end users as it is traders, thus any large scale difference won't move goods on the high price end unless all movement services between empires stops at the same time rather than capitalizing on the new business.
Quote:There will always be cheap stuff for sale at the border systems of an empire by lazy people. And haulers will always be able to take advantage of that by moving that cheap stuff to a more centralized buy order for a profit. Why would you think this will change? Keep in mind we were talking about small scale players on the interempire trade, which is exactly what you are trying to change.
Quote:What do you mean by JF fees becoming prohibitive? What i'm saying is that it costs X amount of isotopes to jump from one empire to another. X amount of isotopes costs Y amount of isk. So before you make any profit on your JF hauling you have to cover Y amount of isk. Haulers won't JF things from trade hub to trade hub at a loss. So the price of fuel is the limiting factor of JF hauling. Yes, I am aware, which means you have messed with the isotope market ignoring the effect this has on the rest of the game and still capped what makes sense for non-JF haulers t move.
Quote:I think you're under the impression that price differentials are bad for trade hubs. They are in fact a great thing. They create movement and content. They make for a dynamic economy and dynamic game. Stagnation is when everything is the same everywhere and it doesn't matter where you buy anything. That's pretty much what we have now. I think you are under the impression that if low sec was introduced everyone would just deal with whatever prices were locally available rather than seeking other sources of supply as end users. Prices stagnate from both traders and users being aware of prices throughout highsec. This isn't something exclusive to traders and as such has them competing even against people who aren't even in their profession.
Essentially a large price differential IS bad for a hub when it's prices are on the high side because people stop using that hub for the items affected. |
|
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
146
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 07:36:00 -
[1471] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Local demand only stays local when there is incentive to do so. If the price differential for a given item is wide enough and trade doesn't bring it closer to equilibrium it won't just be the traders that look elsewhere, it will be the end buyers. That is a major factor in capping trade profits and a major difference from real world trade. Moving goods will still be just as easy for the end users as it is traders, thus any large scale difference won't move goods on the high price end unless all movement services between empires stops at the same time rather than capitalizing on the new business.
First of all, this would have to happen to a lot of items at the same time. And for it to really affect the population it would have to be a building material which the vast majority of those are locally supplied. And having that narrowed down to just high end materials, i don't believe the climate would be conducive to a large migration of people to a single trade hub.Quote:Keep in mind we were talking about small scale players on the interempire trade, which is exactly what you are trying to change. To be honest, i'm not really sure to what extent small scale players trade inter-empire. Based on the normalized prices of each trade hub, it would appear that there is not enough profit to be made for small scale trading between empires. Maybe you have some information about this that i don't have. What have i left out?Quote:Yes, I am aware, which means you have messed with the isotope market ignoring the effect this has on the rest of the game and still capped what makes sense for non-JF haulers t move. This doesn't cap what non-JFers can move, it only caps the JFs. There is no fuel consumption to fly a ship through lowsec to deliver goods to a market. You don't have a fuel overhead. It's all profit.Quote:I think you are under the impression that if low sec was introduced everyone would just deal with whatever prices were locally available rather than seeking other sources of supply as end users. Prices stagnate from both traders and users being aware of prices throughout highsec. This isn't something exclusive to traders and as such has them competing even against people who aren't even in their profession.
Essentially a large price differential IS bad for a hub when it's prices are on the high side because people stop using that hub for the items affected. I don't see why you would think people would relocate over one affected item. And how long do you think it'd take to be reseeded at a better price? I promise, once the price of the item reaches JF viable profits it won't take long before the market is re-saturated. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
519
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 07:41:00 -
[1472] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote: By this you're painting the picture that Jita is the only viable trade hub currently, this is completely not the case. The only real difference between Jita and the other trade hubs is the amount of goods, not the availability. The statement that Jita must be "dethroned" for a change like this to work is completely erroneous.
Sorry to disappoint you (Nah, not really sorry), but Jita IS the only source for a lot of stuff, beginning with moon goo to T2 components, booster gas, T3 production materials, faction and deadspace items over to certain ships and rare minerals. Good luck trying to get that sort of stuff in Amarr or Dodi or Rens for an affordable price, if you can find it at all there. And this is not going to change with this change, quite in contrast, it's only bound to get worse. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1169
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 07:52:00 -
[1473] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:First of all, this would have to happen to a lot of items at the same time. And for it to really affect the population it would have to be a building material which the vast majority of those are locally supplied. And having that narrowed down to just high end materials, i don't believe the climate would be conducive to a large migration of people to a single trade hub. People don't have to migrate to relocate demand, they simply need to be able to be in a place where purchasing something and setting up a contract is possible, which can even be done with an untrained alt. Demand can also vary on a case by case basis, just because one item is ubiquitous in price doesn't mean I'm willing to overpay for another. Additionally don't doubt the need for high end materials which won't make sense to spread widely when initially imported. T2 ships and mods may have at one point been in scarce use, but that isn't the case now.
The end point remains, people being able to remotely buy decreases market variance and trade profits, which will work to pull the spread as close to the costs to move items as possible.
Quote:To be honest, i'm not really sure to what extent small scale players trade inter-empire. Based on the normalized prices of each trade hub, it would appear that there is not enough profit to be made for small scale trading between empires. Maybe you have some information about this that i don't have. What have i left out? I don't but it seems really presumptuous to assume it doesn't happen.
Quote:This doesn't cap what non-JFers can move, it only caps the JFs. There is no fuel consumption to fly a ship through lowsec to deliver goods to a market. You don't have a fuel overhead. It's all profit. Point taken.
Quote:I don't see why you would think people would relocate over one affected item. And how long do you think it'd take to be reseeded at a better price? I promise, once the price of the item reaches JF viable profits it won't take long before the market is re-saturated. It only has to take long enough to find the item at a better price.[/quote]It's not people concentration that is the issue, it's trade concentration. Trade concentration is already self reinforcing without placing lowsec barriers. Trying to create areas of disadvantage will only concentrate trade further in more advantageous areas. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
146
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 08:02:00 -
[1474] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Sorry to disappoint you (Nah, not really sorry), but Jita IS the only source for a lot of stuff, beginning with moon goo to T2 components, booster gas, T3 production materials, faction and deadspace items over to certain ships and rare minerals. Good luck trying to get that sort of stuff in Amarr or Dodi or Rens for an affordable price, if you can find it at all there. And this is not going to change with this change, quite in contrast, it's only bound to get worse. What about racial faction modules? What will happen to those from Amarr, Gallente and Minmatar? Will people stop using them because everyone is going to live in Caldari space?
What these items will really do is create the climate for consistently profitable cross-empire hauling. (assuming what you're saying is true about moon goo, gas and T3 mats. I know the rest not to be true already.) |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1169
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 08:10:00 -
[1475] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Sorry to disappoint you (Nah, not really sorry), but Jita IS the only source for a lot of stuff, beginning with moon goo to T2 components, booster gas, T3 production materials, faction and deadspace items over to certain ships and rare minerals. Good luck trying to get that sort of stuff in Amarr or Dodi or Rens for an affordable price, if you can find it at all there. And this is not going to change with this change, quite in contrast, it's only bound to get worse. What about racial faction modules? What will happen to those from Amarr, Gallente and Minmatar? Will people stop using them because everyone is going to live in Caldari space? What these items will really do is create the climate for consistently profitable cross-empire hauling. (assuming what you're saying is true about moon goo, gas and T3 mats. I know the rest not to be true already.) People will shift their demand to where prices are lowest, but that doesn't mean living there. In fact it means the opposite unless you are moving to different areas of space for every item you buy. Granted black frog will likely see a boon there, but those who explicitly deal in trade rather than transport will still have buyers working against them. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
146
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 08:12:00 -
[1476] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:People don't have to migrate to relocate demand, they simply need to be able to be in a place where purchasing something and setting up a contract is possible, which can even be done with an untrained alt. Demand can also vary on a case by case basis, just because one item is ubiquitous in price doesn't mean I'm willing to overpay for another. Additionally don't doubt the need for high end materials which won't make sense to spread widely when initially imported. T2 ships and mods may have at one point been in scarce use, but that isn't the case now.
The end point remains, people being able to remotely buy decreases market variance and trade profits, which will work to pull the spread as close to the costs to move items as possible. So basically what you're saying is that people will buy the stuff they want and haul it themselves? Yes i'm sure there will be some of that happening. However there are also lots of people who'd rather pay more than travel even a few jumps to find what they're looking for. I personally am quite guilty of doing that. If there are goods locally, people will buy them even at a significantly higher price in some cases. This is why this will work.
Quote:I don't but it seems really presumptuous to assume it doesn't happen. Not that it doesn't happen, but that it doesn't happen frequently enough to really impact anyone.
Quote:It only has to take long enough to find the item at a better price. If Jita has something at a much lower price that I want to buy now, it doesn't matter if the price in rens will be closer to it a week form now or even an hour from now.. Additionally it's not people concentration that is the issue, it's trade concentration. Trade concentration is already self reinforcing without placing lowsec barriers. Trying to create areas of disadvantage will only concentrate trade further in more advantageous areas. Would it be more viable to purchase something in another empire for a cheaper price and haul it to yourself in your empire? Well if it was a high end item, like Dead space, faction, pirate, officer modules yeah i can see that. But not for everyday items like Tech 2 modules or minerals. One time purchases don't really impact trade hubs. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
146
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 08:20:00 -
[1477] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:People will shift their demand to where prices are lowest, but that doesn't mean living there. In fact it means the opposite unless you are moving to different areas of space for every item you buy. Granted black frog will likely see a boon there, but those who explicitly deal in trade rather than transport will still have buyers working against them. It seems to me that we agree on what would happen with trade etc, but we disagree on whether it is positive or negative.
Maybe we just see things from different perspectives. If we look at it from the point of view of a completely non-pvper who only buys 1 module at a time for his BS and never loses it. Then yes, the way you see it would probably be true.
But that's not the way things are. People buy lots of things constantly and in bulk. PvPers will have lots of ships fully fitted and ready to go and lose a bunch in a short period of time and need to replace them. There's no way they're going to another empire every time they need to restock their large supply of ships and modules if there is somewhere close to buy from. Even if it is a bit more expensive because it saves time and effort to buy locally. And a lot of people will value the time and effort over isk. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1169
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 08:24:00 -
[1478] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:So basically what you're saying is that people will buy the stuff they want and haul it themselves? Yes i'm sure there will be some of that happening. However there are also lots of people who'd rather pay more than travel even a few jumps to find what they're looking for. I personally am quite guilty of doing that. If there are goods locally, people will buy them even at a significantly higher price in some cases. This is why this will work. That works for low variances, like the price ubiquity we have now. You want to inflate these variances.
Quote:Not that it doesn't happen, but that it doesn't happen frequently enough to really impact anyone.
[quote]Would it be more viable to purchase something in another empire for a cheaper price and haul it to yourself in your empire? Well if it was a high end item, like Dead space, faction, pirate, officer modules yeah i can see that. But not for everyday items like Tech 2 modules or minerals. One time purchases don't really impact trade hubs. Again that depends on the quantity and variance. When items don't freely flow there tend to be strong variances and I've passed on even common T2 mods for being at a stupid price point in a hub. Even T1 ships of any appreciable cost can be worth looking for, or anything purchased in large amounts. Actually, for saving myself from having to move it personally I'd probably be more inclined to seek price incentives than now on at least ship purchases. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
485
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 08:42:00 -
[1479] - Quote
All of this is academic if people don't actually want to fly through losec which is pretty muchthe case for most in hisec. If you don't break hisec apart completely then they won't care, just work around it. If you put losec between the hubs they simply won't fly across it. It simply wouldn't increase the number if hisec pilots choosing to fly into losec. Those already willing to do so already will be flying losec, and if it becomes mopre dangerous they will simply switch to using BR's more often.
I really don't see that any effort expended on such an idea would benefit any area. There need to be reasons to enter losec above and beyond those that exist now. Breaking hisec apart wouldn't introduce those reasons, just put losec averse pilots off even more. I would much prefer to see the effort expended on giving more and better incentives to enter losec. |
King Fu Hostile
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
116
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 08:46:00 -
[1480] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:All of this is academic if people don't actually want to fly through losec which is pretty muchthe case for most in hisec. If you don't break hisec apart completely then they won't care, just work around it. If you put losec between the hubs they simply won't fly across it. It simply wouldn't increase the number if hisec pilots choosing to fly into losec. Those already willing to do so already will be flying losec, and if it becomes mopre dangerous they will simply switch to using BR's more often.
I really don't see that any effort expended on such an idea would benefit any area. There need to be reasons to enter losec above and beyond those that exist now. Breaking hisec apart wouldn't introduce those reasons, just put losec averse pilots off even more. I would much prefer to see the effort expended on giving more and better incentives to enter losec.
Game design doesn't revolve around your imaginary hisec folk
|
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1171
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 08:48:00 -
[1481] - Quote
King Fu Hostile wrote:Game design doesn't revolve around your imaginary hisec folk If highsec folk were imaginary, so would be the affects of this change.
|
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
146
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 08:54:00 -
[1482] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:All of this is academic if people don't actually want to fly through losec which is pretty muchthe case for most in hisec. If you don't break hisec apart completely then they won't care, just work around it. If you put losec between the hubs they simply won't fly across it. It simply wouldn't increase the number if hisec pilots choosing to fly into losec. Those already willing to do so already will be flying losec, and if it becomes mopre dangerous they will simply switch to using BR's more often.
I really don't see that any effort expended on such an idea would benefit any area. There need to be reasons to enter losec above and beyond those that exist now. Breaking hisec apart wouldn't introduce those reasons, just put losec averse pilots off even more. I would much prefer to see the effort expended on giving more and better incentives to enter losec. All of my eve career low sec has been nothing more than just a middle ground between high sec and null sec. The only time i fly through low sec is when i'm traveling between the two. Which doesn't really happen that often.
What does happen often is people flying from high sec to high sec. And if there was opportunity to be gained then i too would fly from high sec through low sec to high sec. Because why not just let Low sec continue to be a transitional area only with greater utilization. In this way that is stated in the original post it would create a very dynamic and diverse atmosphere in low sec and in high sec. Two of the very most stagnant areas in eve.
People don't fly to low sec now because there's no reason to. Give them reason to and they will. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
146
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 08:56:00 -
[1483] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:King Fu Hostile wrote:Game design doesn't revolve around your imaginary hisec folk If highsec folk were imaginary, so would be the affects of this change. What he means is, the high sec folk he's referring to are imaginary. Not high sec folk in general. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1171
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 08:59:00 -
[1484] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:King Fu Hostile wrote:Game design doesn't revolve around your imaginary hisec folk If highsec folk were imaginary, so would be the affects of this change. What he means is, the high sec folk he's referring to are imaginary. Not high sec folk in general. His imaginary highsec folk are the ones not wanting to go through lowsec, or to put it differently, the ones who your ideal trade profits would come from. If no one has lowsec aversion, the idea becomes meaningless as it would have minimal affect on travel. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
485
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 09:02:00 -
[1485] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:
People don't fly to low sec now because there's no reason to. Give them reason to and they will.
My point though is that those who won't fly losec now wouldn't do in future either, they would simply resent the change and work around it or quit if that didn't suit them. I agree entirely that losec feels transitional but it isn't. I operate their mostly for my profits and many others do too for FW, PI etc. The reason why hisec folks don't use losec is because it is more time intensive to do so. If a player has the time required for losec then why bother? Just go straight to null for better profits.
There needs to be some better reason to live and play in losec. For this end I love the idea of CONCORD as a career option in losec as defined in another thread. If players begin to prvide greater security inlosec through PvP then more players will move there to live which then requires more capsuleer police etc but also increases higher value targets for pirates with consequently greater risk to those pirates. This is the kind of change that losec needs, not more space but more reason to be in the existing space. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
146
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 09:03:00 -
[1486] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Erutpar Ambient wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:King Fu Hostile wrote:Game design doesn't revolve around your imaginary hisec folk If highsec folk were imaginary, so would be the affects of this change. What he means is, the high sec folk he's referring to are imaginary. Not high sec folk in general. His imaginary highsec folk are the ones not wanting to go through lowsec, or to put it differently, the ones who your ideal trade profits would come from. If no one has lowsec aversion, the idea becomes meaningless as it would have minimal affect on travel. High sec folk are not all lowsec adverse. Many of them just lack reason to go to low sec. As do most people in eve most of the time. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
146
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 09:08:00 -
[1487] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Erutpar Ambient wrote:
People don't fly to low sec now because there's no reason to. Give them reason to and they will.
My point though is that those who won't fly losec now wouldn't do in future either, they would simply resent the change and work around it or quit if that didn't suit them. I agree entirely that losec feels transitional but it isn't. I operate their mostly for my profits and many others do too for FW, PI etc. The reason why hisec folks don't use losec is because it is more time intensive to do so. If a player has the time required for losec then why bother? Just go straight to null for better profits. There needs to be some better reason to live and play in losec. For this end I love the idea of CONCORD as a career option in losec as defined in another thread. If players begin to prvide greater security inlosec through PvP then more players will move there to live which then requires more capsuleer police etc but also increases higher value targets for pirates with consequently greater risk to those pirates. This is the kind of change that losec needs, not more space but more reason to be in the existing space. I don't believe it will ever work out with lowsec continuing to be just an aside place. It really needs to be at the center of the game to exist. Seriously what is the point of low sec (excluding the recent revamp of FW).
And the people that quit because of this kind of change. They were going to eventually anyways, either from getting bored of leveling their raven or getting suicide ganked and loosing all of their officer modules they worked their whole career to save up for. For the new people that join the game, this will be in their face, and they can't avoid it. It will be a much better representation of what EVE is really about. Risk and Rewards. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
485
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 09:16:00 -
[1488] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote: I don't believe it will ever work out with lowsec continuing to be just an aside place. It really needs to be at the center of the game to exist. Seriously what is the point of low sec (excluding the recent revamp of FW).
And the people that quit because of this kind of change. They were going to eventually anyways, either from getting bored of leveling their raven or getting suicide ganked and loosing all of their officer modules they worked their whole career to save up for. For the new people that join the game, this will be in their face, and they can't avoid it. It will be a much better representation of what EVE is really about. Risk and Rewards.
I agree entirely about losec being the centre, the fulcrum between hisec and null with WH sitting as a 4th dimension outside the other areas. For it to be more populated it needs to be policed but I wouldn't want hisec style CONCORD there, leave that for hisec. Players policing the area would make a real difference *if* they can be enticed into doing so as a viable alternative career to piracy. Make them empire privateers much like Britain did with Francis Drake and such. CONCORD agree to let them loot any ship destroyed alongside paying out bounties etc on pirates.
I really hope that Eve isn't just about PvP combat and the twisted representation that ganking and the like present of this. My first view of Eve was of the rich and diverse number of playstyles, curtailing these by nerfing any region, or even constructive coercion of players diminishes the game that is Eve and that would be ultimately bad for the game. |
King Fu Hostile
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
117
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 09:23:00 -
[1489] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Erutpar Ambient wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:King Fu Hostile wrote:Game design doesn't revolve around your imaginary hisec folk If highsec folk were imaginary, so would be the affects of this change. What he means is, the high sec folk he's referring to are imaginary. Not high sec folk in general. His imaginary highsec folk are the ones not wanting to go through lowsec, or to put it differently, the ones who your ideal trade profits would come from. If no one has lowsec aversion, the idea becomes meaningless as it would have minimal affect on travel.
Some people obviously have all sorts of aversions, but in reality these people are minority and most people would just adapt. New kind of culture would develop, bears would learn to traverse lowsec and in the end everyone's gameplay simply got more dimensions.
Well, the ones who'd gain most would be the hiseccers who'd open their minds tbh.
|
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
146
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 09:25:00 -
[1490] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: I agree entirely about losec being the centre, the fulcrum between hisec and null with WH sitting as a 4th dimension outside the other areas. For it to be more populated it needs to be policed but I wouldn't want hisec style CONCORD there, leave that for hisec. Players policing the area would make a real difference *if* they can be enticed into doing so as a viable alternative career to piracy. Make them empire privateers much like Britain did with Francis Drake and such. CONCORD agree to let them loot any ship destroyed alongside paying out bounties etc on pirates.
I really hope that Eve isn't just about PvP combat and the twisted representation that ganking and the like present of this. My first view of Eve was of the rich and diverse number of playstyles, curtailing these by nerfing any region, or even constructive coercion of players diminishes the game that is Eve and that would be ultimately bad for the game.
With this kind of a change, there's bound to be an increase in pirate activity. Because there's going to be places where people will most likely be wanting to cross (the shortest routs). And at the same time other players will know that pirates will probably be camping these places so there would be a sort of back and forth of pirates and anti-pirates. Gankings and counter-gankings. It would be great. And it would definitely go along great with another change i have proposed https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=345662&find=unread
As for the PvP stuff, eve is first and foremost a PvP game. The only time you're safe from any pvp activity is when you're docked up. Unless you're playing the .01 isk game, then even when you're docked up you're playing against other players. This is what eve is. It should be embraced. |
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
519
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 09:26:00 -
[1491] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Sorry to disappoint you (Nah, not really sorry), but Jita IS the only source for a lot of stuff, beginning with moon goo to T2 components, booster gas, T3 production materials, faction and deadspace items over to certain ships and rare minerals. Good luck trying to get that sort of stuff in Amarr or Dodi or Rens for an affordable price, if you can find it at all there. And this is not going to change with this change, quite in contrast, it's only bound to get worse. What about racial faction modules? What will happen to those from Amarr, Gallente and Minmatar? Will people stop using them because everyone is going to live in Caldari space? What these items will really do is create the climate for consistently profitable cross-empire hauling. (assuming what you're saying is true about moon goo, gas and T3 mats. I know the rest not to be true already.)
The racial faction modules will be traded where it the most revenue comes from, not where the most profits are.
And if you really think that this would incite cross-empire hauling, where your profits are consumed by hauling costs or die on the way, you sure have nice lucid dreams.
Erutpar Ambient wrote: High sec folk are not all lowsec adverse. Many of them just lack reason to go to low sec. As do most people in eve most of the time.
And this reason is certainly not going to appear with this kind of change.
However, I have to admit that, if this Low sec came to be, other Low sec areas would lose a lot of appeal and would empty out again, making it easier for me to go there and have my kind of fun in the game, without having to worry too much about PVP and other irritating stuff. So, in a way I am indifferent towards this change. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
485
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 09:37:00 -
[1492] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:With this kind of a change, there's bound to be an increase in pirate activity. Because there's going to be places where people will most likely be wanting to cross (the shortest routs). And at the same time other players will know that pirates will probably be camping these places so there would be a sort of back and forth of pirates and anti-pirates. Gankings and counter-gankings. It would be great. And it would definitely go along great with another change i have proposed https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=345662&find=unread
Here I would point out that people can already make more profit from their time by running through losec from hub to hub now. They don't because they either don't have the time or inclination to do so and nothing would change this for those players. Those players have absolutely no interest in ganking and counter ganking or indeed any form of ship combat PvP. They are in it for the trading PvP, the outmaneuvring an opponent in the market, outproducing the opposition, undercutting and other such isk based skullduggery. Others simply actually like to build and sell things, they enjoy the process of gathering goods, making something else from them and then selling the finished product. Those players know full well they could make more isk from other playstyles and don't care as the other styles don't interest them. This change would simply make those players less likely to bother which can only be a bad thing.
Erutpar Ambient wrote: As for the PvP stuff, eve is first and foremost a PvP game. The only time you're safe from any pvp activity is when you're docked up. Unless you're playing the .01 isk game, then even when you're docked up you're playing against other players. This is what eve is. It should be embraced.
Every action in Eve is pretty much PvP. Grabbing the best rocks before others or simply ignoring them to gather up resources you need from lower end rocks in greater safety are PvP actions. The player using hisec is defeating the objective of the losec player by simply not going there. The losec player can go and defeat the hisec miner objective by ganking him. I regularly sell large investment items above other players in the same region which is again another PvP action as I get the sale I want before they do. I gather PI goods without being shot to bits this defeating the gankers by evading them.
Everything comes down to these small personal victories in Eve and that's what makes it fun. Sometimes I have much more fun breaking through a 10 ship gatecamp in an unarmed ship than if I were to jump in and attack them with a bigger fleet. Othert times if the mood took me I'm sure I could have an equal kick from dropping a fleet on top of the same gatecamp but mostly that isn't my thing. Currently there are a multitude of options for PvP actions, trying to turn everyone towards ship to ship combat is counter-productive. Giving people more reasons to enter combat (which most likely would still be avoided by the combat averse one way or another) is far better than making it the only option to maintain a viable profit. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
146
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 10:04:00 -
[1493] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: Here I would point out that people can already make more profit from their time by running through losec from hub to hub now. They don't because they either don't have the time or inclination to do so and nothing would change this for those players. Those players have absolutely no interest in ganking and counter ganking or indeed any form of ship combat PvP. They are in it for the trading PvP, the outmaneuvring an opponent in the market, outproducing the opposition, undercutting and other such isk based skullduggery. Others simply actually like to build and sell things, they enjoy the process of gathering goods, making something else from them and then selling the finished product. Those players know full well they could make more isk from other playstyles and don't care as the other styles don't interest them. This change would simply make those players less likely to bother which can only be a bad thing.
No amount of time will make up for the risk of going through low sec instead of high sec. That's why that doesn't happen now. Like i said before, Low sec will never be anything as long as it's off to the side. Once it's in the center things will be different. The choice won't be safe or fast, it will be safer or faster (longer route less traveled or shorter route more likely to encounter pirates). Now that is a decision worthy of being made. Safe or fast is not a decision. |
Goatman NotMyFault
NorCorp Shipyards The Predictables
122
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 19:05:00 -
[1494] - Quote
to devide all empires by lowsec, would create a more healty and luctrative trade and remove Jita as a main trading hub for all empires.
As ive mention before, a war betwene the empires that results in closed borders, gates that og offline, will force the usuall traders to think New ways to bring in og aquire goods. And as a bonus to trade, if a big war errupts, the different empires will have an direct impact on the marked, demanding high amounts of ships and equipment.... and the war will be vsible at borderlines, where u see empirefleets clash... even see systems fall and become owned by the victorious empire.
(Even the oh so borring incursions could get a boost, when Sansha makes their move, their effect would be reduces or strangled gate activations, even closed gates.... and reduces sec status for the effected systems.) |
XMaxan
The Legion of X
4
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 19:14:00 -
[1495] - Quote
I can see the reason why this idea would be nice, but I would rather see one or two safe routes left through high sec that take significantly more jumps than a dozen low sec routes.
This prevents the empires from becoming completely isolated while still allowing more pirating options. If you do not want to risk anything take the twenty-five jump route all in high sec, or if you need to get there this week go through the five jump low sec route and have some risk.
Perhaps have a few null sec systems that have even less jumps between empires.
I would not like to see the empires cut off from each other entirely or at least without significant gate support from local armies (not CONCORD). |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
146
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 04:20:00 -
[1496] - Quote
XMaxan wrote:I can see the reason why this idea would be nice, but I would rather see one or two safe routes left through high sec that take significantly more jumps than a dozen low sec routes.
This prevents the empires from becoming completely isolated while still allowing more pirating options. If you do not want to risk anything take the twenty-five jump route all in high sec, or if you need to get there this week go through the five jump low sec route and have some risk.
Perhaps have a few null sec systems that have even less jumps between empires.
I would not like to see the empires cut off from each other entirely or at least without significant gate support from local armies (not CONCORD). This is basically what we have now. And guess what, everyone chooses to go the 25 jump high sec route.
The choice between safe or fast is really not a choice. The choice needs to be between safer or faster meaning there is no perfectly safe route. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
527
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 07:09:00 -
[1497] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:XMaxan wrote:I can see the reason why this idea would be nice, but I would rather see one or two safe routes left through high sec that take significantly more jumps than a dozen low sec routes.
This prevents the empires from becoming completely isolated while still allowing more pirating options. If you do not want to risk anything take the twenty-five jump route all in high sec, or if you need to get there this week go through the five jump low sec route and have some risk.
Perhaps have a few null sec systems that have even less jumps between empires.
I would not like to see the empires cut off from each other entirely or at least without significant gate support from local armies (not CONCORD). This is basically what we have now. And guess what, everyone chooses to go the 25 jump high sec route. The choice between safe or fast is really not a choice. The choice needs to be between safer or faster meaning there is no perfectly safe route.
And how is this (the last paragraph) different from now? |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
486
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 09:00:00 -
[1498] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:XMaxan wrote:I can see the reason why this idea would be nice, but I would rather see one or two safe routes left through high sec that take significantly more jumps than a dozen low sec routes.
This prevents the empires from becoming completely isolated while still allowing more pirating options. If you do not want to risk anything take the twenty-five jump route all in high sec, or if you need to get there this week go through the five jump low sec route and have some risk.
Perhaps have a few null sec systems that have even less jumps between empires.
I would not like to see the empires cut off from each other entirely or at least without significant gate support from local armies (not CONCORD). This is basically what we have now. And guess what, everyone chooses to go the 25 jump high sec route. The choice between safe or fast is really not a choice. The choice needs to be between safer or faster meaning there is no perfectly safe route.
There is no perfectly safe route through hisec. If you believe this then maybe you could prove it by putting 10 PLEX in a t1 hauler and autopiloting it through the trade hub routes. It would be interesting to see how it fared. |
Gejja Tokan
Lighting the blight
5
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 13:09:00 -
[1499] - Quote
Easily the best idea since sliced bread and my thanks to all the people who take time to argue this out: keep fighting the good fight explanation squad. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
150
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 05:18:00 -
[1500] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote: And how is this (the last paragraph) different from now?
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: There is no perfectly safe route through hisec. If you believe this then maybe you could prove it by putting 10 PLEX in a t1 hauler and autopiloting it through the trade hub routes. It would be interesting to see how it fared.
Ok, i'll concede these points, there is no perfectly safe place. However High sec does have a major deterrent to hostility where as low sec has basically none. In high sec you can fly a ship around of sufficiently low cargo value and not get ganked. However in low sec it doesn't matter if you have your cargo over loaded or completely empty, you will still be ganked.
So what i said is still mostly true, if you're hauling within reason of course. The fact is that you have a choice between very very safe and slow, or very very unsafe and fast. It's like the choice is jump off a waterfall to get down quick or walk around the safe way. That's about how much difference there is in the choice viability as of right now.
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: For this idea to work (in the sense of force people into losec) would require hisec to be broken apart entirely. That would utterly destroy a large chunk of the player bases chosen style of play. There must be a good reason why CCP hasn't implemented this change (it is after all a simple database change to amend system security levels).
Lets also consider what happens to empires when they are cut off from one another by hostile forces. Consider WWII with the great european empires at each others throats. Once the sealanes were a submarine free for all what happened to trade in those empires? Did it suddenly flourish as a few enterprising merchants risked all to get across through those channels? Or did it take a huge investment in naval power to even get a small percentage of those goods safely through? Guess what happened to those old empires as trade got ground into the dust...
What play style is this that contains a "large chunk" of the player base that lives solely in high sec space that requires constant travel between all the empires? Who are these people???
Well, unlike WWII, the Empires in eve are just a fantasy place that actually do not consume any goods. The Empires are not impacted at all by player trade. If they were then the Caldari would have taken over most of the game. |
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
491
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 08:58:00 -
[1501] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:
Ok, i'll concede these points, there is no perfectly safe place. However High sec does have a major deterrent to hostility where as low sec has basically none. In high sec you can fly a ship around of sufficiently low cargo value and not get ganked. However in low sec it doesn't matter if you have your cargo over loaded or completely empty, you will still be ganked.
So what i said is still mostly true, if you're hauling within reason of course. The fact is that you have a choice between very very safe and slow, or very very unsafe and fast. It's like the choice is jump off a waterfall to get down quick or walk around the safe way. That's about how much difference there is in the choice viability as of right now.
CONCORD are no deterrent to ganking as they kill the gankers *after* the fight, it just means you can fly empty haulers place to place relatively safely.
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: my blurb...
What play style is this that contains a "large chunk" of the player base that lives solely in high sec space that requires constant travel between all the empires? Who are these people???
Well, unlike WWII, the Empires in eve are just a fantasy place that actually do not consume any goods. The Empires are not impacted at all by player trade. If they were then the Caldari would have taken over most of the game. [/quote]
The large chunk is the group of players that don't have the time or inclination to dedicate to nullsec 'yes sir, no sir' games or have no wish to be answerable to others. It is those players who follow a tradoing playstyle whcih even if they don't ever leave station they still impact them game by moving goods around, affecting goods prices, generating sales for the goods they buy to sell on later. There will be many other hisec playstyles no doubt that I've missed but I very seriously doubt that the bulk of Eve players (the players not the myriad alts) who live in null/losec.
My example of WWII was oversimplified granted, but the point remains the same. If you choke trade between the empires then the empires will die. losec haulers *won't* step up and pick up the slack, those willing to do so simply couldn't cover the volume of freight. The folks not willing to fly losec never will no matter what.
The real benefit for losec would come from the constructive ideas presented in this thread other than breaking hisec. Players need to *want* to enter losec. That can only be changed by giving incentive to do so that players choose to follow. The desire to enter losec is a mindset thing, not a game mechanic. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
152
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 01:17:00 -
[1502] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: CONCORD are no deterrent to ganking as they kill the gankers *after* the fight, it just means you can fly empty haulers place to place relatively safely.
Actually it is a deterrent and a limiting factor to ganking in general. Basically, it's going to deter people from ganking without making a profit. And in the same way it will limit people who decide to gank without profit based on their level of expendable assets. This does not exist in low sec. There is no deterrent in Low sec at all and as such traveling through low sec has so much more risk that it is not a proper balance to the time it saves.
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: The large chunk is the group of players that don't have the time or inclination to dedicate to nullsec 'yes sir, no sir' games or have no wish to be answerable to others. It is those players who follow a tradoing playstyle whcih even if they don't ever leave station they still impact them game by moving goods around, affecting goods prices, generating sales for the goods they buy to sell on later. There will be many other hisec playstyles no doubt that I've missed but I very seriously doubt that the bulk of Eve players (the players not the myriad alts) who live in null/losec.
So this "large chunk of the player base" who's "play style will be destroyed" is everyone is high sec? Is that what you're telling me? Where do you get the idea that this change will "destroy" the play style of everyone in high sec? Do mission runners Need to travel between empires to run missions? Do miners need to travel between empires to mine? Do Haulers and scanners need to travel between empires to haul and scan? Do Incursion runners need to travel through empires... yes. Incursions are the only play style that require mobility. And they're such a small, yet wealthy portion of the high sec demographic that it really doesn't bother me if their play style is infringed upon.
Oh wait you're saying traders who don't leave the station? How large of a demographic is this? Why would they need stuff moved around, they only play games with the value of currently available items. They won't be impacted at all...... What are you smoking??!?
Quote: My example of WWII was oversimplified granted, but the point remains the same. If you choke trade between the empires then the empires will die. losec haulers *won't* step up and pick up the slack, those willing to do so simply couldn't cover the volume of freight. The folks not willing to fly losec never will no matter what.
Even if that was true, which it's not and can see by the mere fact that people live in low/null/wh space for the profits, local production will also be incentivised. Local production is the whole idea for the upcoming Industry changes. The maximum anything will be worth is the cost to produce it locally. With the exception of things you can't produce locally.
Quote: The real benefit for losec would come from the constructive ideas presented in this thread other than breaking hisec. Players need to *want* to enter losec. That can only be changed by giving incentive to do so that players choose to follow. The desire to enter losec is a mindset thing, not a game mechanic.
Breaking high sec apart doesn't "break hisec". People will still have large swaths of continuous high sec to fly around. By putting low sec between empires it does provide much greater incentive to travel through low sec than we have now. People will still need to *want* to enter low sec, but with this there are reasons to do it. Currently the only incentives are FW and just to see what's there. There is no driving factor for/to lowsec. And by surrounding low sec with null, that makes low sec effectively the path to nowhere.
Think of it like this, what other games can you travel from town to town in complete safety(with out at least having been there first)? Basically EVE just has one town, High sec, and there's really no incentive to leave. |
Bira Fortuna
CERROKA Corporation
0
|
Posted - 2014.05.24 16:55:00 -
[1503] - Quote
Hmmm what an interesting idea.
Big enough for another expansion.Cuz you forgot that Eve is living world so it can and shouldl adapt for it somehow.(I mean the CCP guys can handle it somehow )
I see how shipcrafting NPC corps make develop new kinds of ships, haul frigs (so to fast for catch) for beginners with extra huge cargo for frig class and whole new class Jugernaut (like that name) with is some kind of semi-freighter (for advanced players) witch have smaller cargo then freighter but larger then ordinary hauler and have +1 warp, lots of drones, cloak or something what makes them simply ungankable by one pirate frig, so it must be organized small gank.
I see new factions of NPC mercenary corps (so new ships?tech?) wich will also gate camp for period of time (or will be trigged when someone start shooting) and kill all criminals they see, or attack everyone who start shooting first. As pirate factions have they way how to kill you (webing,energ drains...) they shall have theyr ways hot will they try to save you (caldari mercs repair your shields, amars armor, galante damp those who attacking you, minmatars makes you warp scramble free, or some kind of support). Sou you have 10%?30%?50%? chance to survive even if pirates will be there cuz they must handle these mercs somehow or clear the gate first. And if pirate gank camp gate for too long, each wave of mercs can be stronger and stronger until they beat/make pirates flee, then guard gate for couple of minutes and disapear etc.
Why merc should be there you ask? Cuz it gives work to Eves citizens, they will see bounty on capsulers, empires wanna safe trade and transport between empires (and no, they wont send imperial fleets cuz its like if North korea send army to demilitarized zone).
How to make low-sec there? I dunno...rebellion?rise of new pirate faction?New alien-like race who came through WH from "somehwere"? (and bring new missons,ships, blablabla) sleepers? , some fenomena of strange new gas that expand space (new stuffs to explore, harvest...)?
So if CCP wanna make this idea real, they will, cuz Eve will evolve |
Spacemover
Cathouse Club The Kadeshi
4
|
Posted - 2014.05.25 18:13:00 -
[1504] - Quote
simple thing: the empire factiosn are at war with each other. thats the idea of factionwar.
so ther should be borders guarded by heavy npc forces and "dead system aka lowsec" in between.
right now it-Ķs like russia sitting next to the usa and both looking the border and telling you "there is a boarder? we couldn-Ķt care less" empire is right now just oone big blue muffin sitting in a ring of nullsec (no matter if donut or no donut) |
ugh zug
98
|
Posted - 2014.05.25 21:47:00 -
[1505] - Quote
OP idea, +1
not only would this bring more pew pew and tears but shake up the markets from their current stagnation by causing shortages and offering locals the chance to actually produce goods and make some serious bank. Want me to shut up? Remove content from my post, 15 bil. Remove my content from a thread I have started 30bil. |
w3ak3stl1nk
Hedion University Amarr Empire
43
|
Posted - 2014.05.26 01:18:00 -
[1506] - Quote
I think a better idea is have incursions do a temporary low sec any system it exist in for more than 48 hours. Might add variety to the static alliance gate camp mania you are all searching for. Like a storyline of incursions scrambling concord communications or something. Still should not allow POS but everything else like low sec.. I just think there are better forced pvp options. And still block cyno beacons... |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
155
|
Posted - 2014.05.27 00:29:00 -
[1507] - Quote
w3ak3stl1nk wrote:I think a better idea is have incursions do a temporary low sec any system it exist in for more than 48 hours. Might add variety to the static alliance gate camp mania you are all searching for. Like a storyline of incursions scrambling concord communications or something. Still should not allow POS but everything else like low sec.. I just think there are better forced pvp options. And still block cyno beacons... ??????
I really don't understand what you're saying at all....
However, if you're saying add more incursions then I'll have to say, that is a terrible Idea. Incursions are a terrible game feature. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
512
|
Posted - 2014.05.27 08:55:00 -
[1508] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:w3ak3stl1nk wrote:I think a better idea is have incursions do a temporary low sec any system it exist in for more than 48 hours. Might add variety to the static alliance gate camp mania you are all searching for. Like a storyline of incursions scrambling concord communications or something. Still should not allow POS but everything else like low sec.. I just think there are better forced pvp options. And still block cyno beacons... ?????? I really don't understand what you're saying at all.... However, if you're saying add more incursions then I'll have to say, that is a terrible Idea. Incursions are a terrible game feature.
I think he meant have incursions turn the system into losec temporarily So no CONCORD response etc
|
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
156
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 19:34:00 -
[1509] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Erutpar Ambient wrote:w3ak3stl1nk wrote:I think a better idea is have incursions do a temporary low sec any system it exist in for more than 48 hours. Might add variety to the static alliance gate camp mania you are all searching for. Like a storyline of incursions scrambling concord communications or something. Still should not allow POS but everything else like low sec.. I just think there are better forced pvp options. And still block cyno beacons... ?????? I really don't understand what you're saying at all.... However, if you're saying add more incursions then I'll have to say, that is a terrible Idea. Incursions are a terrible game feature. I think he meant have incursions turn the system into losec temporarily So no CONCORD response etc Ah, yeah, ok
Well i don't like any mechanic that will change high sec to low sec in any way. That would actually have the potential to Force someone into low sec by dumping low sec right on top of them.
Why don't we just move all Incursions out of high sec and double them up in low sec. In fact that makes more sense then just having them randomly in the middle of high sec space. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
160
|
Posted - 2014.06.01 21:12:00 -
[1510] - Quote
With a change like this, maybe we can change other mechanics that could use some updating.
For instance: War Dec Revamp
If you want to own POCOs or POS' in empire space you have to register your corp/alliance with the respective empire of the space you want to use(requires certain level of faction standing). Only registered Corps are able to be the non-consensual target of a War Declaration and it only applies in the empire of the specified faction. Also all FW corps will automatically be "registered" with their faction.
Any structures anchored in Empire space that are not registered with the faction in control of the space are free targets to anyone. (including offline POS', haha 2 birds 1 stone)
This means War Decs wouldn't be able to be used to grief noob corps. Their purpose would be to fight for assets in high sec space. And if your corp can't handle it, you can always move to another Empire where the wardec is not in effect.
Of course there will still be suicide ganking for anyone that's a big proponent of non-consensual pvp. And of course for RvB there can still be mutual forever wars. |
|
Regnag Leppod
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
17
|
Posted - 2014.06.08 23:00:00 -
[1511] - Quote
+1 to the OP's idea.
It's a simple change, but would have a big impact on how the cluster functions. |
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
1149
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 05:47:00 -
[1512] - Quote
I've changed my mind. This should be done. It is just too easy to move around highsec. Stronger regional hubs would be good for the game - more diversity. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
169
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 23:00:00 -
[1513] - Quote
Zappity wrote:I've changed my mind. awesome!
Even more awesome to admit it! |
Barry Filler
Heuristic Industrial And Development
7
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 23:32:00 -
[1514] - Quote
I support |
Hakaari Inkuran
State War Academy Caldari State
25
|
Posted - 2014.06.13 00:22:00 -
[1515] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:w3ak3stl1nk wrote:I think a better idea is have incursions do a temporary low sec any system it exist in for more than 48 hours. Might add variety to the static alliance gate camp mania you are all searching for. Like a storyline of incursions scrambling concord communications or something. Still should not allow POS but everything else like low sec.. I just think there are better forced pvp options. And still block cyno beacons... ?????? I really don't understand what you're saying at all.... However, if you're saying add more incursions then I'll have to say, that is a terrible Idea. Incursions are a terrible game feature. I actually agree. After spending some time lurking common incursion channels I have to say I hate what incursions do to about 10% of the EVE player base. Or whatever the number is. |
ashley Eoner
310
|
Posted - 2014.06.13 03:57:00 -
[1516] - Quote
Hakaari Inkuran wrote:Erutpar Ambient wrote:w3ak3stl1nk wrote:I think a better idea is have incursions do a temporary low sec any system it exist in for more than 48 hours. Might add variety to the static alliance gate camp mania you are all searching for. Like a storyline of incursions scrambling concord communications or something. Still should not allow POS but everything else like low sec.. I just think there are better forced pvp options. And still block cyno beacons... ?????? I really don't understand what you're saying at all.... However, if you're saying add more incursions then I'll have to say, that is a terrible Idea. Incursions are a terrible game feature. I actually agree. After spending some time lurking common incursion channels I have to say I hate what incursions do to about 10% of the EVE player base. Or whatever the number is. What you say is completely absurd. Incursions do nothing to people other then slightly inconvenience those in the area. Your complaint is with the eve player base in general. Incursions have nothing to do with how people are in this game.
What is the point of this idea? This change will not produce magical gatecamp fun. It'll just result in less movement of people which will result in large areas of highsec being useless. I guess that's a great thing if you're a ganker as you won't have to put forth as much effort to find targets. For the rest of the population it'll just mean a move to the populated faction. |
ViRtUoZone
0ne Percent. Odin's Call
25
|
Posted - 2014.06.13 04:15:00 -
[1517] - Quote
Lets come up with more and more ideas to slow down the economy and continue to build the inflation that CCP is trying so desperately to get rid of! Remember when drakes were GOOD and only cost 30mil? Boy those were the times. |
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
1151
|
Posted - 2014.06.13 04:36:00 -
[1518] - Quote
ViRtUoZone wrote:Lets come up with more and more ideas to slow down the economy and continue to build the inflation that CCP is trying so desperately to get rid of! Remember when drakes were GOOD and only cost 30mil? Boy those were the times. You don't know what you are talking about. EVE's economy deflated during the last year. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
170
|
Posted - 2014.06.13 06:54:00 -
[1519] - Quote
ashley Eoner wrote: What is the point of this idea? This change will not produce magical gatecamp fun. It'll just result in less movement of people which will result in large areas of highsec being useless. I guess that's a great thing if you're a ganker as you won't have to put forth as much effort to find targets. For the rest of the population it'll just mean a move to the populated faction.
Hmmm, i think you have the wrong idea. We don't want there to be lots of islands of high sec in a sea of low sec. We want there to be the 4 Empires complete as they are, but each one separated from each other by low sec. So yes high sec will lose it's current, what, 99%? continuity?
About ganking: Yes, this may increase ganking in low sec. But maybe it will take some of the heat off of high sec. In one instance the ability for high sec ganking group (i.e. thecode or whatever) their mobility will be hindered a bit as well. So if they're primarily in one empire, the other empires should be at least slightly safer. But yes, low sec may have more targets with a change like this. But it's a good thing for pvp areas to have traffic and pvp. Maybe more positive pvp encounters will happen where it's someone looking for a fight getting a fight from a ganker or gatecamper.
Do you you really believe everyone living in minmatar space will move to caldari space because of this change? Do you believe gallente inhabitants will move to caldari space? Do you really truely believe anyone from Amarr space will move to caldari space even though Amarr players are the only ones with any measurable sense of nationality?
Maybe you should think a bit more about the plausibility of the effects you foresee.
ViRtUoZone wrote:Lets come up with more and more ideas to slow down the economy and continue to build the inflation that CCP is trying so desperately to get rid of! Remember when drakes were GOOD and only cost 30mil? Boy those were the times. How is this supposed to drive up inflation? I guess if more ships get killed in general then there will be a lot more Insurance pay outs and in turn a lot of isk generated into the game. But otherwise i don't quite see it. If you're talking about the relative cost of goods, well you're in luck! This change should have basically zero effect on mineral based commodities (such as drakes) but there will probably be noticeable price shift on non-local materials.
It's not too scary of an idea. |
Barry Filler
Heuristic Industrial And Development
7
|
Posted - 2014.06.13 11:27:00 -
[1520] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:[quote=ashley Eoner] How is this supposed to drive up inflation? I guess if more ships get killed in general then there will be a lot more Insurance pay outs and in turn a lot of isk generated into the game. But otherwise i don't quite see it. If you're talking about the relative cost of goods, well you're in luck! This change should have basically zero effect on mineral based commodities (such as drakes) but there will probably be noticeable price shift on non-local materials.
It's not too scary of an idea.
Inflation could happen because of the slight decentralization in trade. Jita dictates prices more than any other place in EvE, and if you did surround every empire space with low sec we would have 4 big trade hubs instead of one super. That would mean 4 times less undercutting of price. Less competition = more profit
Also more ships would blow up and that would drive the mineral prices up slightly. |
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
564
|
Posted - 2014.06.13 11:43:00 -
[1521] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:
Do you you really believe everyone living in minmatar space will move to caldari space because of this change? Do you believe gallente inhabitants will move to caldari space? Do you really truely believe anyone from Amarr space will move to caldari space even though Amarr players are the only ones with any measurable sense of nationality?
Actually I do believe that most players would move to the largest current trade centre. Capsuleers are intrinsically lazy and will simply run missions etc wherever is the easiest to refit and rearm. This means that the trade in ships and weapons will also be concentrated here. The only trade crossing the losec regions between the hisec islands (that's exactly what they would be) would be in BR's taking the more unique racial gear across that region. Even then it would probably be a few runs across the 3-4 systems of losec to drop the goods off at the nearest hisec area in a freighter for the last bit. Would I risk a freighter bringing lots of stuff through losec in one go? Hell no, I'd make a few quick runs with a BR instead and the gatecamps would likely never even see me
If this was a good idea CCP would have made this change a looong time ago I think. That they haven't says it all. They seem to be taking the approach of introducing more content to losec to draw both people from hisec and null into the region (worked for me as I no run combat anoms in losec where I didn't before). I entirely agree with this approach as it appeals to the % of players in hisec who are *willing* to go through losec. Those who are not simply will not in any circumstance. |
Barry Filler
Heuristic Industrial And Development
7
|
Posted - 2014.06.13 11:46:00 -
[1522] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Erutpar Ambient wrote:
Do you you really believe everyone living in minmatar space will move to caldari space because of this change? Do you believe gallente inhabitants will move to caldari space? Do you really truely believe anyone from Amarr space will move to caldari space even though Amarr players are the only ones with any measurable sense of nationality?
Actually I do believe that most players would move to the largest current trade centre. Capsuleers are intrinsically lazy and will simply run missions etc wherever is the easiest to refit and rearm. This means that the trade in ships and weapons will also be concentrated here. The only trade crossing the losec regions between the hisec islands (that's exactly what they would be) would be in BR's taking the more unique racial gear across that region. Even then it would probably be a few runs across the 3-4 systems of losec to drop the goods off at the nearest hisec area in a freighter for the last bit. Would I risk a freighter bringing lots of stuff through losec in one go? Hell no, I'd make a few quick runs with a BR instead and the gatecamps would likely never even see me If this was a good idea CCP would have made this change a looong time ago I think. That they haven't says it all. They seem to be taking the approach of introducing more content to losec to draw both people from hisec and null into the region (worked for me as I no run combat anoms in losec where I didn't before). I entirely agree with this approach as it appeals to the % of players in hisec who are *willing* to go through losec. Those who are not simply will not in any circumstance.
+1 CCP would need to make each Empire more unique first to counter this problem. |
ashley Eoner
310
|
Posted - 2014.06.13 22:32:00 -
[1523] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:ashley Eoner wrote: What is the point of this idea? This change will not produce magical gatecamp fun. It'll just result in less movement of people which will result in large areas of highsec being useless. I guess that's a great thing if you're a ganker as you won't have to put forth as much effort to find targets. For the rest of the population it'll just mean a move to the populated faction.
Hmmm, i think you have the wrong idea. We don't want there to be lots of islands of high sec in a sea of low sec. We want there to be the 4 Empires complete as they are, but each one separated from each other by low sec. So yes high sec will lose it's current, what, 99%? continuity? About ganking: Yes, this may increase ganking in low sec. But maybe it will take some of the heat off of high sec. In one instance the ability for high sec ganking group (i.e. thecode or whatever) their mobility will be hindered a bit as well. So if they're primarily in one empire, the other empires should be at least slightly safer. But yes, low sec may have more targets with a change like this. But it's a good thing for pvp areas to have traffic and pvp. Maybe more positive pvp encounters will happen where it's someone looking for a fight getting a fight from a ganker or gatecamper. Do you you really believe everyone living in minmatar space will move to caldari space because of this change? Do you believe gallente inhabitants will move to caldari space? Do you really truely believe anyone from Amarr space will move to caldari space even though Amarr players are the only ones with any measurable sense of nationality? Maybe you should think a bit more about the plausibility of the effects you foresee. ViRtUoZone wrote:Lets come up with more and more ideas to slow down the economy and continue to build the inflation that CCP is trying so desperately to get rid of! Remember when drakes were GOOD and only cost 30mil? Boy those were the times. How is this supposed to drive up inflation? I guess if more ships get killed in general then there will be a lot more Insurance pay outs and in turn a lot of isk generated into the game. But otherwise i don't quite see it. If you're talking about the relative cost of goods, well you're in luck! This change should have basically zero effect on mineral based commodities (such as drakes) but there will probably be noticeable price shift on non-local materials. It's not too scary of an idea. You're not even responding to what I said. I have no idea how you got ganking and lowsec together as there is no such thing as a gank in lowsec...
Yeah I believe they will be forced to move as the smaller markets shrivel up due to the majority of the players being located in the jita/amarr areas. People are inherently lazy and they will move to the cheapest market area. The lack of SOE mission areas and Jita being the main trade hub will assure that the serious mission runners are located in Caldari space. Amarr space will probably be fine as it's a primary target of incursions. |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2393
|
Posted - 2014.06.14 01:06:00 -
[1524] - Quote
The new industry changes would assure there would be no super hubs if this change occurred. Pretty sure the modulation of 14% cheaper goods would draw players to other regions of space. -á --á |
M1k3y Koontz
Thorn Project Surely You're Joking
583
|
Posted - 2014.06.14 01:11:00 -
[1525] - Quote
ashley Eoner wrote: Yeah I believe they will be forced to move as the smaller markets shrivel up due to the majority of the players being located in the jita/amarr areas. People are inherently lazy and they will move to the cheapest market area. The lack of SOE mission areas and Jita being the main trade hub will assure that the serious mission runners are located in Caldari space. Amarr space will probably be fine as it's a primary target of incursions.
There are also SOE agents in Minmatar and Amarr space. Mission runners would continue to run missions for whoever they currently are, they wouldn't change simply because they need a cloaky hauler to sell their low volume goods at whichever market they would get the highest price at.
Additionally there are trade hubs in each of the 4 empires, they would grow, not shrink, if the empires were separated, as they would be more valuable as an easy place to get commonplace modules (T2s/Meta 4s). Faction/deadspace mods would likely still center around Jita, but for a small market this is inevitable, and that's how it is now. How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp. |
ashley Eoner
310
|
Posted - 2014.06.14 01:54:00 -
[1526] - Quote
M1k3y Koontz wrote:ashley Eoner wrote: Yeah I believe they will be forced to move as the smaller markets shrivel up due to the majority of the players being located in the jita/amarr areas. People are inherently lazy and they will move to the cheapest market area. The lack of SOE mission areas and Jita being the main trade hub will assure that the serious mission runners are located in Caldari space. Amarr space will probably be fine as it's a primary target of incursions.
There are also SOE agents in Minmatar and Amarr space. Mission runners would continue to run missions for whoever they currently are, they wouldn't change simply because they need a cloaky hauler to sell their low volume goods at whichever market they would get the highest price at. Additionally there are trade hubs in each of the 4 empires, they would grow, not shrink, if the empires were separated, as they would be more valuable as an easy place to get commonplace modules (T2s/Meta 4s). Faction/deadspace mods would likely still center around Jita, but for a small market this is inevitable, and that's how it is now. Lanngisi sends you 120something AU to go to barkrik so few people use that one. Gicodel is distribution which is horrible isk per hour.
The ones that are used the most are Osmon and Apanake. Osmon is in Caldari territory furthering my earlier statement. Apanake is in Amarr territory which also furthers my earlier statements.
The issue though is that low volume goods are not guns ammo etc. The majority of goods that mission runners and such use are bulky and low priced. With such a change they'll be bulky and high priced in two of the areas.
Ever mined? There's no doubt that amarr and caldari space are far more populated with everyone including miners. With far fewer miners Minmatar and gallente space would see price increases. Once again minerals are a bulky normally low cost item that you can't transport enough of in BRs.
So what you will see is a slow transition as the playerbase moves to Amarr and Caldari space for the cheaper prices and more availability. Who's going to move nestors and such to Minmatar Gallente space?
Meanwhile newbies who join minmatar and gallente will either be stuck, quit or move to the more populated areas through a death dive in lowsec.
There would have to be a massive re-balancing of the way empire space is setup and that re-balance would just result in four copies of what we already have...
EDIT : WHat do you hope to achieve with this? I've seen nothing but assertions that it'll "be better" or "a good idea". What do you think will be the positive results of this? |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
172
|
Posted - 2014.06.14 06:30:00 -
[1527] - Quote
ashley Eoner wrote:
Ever mined? There's no doubt that amarr and caldari space are far more populated with everyone including miners. With far fewer miners Minmatar and gallente space would see price increases. Once again minerals are a bulky normally low cost item that you can't transport enough of in BRs.
So what you will see is a slow transition as the playerbase moves to Amarr and Caldari space for the cheaper prices and more availability.
I guess you don't really understand how markets work. First of all, the value of something is only as great as what people are willing to spend on it. If you have a market full of extra expensive minerals and nobody buys them, then either you drop the price or you hang on to them for no profit. Second, if a place exists where the price of an item, such as minerals, does have a higher selling point, then isn't that going to attract more miners to be able to make a higher premium on their work? And by that eventually saturating and lowering the price point on the market.
And about your claim that caldari space is more populated with miners.... You do realize that the rats in caldari space use ECM and is thus the worst place to mine (if you spend any time afk or browsing while you mine). I do know that plenty of Gallente space is very saturated. Believe it or not, miner saturation is not a good thing for miners. If i knew that another area had less saturation and a working market, i'd be there in a heart beat.
Quote: Who's going to move nestors and such to Minmatar Gallente space?
The nestor is your example? Do nestors move in jita or amarr at all anyways? I don't think there's going to be many people who are put out by not having a nestor available at a nearby trade hub.
Quote: EDIT : WHat do you hope to achieve with this? I've seen nothing but assertions that it'll "be better" or "a good idea". What do you think will be the positive results of this?
This change will have lots of positive impacts. First, destabilizing the markets is the first and most important effect.
With that hauling will be given some life. Currently all hauling is, is saving up for a freighter and then moving larges volumes of things from one trade hub to another for small profits. Which of course is super boring causing a lot of people to just auto pilot it resulting in the climate of freighter ganking we have now. With the destabilized markets, there should be plenty of opportunity to find common things in one market that are at a premium in another thus giving a higher profit ceiling to the profession.
Then, with the increased traffic, low sec would be given some life. Currently low sec is just an out of the way place with very little to do, and the mechanics are not very good there either (they need a revamp for sure). With a low sec barrier between each empire there will not be a reason for people to go into low sec. Currently it's basically just to see what's there or move a cyno alt.
Another thing, because of the livened up low sec, of course there will be increased piracy. Hopefully there would be a shift of high sec gankers, wardeccers, etc moving into low sec. But also if there is a climate of increased pirate density there'd also be a climate of increased pirate hunter density, or just people looking for good fights.
And then, lastly, if there does end up being that climate of increased pvp in low sec, newer players and corps will now have a place near by to find and try out pvp. I'm really not sure how new players are supposed to get into it currently. Maybe just by luck? Maybe that's why only 10% of players (that begin subscription) stick around. Maybe it's just by luck that they find a good pvp experience. Good pvp experiences can show what EvE is all about, AND most importantly they can show people the importance of group play which in a lot of cases means getting involved with the people/person they just lost their ship to.
I think these are all positive results, don't you? |
ashley Eoner
310
|
Posted - 2014.06.14 08:20:00 -
[1528] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:And about your claim that caldari space is more populated with miners.... You do realize that the rats in caldari space use ECM and is thus the worst place to mine (if you spend any time afk or browsing while you mine). I do know that plenty of Gallente space is very saturated. Believe it or not, miner saturation is not a good thing for miners. If i knew that another area had less saturation and a working market, i'd be there in a heart beat. well with aggressive drones out ecm isn't generally a concern. I didn't have any issue when I was last out afk mining in caldari. By far gankers were more problematic then the occasional rat.
Quote: The nestor is your example? Do nestors move in jita or amarr at all anyways? I don't think there's going to be many people who are put out by not having a nestor available at a nearby trade hub.
This change will have lots of positive impacts. First, destabilizing the markets is the first and most important effect.
Nestor is one example of hundreds of an item that has a very localized source...
How is that a positive impact? Have you not noticed that ccp tends to like to stabilize the markets?
Quote:With that hauling will be given some life. Currently all hauling is, is saving up for a freighter and then moving larges volumes of things from one trade hub to another for small profits. Which of course is super boring causing a lot of people to just auto pilot it resulting in the climate of freighter ganking we have now. With the destabilized markets, there should be plenty of opportunity to find common things in one market that are at a premium in another thus giving a higher profit ceiling to the profession.
How will hauling to only one trade hub instead of four or so give hauling life? There's nothing there and limiting people to one trade hub isn't going to help that. Have you looked at aufay lately? Not enough life there for you? So because freighter ganking is bad so we need more of it by isolating each faction.... riight.
As for the ability to find profit it might happen with a few things but overall few will bother. No one is going to buy stuff in Jita fly through four hops of lowsec on top of the 20 hops of highsec gankers just to sell something at rens for a little higher price. Assuming they can even sell it because demand will probably suck.
Quote:Then, with the increased traffic, low sec would be given some life. Currently low sec is just an out of the way place with very little to do, and the mechanics are not very good there either (they need a revamp for sure). With a low sec barrier between each empire there will not be a reason for people to go into low sec. Currently it's basically just to see what's there or move a cyno alt. Except every single thing done so far has shown that people will avoid lowsec as much as possible. The only increased traffic will be in a handful of systems which is great if you're lazy and want easy kills..
Another thing, because of the livened up low sec, of course there will be increased piracy. Hopefully there would be a shift of high sec gankers, wardeccers, etc moving into low sec. But also if there is a climate of increased pirate density there'd also be a climate of increased pirate hunter density, or just people looking for good fights.
What you call piracy I call lazy unskilled pvp. Yeah sure there will be the occasional fight over a gate but that'll be fixed once the blobs arrive. THe highsec gankers/warddeccers/etc aren't in lowsec already for a reason and nothing you offer changes that reason. People are naturally risk adverse and few probably are as risk adverse as gankers.
Quote:And then, lastly, if there does end up being that climate of increased pvp in low sec, newer players and corps will now have a place near by to find and try out pvp. I'm really not sure how new players are supposed to get into it currently. Maybe just by luck? Maybe that's why only 10% of players (that begin subscription) stick around. Maybe it's just by luck that they find a good pvp experience. Good pvp experiences can show what EvE is all about, AND most importantly they can show people the importance of group play which in a lot of cases means getting involved with the people/person they just lost their ship to.
Said the same thing about fixing the level 5 bug. All those level 5 mission runners will follow the isk into low and create a target for pirates and then become pirates themselves and SUDDENLY LOWSEC IS SOLVED.. how did that work out?
There would be no room for newbies as the blobs would push them out of the good areas. Just like what happens today.
I think these are all positive results, don't you?
Nope because it's all a pipe dream that only someone who hasn't been paying attention to eve's history would think is possible. Your assumptions go against the entire history of eve players.
The one spot you were right about those is that there would be increased piracy in the few tunnels through lowsec as "pirates" fight over killing fish in the barrel. Once traders get tired of that crap two empires will see trade hub collapse. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
567
|
Posted - 2014.06.14 09:59:00 -
[1529] - Quote
This is my basic problem with this idea, the assumption that becase you split the empires the haukers will suddenly think 'Oh well that's that, I'd better fly my multi-billion ship and cargo through losec now. It will never happen...the smaller hubs will become marginalized and wither.
Is there actually any time in history where separating markets with hostile armed forces has improved trade? I can't think of any and since we are simulating a market here why should we believe this would work differently in Eve?
Don't get me wrong, I would actually profit from this change but I don't agree with ideas simply because they would benefit me. I can only see bad things from a change like this. Much better to increase the content in losec and encourage players to go there of their own volition.
Choice is the key to Eve, if we start removing choices we stifle the game. |
M1k3y Koontz
Thorn Project Surely You're Joking
583
|
Posted - 2014.06.14 12:46:00 -
[1530] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:This is my basic problem with this idea, the assumption that becase you split the empires the haukers will suddenly think 'Oh well that's that, I'd better fly my multi-billion ship and cargo through losec now. It will never happen...the smaller hubs will become marginalized and wither.
Is there actually any time in history where separating markets with hostile armed forces has improved trade? I can't think of any and since we are simulating a market here why should we believe this would work differently in Eve?
Don't get me wrong, I would actually profit from this change but I don't agree with ideas simply because they would benefit me. I can only see bad things from a change like this. Much better to increase the content in losec and encourage players to go there of their own volition.
Choice is the key to Eve, if we start removing choices we stifle the game.
But the smaller hubs won't wither and die because they are centers for trade currently. Separating the empires would cause them to grow as people would rather buy locally than jump in something cloaky and fly through lowsec to Jita.
If they want something faction/deadspace/officer, then they will get a cheetah or blockade runner and fly to Jita, just as they do now.
Paired with the industry changes caldari space would no grow to dominate highsec, the price of production there would force people out, as well as the draw of higher prices in other, more local trade hubs. How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp. |
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
566
|
Posted - 2014.06.14 13:06:00 -
[1531] - Quote
M1k3y Koontz wrote:[ But the smaller hubs won't wither and die because they are centers for trade currently. Separating the empires would cause them to grow as people would rather buy locally than jump in something cloaky and fly through lowsec to Jita.
And how do you get the stuff there? Items and ships don't move themselves. |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2393
|
Posted - 2014.06.14 13:46:00 -
[1532] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:M1k3y Koontz wrote:[ But the smaller hubs won't wither and die because they are centers for trade currently. Separating the empires would cause them to grow as people would rather buy locally than jump in something cloaky and fly through lowsec to Jita. And how do you get the stuff there? Items and ships don't move themselves. There are manufacturing station that exist outside of The Forge region. Also POSes can build things. -á --á |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
566
|
Posted - 2014.06.14 14:17:00 -
[1533] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:M1k3y Koontz wrote:[ But the smaller hubs won't wither and die because they are centers for trade currently. Separating the empires would cause them to grow as people would rather buy locally than jump in something cloaky and fly through lowsec to Jita. And how do you get the stuff there? Items and ships don't move themselves. There are manufacturing station that exist outside of The Forge region. Also POSes can build things.
And how do you get the materials to your manu stations outside major hubs (Idc about Forge when it comes to manufacturing stations)? |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2393
|
Posted - 2014.06.14 14:53:00 -
[1534] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:M1k3y Koontz wrote:[ But the smaller hubs won't wither and die because they are centers for trade currently. Separating the empires would cause them to grow as people would rather buy locally than jump in something cloaky and fly through lowsec to Jita. And how do you get the stuff there? Items and ships don't move themselves. There are manufacturing station that exist outside of The Forge region. Also POSes can build things. And how do you get the materials to your manu stations outside major hubs (Idc about Forge when it comes to manufacturing stations)? The same exact way they are getting there right now. Transporting goods through null sec is not some magical thing that will have to be figured out, it has been being done for years. With the new Ore Compression Array it actually becomes easier transport Ore around with Blockade runners. -á --á |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
567
|
Posted - 2014.06.14 21:51:00 -
[1535] - Quote
Strikes me as odd that the PvP centric folks simply ignore any of the replies from the S&I folks here (who are notorious for not nothering with forums) who say they absolutely will not travel losec if such a change were made.
This would stagnate those areas outside Jita and possibly Amarr as people who run missions don't care where so they would go for the easiest place/biggest hub. That in turn means that all goods would be delivered there for those pilots to buy. The only ships flying through losec would be BR's etc so no more targets there. Any freighters that do run through would be from big corps who will support them, so nope no chance there either for more targets.
If this were a good idea it would have been done long ago. It clearly isn't as it's been kicking around for ages and never gained any traction with the devs. |
M1k3y Koontz
Thorn Project Surely You're Joking
583
|
Posted - 2014.06.14 22:30:00 -
[1536] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:M1k3y Koontz wrote:[ But the smaller hubs won't wither and die because they are centers for trade currently. Separating the empires would cause them to grow as people would rather buy locally than jump in something cloaky and fly through lowsec to Jita. And how do you get the stuff there? Items and ships don't move themselves. There are manufacturing station that exist outside of The Forge region. Also POSes can build things. And how do you get the materials to your manu stations outside major hubs (Idc about Forge when it comes to manufacturing stations)?
News flash, most minerals aren't even sold in trade hubs, but in industrial hub systems that you've never heard of where they're mined, the same industrial hubs where T1 mods are made. These hubs exist outside of Caldari space.
Moon goo will be moved the same way it always is, by jump freighter to where ever they get the most money for it. If prices are double in Dodixie what they are in Jita, route will modify to accommodate the increase in price.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
175
|
Posted - 2014.06.14 23:55:00 -
[1537] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:And how do you get the materials to your manu stations outside major hubs (Idc about Forge when it comes to manufacturing stations)? You do realize that everything is not just automatically seeded in Jita right? A trade hub only exists because it's convenient to trade there either by location or market size. If the location becomes inconvenient don't worry, the market sizes of the current trade hubs will still perpetuate themselves and they'll continue to be the major trade hubs. But it's pretty silly to believe that materials won't move freely through hostile territory. It already happens now, and in great volumes.
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Strikes me as odd that the PvP centric folks simply ignore any of the replies from the S&I folks here (who are notorious for not nothering with forums) who say they absolutely will not travel losec if such a change were made.
This would stagnate those areas outside Jita and possibly Amarr as people who run missions don't care where so they would go for the easiest place/biggest hub. That in turn means that all goods would be delivered there for those pilots to buy. The only ships flying through losec would be BR's etc so no more targets there. Any freighters that do run through would be from big corps who will support them, so nope no chance there either for more targets.
If this were a good idea it would have been done long ago. It clearly isn't as it's been kicking around for ages and never gained any traction with the devs. When you say S&I folks, you mean High sec only S&I folks right? Well the beauty about this is, if they don't move through low sec, they'll come to a point where they'll be saturating Jita with their goods. And when that happens they'll be making less profits. And this will open up opportunity for new S&I people in other locations to make a good living.
One of the most basic principles of business is, you have to be able to adapt to change. Here's a great article about that http://www.businessinsider.com/overcome-by-change-the-failure-of-two-companies-to-seize-the-initiative-and-master-oncoming-change-2011-11
And the funny thing about this idea, it's older than you think. In fact EvE was like this in the beginning. But unfortunately the player base wasn't large enough to support 4 healthy economies at that time. However, things are different now. There are more than enough people to support each empire. Now is the right time to bring this back. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
567
|
Posted - 2014.06.15 00:03:00 -
[1538] - Quote
Another very simple thing is supply and demand, if the demand moves to one area so will the supply. Why risk moving stuff between all the empires when all you have to do i a trip to jita one way or another? All trade would move to the easiest place which right now would be jita. The other hubs would be marginalized to local goods that are in less demand.
I repeat again no market has ever been benefited by being separated from other markets by large numbers of homicidal heavily armed nutters hellbent on killing anyone who ventures anywhere near them. |
Mythic Man
Viziam Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2014.06.15 06:13:00 -
[1539] - Quote
I support this idea.
Eventhough I like the current state of the game, which allows pirate players to blap unsuspecting space pi+Ķatas in highsec. I think this would be an interesting change for both pirates, anti-pirates, Factional Warfare Players and Traders as a whole.
While we're at it: I'd also like for CCP to look into the suggestion to sew genitals onto my face at the character creation screen. I think that would pave way for greater immersion.
All these implementations of mouseover tooltips pretty much resemble having a giant weener hanging in my eyes anyways.
Yes I'm looking at you CCP Rise, and yes, I'm mad bro. |
Mythic Man
Viziam Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2014.06.15 06:15:00 -
[1540] - Quote
I'm afraid Corraidhin Farsaidh might have a point though. |
|
Dave Stark
6358
|
Posted - 2014.06.15 06:46:00 -
[1541] - Quote
separating the 4 empires with low sec will just lead to people gate camping obvious high-low gates and popping the odd blockade runner and/or jump freighter.
the cost of hauling **** back and forth between the hubs will just add a premium to everything since certain minerals are now exclusive to these newly formed high sec islands, and logistics costs will have increased.
meanwhile, everyone who isn't a hauler or gate camper gives exactly 0 *****. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
568
|
Posted - 2014.06.15 07:02:00 -
[1542] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:And how do you get the materials to your manu stations outside major hubs (Idc about Forge when it comes to manufacturing stations)? You do realize that everything is not just automatically seeded in Jita right? A trade hub only exists because it's convenient to trade there either by location or market size. If the location becomes inconvenient don't worry, the market sizes of the current trade hubs will still perpetuate themselves and they'll continue to be the major trade hubs. But it's pretty silly to believe that materials won't move freely through hostile territory. It already happens now, and in great volumes.
I'd love to see numbers supporting your claim. My experience, so far, tells me otherwise.
Moreover, you are too fixated on stuff that is truly available throughout the cluster and truly won't be affected much by such change. Henceforth, it's not a good point for supporting your argument and you should find more suitable goods. |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
175
|
Posted - 2014.06.15 21:57:00 -
[1543] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: Another very simple thing is supply and demand, if the demand moves to one area so will the supply. Why risk moving stuff between all the empires when all you have to do i a trip to jita one way or another? All trade would move to the easiest place which right now would be jita. The other hubs would be marginalized to local goods that are in less demand.
I repeat again no market has ever been benefited by being separated from other markets by large numbers of homicidal heavily armed nutters hellbent on killing anyone who ventures anywhere near them.
I see you don't understand the meaning of Supply and Demand. The law of supply and demand says the price of a good will vary until the demand at a certain price will equal the quantity supplied by producers at that price. The law of supply and demand has only to do with the price of a product. It has nothing to do with population/migration trends. Any movement trends attributed to it are speculative and opinion based only.
So your assertion is that "demand" will move to Jita.
OK, then answer this. Which group of players has the largest impact on demand? And where do these players generally base out of?
*Here's a hint, High sec mission runners and miners probably don't incur enough losses to drive any significant portion of demand.
Dave Stark wrote:separating the 4 empires with low sec will just lead to people gate camping obvious high-low gates and popping the odd blockade runner and/or jump freighter.
the cost of hauling **** back and forth between the hubs will just add a premium to everything since certain minerals are now exclusive to these newly formed high sec islands, and logistics costs will have increased. Where there are gate camps near high sec, there will be people to come bust up the gate camps in the name of "gud fights". If gate camps were more common and accessible, there'd definitely be a rise in gate camp busting. Which would put a fair amount of risk on the gate campers themselves.
And what is this "cost of hauling"? It's the amount of money someone makes for taking the risk of moving something from one place to another. This is a great thing. Hauling would then not only be more dynamic but much more lucrative too.
Yes these are some of the positive points to this change.
Rivr Luzade wrote:Erutpar Ambient wrote: You do realize that everything is not just automatically seeded in Jita right? A trade hub only exists because it's convenient to trade there either by location or market size. If the location becomes inconvenient don't worry, the market sizes of the current trade hubs will still perpetuate themselves and they'll continue to be the major trade hubs. But it's pretty silly to believe that materials won't move freely through hostile territory. It already happens now, and in great volumes.
I'd love to see numbers supporting your claim. My experience, so far, tells me otherwise. Moreover, you are too fixated on stuff that is truly available throughout the cluster and truly won't be affected much by such change. Henceforth, it's not a good point for supporting your argument and you should find more suitable goods. I'm not sure what numbers you'd love to see... Stuff that moves through hostile areas? Ok...
100% of Moon Goo travels through hostile territory. 100% of tech III materials travels through hostile territory. 100% of pirate ships, modules and bpcs (excluding SOE) travel through hostile territory. A large % of high end minerals travel through hostile territory.
In fact if the empires were split, do you think entities in the south are going to make a cyno chain around amarr and gallente space to get their stuff to Jita? Do you think they'll travel to Amarr manual or auto pilot across then cross Low Sec just to get to Jita? Or will they even further perpetuate Amarr by buying and selling there instead of putting forth the massive effort to get to Jita?
What seems more reasonable? |
Spacemover
Cathouse Club The Kadeshi
5
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 15:07:00 -
[1544] - Quote
i would like to hear what our dev-Ķs are thinking about that idea. i mean more than "i read it." |
DrysonBennington
Aliastra Gallente Federation
138
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 15:46:00 -
[1545] - Quote
What about establishing a neutral zone around each of the Empire space boundaries? In order to pass through each Neutral System Gate you would have to meet a satisfactory standing with the local agent that would give you missions in either empire space or another low sector non-neutral zone system.
Once you would reach lets say a 2.0 standing with the agent they would give you a pass key that would unlock each gate to travel through neutral zone space to low sector and null space.
Once you unlocked the route into low or null space you would never have to use the gate key again and those systems would be open to you permanently.
|
Inshallah Eichman
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2014.06.22 22:34:00 -
[1546] - Quote
Very cool idea.
Very cool.
It is risky to implement. It may lead to severe fracturing. Not in a beneficial sense. Not in a good economic sense for the game itself either.
But if it didn't, this would be totally awesome. |
Madbuster73
V0LTA Triumvirate.
100
|
Posted - 2014.06.23 01:22:00 -
[1547] - Quote
I like the idea, it would mix things up again.
|
Sunai Karvinoinas
19
|
Posted - 2014.06.24 10:22:00 -
[1548] - Quote
Stay tuned. I will create a new char to refuse this stupid idea once more. After that I will delete this char and come up with a new one tomorrow in order to refuse this idea again...
Since my last post in this thread there's only a long circle of nearly the same arguments, without any progression in developing a useful and serious proposal. Again and again and again... No typical highsec player, who is travelling between empires often, will support this idea as it's proposed.
You can paint 78 further pages black with posts like the previous ones or give some new ideas with compromises which are worth to discuss really between all affected parties.
CCP will not f*** off a huge part of their paying player base. I believe the players in highsec are more often paying for their accounts due to a lower income in general. (except multiboxer or botter and some really active players) Casual players will more often stay in highsec and may not be interested in making money to buy PLEX every month.
I'm really sure, this whole thread was created as a funny provocation only. But hey... not everybody has the same definition of fun.
CU
|
Jade Blackwind
Alexylva Paradox Low-Class
74
|
Posted - 2014.06.24 10:31:00 -
[1549] - Quote
Supported. |
Syd Unknown
4
|
Posted - 2014.06.24 19:50:00 -
[1550] - Quote
GOOD IDEA!!! |
|
Vovan Sotkin
Fulgentis Kashuken Corporation
1
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 13:41:00 -
[1551] - Quote
I like this idea |
Thorr VonAsgard
Never Surrender.
41
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 15:10:00 -
[1552] - Quote
+1 to this idea for me ^^
All the 4 empire are supposed to be at war but it's so easy to go trought the 4 empires |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
683
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 15:36:00 -
[1553] - Quote
The Empires are in a sort of Cold War, only occasionally breaking out into fighting, and that kept covered up. Usually it's a proxy war using deniable assets (us cap pilots) rather than open war.
Maybe if Low sec was changed so that gate camps were impossible it could be a thing. |
Altirius Saldiaro
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 15:38:00 -
[1554] - Quote
Klymer wrote:Breaking up hisec into several small pockets would not encourage/force more people into losec or to hop in a combat ship and go pewpew. At best they would just stick to their little pond and at worse they would quit. And before someone says those people should quit, no we need every real person we can get lest this game becomes Alts Online.
Sorry I didn't read this threadnaught, so if that opinion has been expressed before then count this post as a no towards your idea.
Agreed. |
NiteNinja
The Black Dynasty Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
19
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 18:37:00 -
[1555] - Quote
What is the hardon for lowsec lately? First faction warfare, then increased wormholes in Lowsec, now this idea?
Case in point, lowsec is for nullsec PVP wannabes who are afraid of interdiction spheres and highsec market carebears who set up sell order traps to lure new players into gank traps.
I had, and never will have desire to go to lowsec. Maybe if lowsec PVP didn't involve docking your security status, I might venture out more often, but I keep to Nullsec for any of that.
If this is implimented, trade will literally come to a halt. Marmite will have every direct and indirect path in lowsec camped. Freighters will be useless, jump freighters will be worth tens of billions, and cyno traps will become a nusiance. New players making a living on T1 haulers moving stuff from Jita to Dodixie or wherever will just have more barriers to overcome, and would just put another gauntlet on EVE life for rookies.
Maybe if there was a 5 system diameter NKZ around starter systems, and more education on how to stay safe in lowsec, this could possibly work. But I doubt it. |
Pie Napple
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
7
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 19:28:00 -
[1556] - Quote
NiteNinja wrote:What is the hardon for lowsec lately? First faction warfare, then increased wormholes in Lowsec, now this idea?
Case in point, lowsec is for nullsec PVP wannabes who are afraid of interdiction spheres and highsec market carebears who set up sell order traps to lure new players into gank traps.
I had, and never will have desire to go to lowsec. Maybe if lowsec PVP didn't involve docking your security status, I might venture out more often, but I keep to Nullsec for any of that.
If this is implimented, trade will literally come to a halt. Marmite will have every direct and indirect path in lowsec camped. Freighters will be useless, jump freighters will be worth tens of billions, and cyno traps will become a nusiance. New players making a living on T1 haulers moving stuff from Jita to Dodixie or wherever will just have more barriers to overcome, and would just put another gauntlet on EVE life for rookies.
Maybe if there was a 5 system diameter NKZ around starter systems, and more education on how to stay safe in lowsec, this could possibly work. But I doubt it.
Lowsec is the best part of this game. It's superior to null for solo and small gang pvp. Lowsec is thriving and nullsec is dieing.
Marmite leaving highsec? What?
And all this elite pvp talk, coming from a renter. Really?
Why do you care about your security status if you live in null?
I like this idea.
|
Alternative Splicing
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
76
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 20:07:00 -
[1557] - Quote
NiteNinja wrote: Case in point, lowsec is for nullsec PVP wannabes who are afraid of interdiction spheres and highsec market carebears who set up sell order traps to lure new players into gank traps.
I believe you have it backwards, nullsec is for lowsec PvP wannabes. Lowsec people tend to have the opposite reaction to people entering local as most sov residents. |
Satyr Ersatz
New Eden Security Services New Eden Conglomerate
7
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 20:08:00 -
[1558] - Quote
I really like this idea, for gameplay reasons, because it would spice things up, and because it fits perfectly with the current narrative of the empires losing control.
+1 |
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys Mordus Angels
1913
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 20:38:00 -
[1559] - Quote
I rather like this idea. +1 |
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
166
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 21:42:00 -
[1560] - Quote
The ganking crowd constantly crows about how elite it is and how easy we highsec players have it, when the truth of the matter is that highsec ganking is actually rather easy.
How is it then that you need more and more aids to do a simple gank?
Perhaps you would eventually like CCP to make it so we have to take one ship per day out, park it in front of a known hostile, flag ourselves and then your ship "auto-fires" because lets face it if you cannot pull off highsec ganking now you probably cannot figure out how to push your damage dealing button either. Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really. |
|
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
181
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 04:52:00 -
[1561] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:The Empires are in a sort of Cold War, only occasionally breaking out into fighting, and that kept covered up. Usually it's a proxy war using deniable assets (us cap pilots) rather than open war.
Maybe if Low sec was changed so that gate camps were impossible it could be a thing. So you're saying that FW = Cold War? Very interesting interpretation.
Altirius Saldiaro wrote:Klymer wrote:Breaking up hisec into several small pockets would not encourage/force more people into losec or to hop in a combat ship and go pewpew. At best they would just stick to their little pond and at worse they would quit. And before someone says those people should quit, no we need every real person we can get lest this game becomes Alts Online.
Sorry I didn't read this threadnaught, so if that opinion has been expressed before then count this post as a no towards your idea.
Agreed. It's true, if you break high sec up into several "small" pockets, then yes, that would probably have a negative impact on a lot of people. HOWEVER this is NOT the suggestion. What we're looking for is that High Sec be broken up into their respective 4 EMPIRES. Or in other words 4 continents, or in perspective of the "little pond" comment, 4 oceans.
Here's another way to think about it. What if CCP added 3 more areas of high sec similar in size of current high sec on the other side of null sec. Would there be no trade in those regions? Would there be nobody to venture there and make a living? How deep does your head have to be in the sand to believe that trade will be so significantly impacted?
I guess no only did the person you quoted not read this "threadnaught", they also didn't read the original post! |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
181
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 05:08:00 -
[1562] - Quote
NiteNinja wrote:What is the hardon for lowsec lately? First faction warfare, then increased wormholes in Lowsec, now this idea?
Case in point, lowsec is for nullsec PVP wannabes who are afraid of interdiction spheres and highsec market carebears who set up sell order traps to lure new players into gank traps.
I had, and never will have desire to go to lowsec. Maybe if lowsec PVP didn't involve docking your security status, I might venture out more often, but I keep to Nullsec for any of that.
If this is implimented, trade will literally come to a halt. Marmite will have every direct and indirect path in lowsec camped. Freighters will be useless, jump freighters will be worth tens of billions, and cyno traps will become a nusiance. New players making a living on T1 haulers moving stuff from Jita to Dodixie or wherever will just have more barriers to overcome, and would just put another gauntlet on EVE life for rookies.
Maybe if there was a 5 system diameter NKZ around starter systems, and more education on how to stay safe in lowsec, this could possibly work. But I doubt it. Even with FW, the WH junk, the Tags4Sec AND the ML bpc drops Low sec still really needs some love. Low sec is still just an out of the way place that many people don't really need to bother with. Or at least, there's very little incentive to bother with it. But then again, this change isn't just for Low Sec. This change is to improve High Sec also. High sec has such little going on and even less reason to be somewhere in particular or even what race you are.
I do agree the sec status mechanics need reworking to not push people away from low sec engagement. There's already enough mechanics driving people away from PVP (aka consequences) adding a sec hit on top is just the icing on the cake.
And it's pretty obvious that you don't get out of high sec very often. If you believe Marmite or any entity could camp every path in low sec, you must not understand the game. (In fact one of Marmites biggest strengths is being in High sec and using neutral alt logistics, can't do that in low sec)
Freighters will still have entire empires to traverse, Jump Freighters will be limited by fuel costs in what they can transport. There's really no money to be made for T1 hauling stuff from Jita to Dodixie because the continuous nature of high sec normalizes the prices to such an extent that you have to move things in freighter loads to see any reasonable profit.
I'm not sure where you're going with the starter system stuff.... |
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
181
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 05:12:00 -
[1563] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:The ganking crowd constantly crows about how elite it is and how easy we highsec players have it, when the truth of the matter is that highsec ganking is actually rather easy.
How is it then that you need more and more aids to do a simple gank?
Perhaps you would eventually like CCP to make it so we have to take one ship per day out, park it in front of a known hostile, flag ourselves and then your ship "auto-fires" because lets face it if you cannot pull off highsec ganking now you probably cannot figure out how to push your damage dealing button either. I'm having trouble understanding what you're talking about....
Do you somehow believe that this change will take away your High Sec? Or in some way make it easier to gank people?
In fact, one of the major driving factors for players Suicide Ganking in High Sec is because of boredom. There's really nothing to do in many many places, and trying to stir up content is basically hours of waiting around for people to get their stuff together so you can go out on a roam that you'll likely never see anyone.
If you have a high traffic low sec, then there's a possibility that High Sec suicide ganking would see a major reduction as all those bored players with nothing better to do than harass miners (and whatever else gets ganked) would have a place to go to get some action.
How about that? |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
1713
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 07:11:00 -
[1564] - Quote
I am happy to see that this thread is still active. I haven't seen it in over a year!
Hope this gets implemented soon. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) "What if [climate change is] a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?" -comic on Greenmonk |
Saleika Issikainen
Sassikainen
0
|
Posted - 2014.07.23 06:33:00 -
[1565] - Quote
It's been two years since this has been suggested?
I wouldn't be surprised if the guy behind the system security status code quit and the only reason this hasn't been implemented is because CCP doesn't have enough money left to hire someone who could figure it out. |
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
334
|
Posted - 2014.07.23 07:52:00 -
[1566] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Mildew Wolf wrote:i like this idea in general. i would also prefer to put some more limits on things like jump freighters, jump bridges, titan bridge etc. its become too easy to move things around and force project imo Tbh I always thought jump drives were a dumb idea in the first place.
Remove bridging from lowsec? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
|
Erutpar Ambient
The Flying Tigers Black Core Alliance
181
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 02:49:00 -
[1567] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:Commander Ted wrote:Mildew Wolf wrote:i like this idea in general. i would also prefer to put some more limits on things like jump freighters, jump bridges, titan bridge etc. its become too easy to move things around and force project imo Tbh I always thought jump drives were a dumb idea in the first place. Remove bridging from lowsec? Remove bridging period...... That's what camp i'm in. It would be a benefit to the game as a whole. Though it would reduce bloc size to a point where we'd never see another B-R5RB, HED-GP, Asakai, 6VDT-H. Though we may never see another one of those with the current state of things.
Anyways, this conversation has digressed.
Separate the Empires! Nationality to all!!!! And dynamic player interaction smack dab in the middle of the map!!! A reason for the most risk adverse to decide to traverse low sec for the first time, without forcing them to do it. Now cross low sec gets you to more high sec, instead of the even uglier null sec. And not just any high sec! But high sec that is alive and potentially busy! (not like those little crappy high sec islands out there)
Anyways. Keep this thread a going!!!!
We need this sooner than later btw. If population continues to drop like it is, there will come a point (or come back to a point) where the population is too low to actually sustain 4(much less more) healthy empires and markets. Not sure what the threshold is exactly but i am very sure that one exists. |
Mr Barbeque
Mayhem and Ruin Point Blank Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 00:00:00 -
[1568] - Quote
bump-a-dump for a wonderful idea |
SGT FUNYOUN
Arachnea Phoenix Battalion
83
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 04:05:00 -
[1569] - Quote
Fairly certain I have replied to this thread before but...
No...unless...
Jump Freighters are allowed to jump in High Sec, or freighters all get a MASSIVE speed boost or the ability to fit MASSIVE amounts of armor and are made to be Warp Stable by at least +2.
Otherwise no... because you will utterly destroy the entire market because freighters will NEVER be used to go between markets as they are and the various freighter corps will fall apart because you will kill their entire business. Shipping from one empire to another will increase in cost by at least triple current costs, and the entire market grinds to a halt as no one wants to trade anymore and the entire game stops working because marketeering becomes useless. You will kill EVE with this idea, unless you change more than just the shape of the star maps and security standings.
No. Unless you change how freighters and jump freighters, and jump bridges work... no. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
1817
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 06:17:00 -
[1570] - Quote
SGT FUNYOUN wrote:Fairly certain I have replied to this thread before but...
No...unless...
Jump Freighters are allowed to jump in High Sec, or freighters all get a MASSIVE speed boost or the ability to fit MASSIVE amounts of armor and are made to be Warp Stable by at least +2.
Otherwise no... because you will utterly destroy the entire market because freighters will NEVER be used to go between markets as they are and the various freighter corps will fall apart because you will kill their entire business. It's not like you NEED to transit large amounts of material between one faction's space and another to build stuff. The majority of highsec prices would be virtually unaffected, and the rest would just rise a little. You have little faith in the strength of the EVE economy if you think something this simple would grind anything at all to a halt. The more noticeable impact would be that faction-specific items would become more expensive in other faction space, which would open up larger trade margins for daring traders willing to smuggle them through lowsec. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) "What if [climate change is] a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?" -comic on Greenmonk |
|
Jack Reafman
Sodex Solutions Warped Intentions
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 07:58:00 -
[1571] - Quote
So, I'm one of those people who, currently avoids PvP at all costs. I'm a rock grinding carebear. Granted, I'm a smart rock gridning carebear so I take my undervalued high-sec ore and sell it where ever Eve-Central says has the best prices, depending on how much better those prices are than local.
I feel like traveling from place to place is an important part of the game, getting goods here and there is necessary. I even go so far s to feel like maybe the resources should be more specialized. Ores and minerals that are even more scarce in different regions.
So, I'm a carebear who hates lowsec, loves travel, and avoids PvP. One could easily assume that I would hate this idea. I mean, it would RUIN my gameplay.
I don't care, I love it, and would have to adapt, or get eaten by the sharks.
Right now it's very easy to sit in your comfortable little hole and never have to leave, or if you do leave, it's to go 15 jumps away, through high sec, to the other end of the galaxy, never leaving the safety of CONCORD.
With this idea, I'd go about busting my rocks. Lets say Omber, which isn't available outside of Gal/Min in high sec. Best place to sell THAT would be Amarr space, right? Now, I could make SOME money selling it right here in my home space, but I could make a bunch more if I passed through the badlands.
Anything that can be faction/system/space specific would become more valuable. More sought after. You could have people who amass great fortues by being brave enough to strike out across lowsec. You'd have others (like myself, most likely) who sat quietly building a small amount of wealth trading locally. You'd have pirate kings, and fleets that work to hold them in check.
Once separating the empires you'd have to make some difference in them. I mentioned Omber earlier, because Omber and Pyrox are ... well they're empire ores, basically. In High you only find Omber in Gal/Min and Pyrox in Amarr/Cal. Thing is, you can get the same minerals (just in different quantities) from mining other stuff, or from going to a lower sec (which, since you're going to have to pass through there anyway, becomes... not less scarey, but more likely). You'd have to differentiate the Empires a bit more. Things that can ONLY (when I say only, maybe for some things ONLY but for others "greatly limited supplies" might be better) be found in Min space, things that can ONLY be found in Amarr space. You force the Empires apart, then let the players figure out how they're going to deal with the resource distribution.
It's one of those, make some changes and see how the players break it sort of things.
On the other hand, maybe I'm crazy, and that's much more likely. |
SGT FUNYOUN
Arachnea Phoenix Battalion
83
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 08:00:00 -
[1572] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:SGT FUNYOUN wrote:Fairly certain I have replied to this thread before but...
No...unless...
Jump Freighters are allowed to jump in High Sec, or freighters all get a MASSIVE speed boost or the ability to fit MASSIVE amounts of armor and are made to be Warp Stable by at least +2.
Otherwise no... because you will utterly destroy the entire market because freighters will NEVER be used to go between markets as they are and the various freighter corps will fall apart because you will kill their entire business. It's not like you NEED to transit large amounts of material between one faction's space and another to build stuff. The majority of highsec prices would be virtually unaffected, and the rest would just rise a little. You have little faith in the strength of the EVE economy if you think something this simple would grind anything at all to a halt. The more noticeable impact would be that faction-specific items would become more expensive in other faction space, which would open up larger trade margins for daring traders willing to smuggle them through lowsec.
Except for the fact that minerals... the very basis for ALL construction in EvE would skyrocket within the sectors they were lacking in. EVERYTHING IN EVE hinges off of Jita's market prices. Cut Jita off from the rest of the galaxy and make it a faction only trade port by walling it behind low sec and you throw the entire market off balance. There are minerals that only exist in high quantity in certain sectors of the galaxy. Like Omber ONLY shows up in the Gallente sector, and Kernite ONLY shows up closer to JIta... and each of these have higher concentrations of specific minerals. Thus if you put low sec between each empire, then you effectively destroy an entire wing of marketeering in that, in the market that has Omber, the minerals in omber are more plentiful and therefore are cheaper. However, the other 3 markets where Omber does not exist have less of the minerals within Omber and thus have a smaller supply and thus have higher prices.
This idea will drive ALL mineral prices through the roof, make ALL items in the game that much more expensive, and will relegate freighters to the scrap heap, because no one will have any justification to use them... why and how you ask? Because in the time it takes to move a freighter from the farthest high sec point in the Amarr cluster to Jita, a single hauler can make three of that same trip. He whole real reason why Freighters have a use, is because they can haul a MASSIVE quantity of cargo over MASSIVE distances for no cost at all. They are built and designed for the freighter pilot to move entire space stations worth of cargo from Dodixie, Rens, Hek, and Amarr over to Jita and back again with total impunity. Take that away and you relegate 3 entire jobs in EvE to the scrap heap, destroy an entire class of ships, and grind the markets to a halt because no noone wants to try and trade in Jita.
Also, now instead of having 4 empires with players who choose to go between the empires and interact with each other and breed a spirit of community and cohesion, you now have 4 factions that are constantly in factional warfare with each other and then it turns into "who has the better faction" until it eventually boils down to nothing more than World of Warcraft in space. This is nothing more than a p***ing contest generator and is a bad idea all the way around. One of the primary reasons WHY the EvE community is such a strong gamer community, is because we do not have separations along lines of race like games like WoW, StarCraft, and Star Trek Online have... those games are failures or failures waiting to happen because they do not engender a community... they engender in-game racial bigotry and a general sense of racism.
EvE is different in that there are 4 separate empires yes, but each empire is still connected and relies on the other empires. WoW is ****** and his ****'s against the world... EvE is symbiosis. |
Jack Reafman
Sodex Solutions Warped Intentions
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 09:11:00 -
[1573] - Quote
SGT FUNYOUN wrote:Reaver Glitterstim wrote:SGT FUNYOUN wrote:Fairly certain I have replied to this thread before but...
No...unless...
Jump Freighters are allowed to jump in High Sec, or freighters all get a MASSIVE speed boost or the ability to fit MASSIVE amounts of armor and are made to be Warp Stable by at least +2.
Otherwise no... because you will utterly destroy the entire market because freighters will NEVER be used to go between markets as they are and the various freighter corps will fall apart because you will kill their entire business. It's not like you NEED to transit large amounts of material between one faction's space and another to build stuff. The majority of highsec prices would be virtually unaffected, and the rest would just rise a little. You have little faith in the strength of the EVE economy if you think something this simple would grind anything at all to a halt. The more noticeable impact would be that faction-specific items would become more expensive in other faction space, which would open up larger trade margins for daring traders willing to smuggle them through lowsec. Except for the fact that minerals... the very basis for ALL construction in EvE would skyrocket within the sectors they were lacking in. EVERYTHING IN EVE hinges off of Jita's market prices. Cut Jita off from the rest of the galaxy and make it a faction only trade port by walling it behind low sec and you throw the entire market off balance. There are minerals that only exist in high quantity in certain sectors of the galaxy. Like Omber ONLY shows up in the Gallente sector, and Kernite ONLY shows up closer to JIta... and each of these have higher concentrations of specific minerals. Thus if you put low sec between each empire, then you effectively destroy an entire wing of marketeering in that, in the market that has Omber, the minerals in omber are more plentiful and therefore are cheaper. However, the other 3 markets where Omber does not exist have less of the minerals within Omber and thus have a smaller supply and thus have higher prices. This idea will drive ALL mineral prices through the roof, make ALL items in the game that much more expensive, and will relegate freighters to the scrap heap, because no one will have any justification to use them... why and how you ask? Because in the time it takes to move a freighter from the farthest high sec point in the Amarr cluster to Jita, a single hauler can make three of that same trip. He whole real reason why Freighters have a use, is because they can haul a MASSIVE quantity of cargo over MASSIVE distances for no cost at all. They are built and designed for the freighter pilot to move entire space stations worth of cargo from Dodixie, Rens, Hek, and Amarr over to Jita and back again with total impunity. Take that away and you relegate 3 entire jobs in EvE to the scrap heap, destroy an entire class of ships, and grind the markets to a halt because no noone wants to try and trade in Jita. Also, now instead of having 4 empires with players who choose to go between the empires and interact with each other and breed a spirit of community and cohesion, you now have 4 factions that are constantly in factional warfare with each other and then it turns into "who has the better faction" until it eventually boils down to nothing more than World of Warcraft in space. This is nothing more than a p***ing contest generator and is a bad idea all the way around. One of the primary reasons WHY the EvE community is such a strong gamer community, is because we do not have separations along lines of race like games like WoW, StarCraft, and Star Trek Online have... those games are failures or failures waiting to happen because they do not engender a community... they engender in-game racial bigotry and a general sense of racism. EvE is different in that there are 4 separate empires yes, but each empire is still connected and relies on the other empires. WoW is old dead Hit-ler and his Nazii's against the world... EvE is symbiosis.
|
Jack Reafman
Sodex Solutions Warped Intentions
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.30 09:11:00 -
[1574] - Quote
SGT FUNYOUN wrote: EvE is symbiosis.
In a symbiotic relationship, each party benefits because they give to the other something which they were lacking. It's a partnership of sorts, where I have something you need, and you have something I need, and we share. That's symbiosis.
In Eve, there is no symbiotic relationship, because everything is available to everyone without anyone having to facilitate that.
In reply to what you said though.....
In a situation where you have a "sea" of low-sec between Gallente and Amarr, it would be safe to say that Iso would be more expensive in Amarr than Gallente (thanks to Omber). With that being said, you'd have intrepid traders making their way through to Amarr space, most likely, right? Since they'd get the best prices there. Now, here's where you get people coming together instead of being driven apart in a WoW/STO style thing. First you've got pirates, maybe some of them belong to the empires, but many of them are going to belong to low/null/wh corps/alliances. They'll be coming together to rob us all blind when we try to pass through the "sea" between empires. Then you've got players who form defense fleets. I mean, in the real world countries have come together to stop pirates both historically and presently (as pirates are something of a problem around Somalia), so why wouldn't players? Even players from different Empires. You don't think the space separating Amarr from Gallente would have fleets of people who patrol with the explicit purpose of hunting down pirates, and you don't think some of those fleets would be comprised of people from different empires? In the end, an idea like this isn't about making it Amarr vs Gallente vs Caldarii Vs Minmatar... it's about the civilized world against those who would tear it down!
As for the economy, yes, it would be HUGELY disrupted, and then it would normalize. You'd find certain minerals more expensive in this area, but cheaper in that area, they'd balance out. Gallente would have to pay more for "X" "Y" "Z" but could charge more for "A". As for the loss of professions, pirateering, privateering, would both become more viable, and your freigher haulers? They'd have to hire guards to take them through the lowsec areas, but they'd be able to afford such a thing because they'd be making more money. |
Professor Headmash
Void Diplomacy Extended Downtime.
7
|
Posted - 2014.08.31 07:46:00 -
[1575] - Quote
SGT FUNYOUN wrote:Fairly certain I have replied to this thread before but...
No...unless...
Jump Freighters are allowed to jump in High Sec, or freighters all get a MASSIVE speed boost or the ability to fit MASSIVE amounts of armor and are made to be Warp Stable by at least +2.
No, this concept is build around risk and reward, your making it too easy.
Otherwise no... because you will utterly destroy the entire market because freighters will NEVER be used to go between markets as they are and the various freighter corps will fall apart because you will kill their entire business.
Absolute rubbish. Do you know how many jumps across each empire is? Freighters will still be needed on mass to move around each empire but also move products to regular low sec crossing points to either ship across themselves, or sell for others to do.
Shipping from one empire to another will increase in cost by at least triple current costs,
It may do, but the increased price of your goods will out way the increased costs. Ie gallente ice will get higher return in amarr space, fed navy comet bpo will get more, fed navy webs are not available locally, so will get a premium etc etc
and the entire market grinds to a halt as no one wants to trade anymore and the entire game stops working because marketeering becomes useless. You will kill EVE with this idea, unless you change more than just the shape of the star maps and security standings.
I disagree, this game needs a large scale shake up, in my opinion this could well be it. We all know the current state of the game, numbers are slowly decreasing, especially in high and low sec. The people who play this game are well known for their ability to adapt and prosper, this will not cause mass scale de subs but actually give them a reason to log in again. Indy players will think 'I can potentially make more isk here', low sec dwellers will think 'I can actually start to make isk from piracy now' due to increased traffic flow through low. It will provide the content we all crave, of which the game in its current state does not provide.
No. Unless you change how freighters and jump freighters, and jump bridges work... no.
Jump bridges have nothing to do with high or low sec areas, so confused as to why mentioned. |
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
6
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 00:59:00 -
[1576] - Quote
Interesting read all of this.
I think the answer to this being implemented comes from the fact that this topic is more than 2 years old. If CCP thought this was a good idea it would have happened by now. At the very least they would have had a trial for this up on a test server and would be looking for input from the community but it does not exist. From this I think we can safely believe that apart from a discussion point here this is a dead issue.
These are all just personal observations based entirely on my own views of EVE.
For those who support this idea you have many theories on why this would not adversely affect the markets and game play of EVE. The problem is that they are just that, they are theories and the only way to find out would be to try it. So why not try it, the primary reason I can come up with is what happens to the game if it fails? Could CCP roll us back to the old fast enough to prevent collapsing the entire EVE gaming community out of existence? Would they be able to roll it back at all? What would be the real world costs of trying this and does the potential for gains in game out weight those real world costs? Being one that has to compare risks,and expenses and make decisions on implementing new ideas/processes in real life all I can say is this. If I were CCP no matter how good this sounded it would never see the light of day there is to much real world risk to even consider it. |
Calypso Warsmith
Strata Dynamics Power Absolute Inc.
23
|
Posted - 2014.09.01 03:07:00 -
[1577] - Quote
You know i suggested this same thing over 2 years ago.
And got like 20 pages of people saying how bad an idea it was.
How the times change.
or not. |
Haakaa PaaIIe
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 03:16:00 -
[1578] - Quote
Great idea! CCP pwease? |
Foxstar Damaskeenus
Soul Takers
204
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 10:59:00 -
[1579] - Quote
I like this idea.
I maintain a low security market (8 billion in 400 sell orders) with about 30 of those being stacks of popular ships. This would actually make that play style more profitable. |
Hicksimus
Torgue Fueling the Fire
310
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 12:54:00 -
[1580] - Quote
This would be a nice twist. It would also be cool to find wormholes that get you from one nation's space to another. Do you have it? |
|
Vincintius Agrippa
F L O O D
57
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 15:25:00 -
[1581] - Quote
No. Only YOU can prevent internet bullying! |
Haakaa PaaIIe
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 16:45:00 -
[1582] - Quote
Vincintius Agrippa wrote:No. yes. |
Inevitability
Blackwater USA Academy Violent Intent
29
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 17:33:00 -
[1583] - Quote
Yes. |
Maenth
The Thirteen Provinces
11
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 18:27:00 -
[1584] - Quote
I like the idea! While I believe the empires would have protected borders (for continuous hisec) I do like the idea of borders changing and becoming dangerous to cross ... the lore angle I'd like is if - seeing the rise of power of capsuleers and pirates - the empires would make a move to increase their power likewise, exploiting new technologies to secure their place ... they certainly have funding with populations and taxation, and they develop advanced technologies also (what and where exactly is that gate in "The Prophecy"?) |
Kalicondoin
TunDraGon Cynosural Field Theory.
3
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 19:54:00 -
[1585] - Quote
I LOVE this Idea... IMO High Sec is as big a problem to this game as the **** that is Null Sec SOV.
This can cause a massive mix up for the current "meta" and stagnation! |
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
198
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 20:19:00 -
[1586] - Quote
You are looking at a surface issue and not the core problem. The big problem facing EVE isn't "can we get served more freighters to gank each day", it is:
The bone-deep cowardice we find in nullbabies with respect to fighting against ships that can actually fire back. Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really. |
Oxford Blue
Serene Vendetta Brawls Deep
15
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 21:22:00 -
[1587] - Quote
Do it Do it now!
I want this! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2880508& -á<< Corporation Recruitment https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=356199&find=unread -á<< Alliance Recruitment |
Vincintius Agrippa
F L O O D
57
|
Posted - 2014.09.13 00:29:00 -
[1588] - Quote
No. They aren't at war technically. Its a proxy war fought by militia, only occasionally breaking out into conflict. Its more like a cold war. (Also, didnt all empires donate tech to create concord, cross faction police?) Also, why separate all four from each other? If its a war as you say it is, then gallente are allied with minmatar and caldari with amarr. Also, technically speaking its amarr vs minmatar and caldari vs gallente. Citizens from each faction can freely travel between the four major empires.
Worth noting: eve populace: Caldari>Gallente>Amarr>Minmatar space. Separating the empires would mean most people would be in caldari space because well that's were the most people are. Whether or not they are caldari.
Quadrupling the alpha gank fleet systems will just force people to just settle in certain regions more than others. This does one thing and one thing only: increase cash flow to pirates. For a little while at least. People would eventually get tire and the majority will just stay in the forge or essence. Only YOU can prevent internet bullying! |
Liam Inkuras
Love Squad Pasta Syndicate
1268
|
Posted - 2014.09.13 00:37:00 -
[1589] - Quote
Vincintius Agrippa wrote:This does one thing and one thing only: increase cash flow to pirates.
I see nothing wrong with this conclusion
I wear my goggles at night.
Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone |
The Ironfist
Nordbot Capitals Northern Associates.
35
|
Posted - 2014.09.13 08:25:00 -
[1590] - Quote
Rather dumb idea because its not going to chance anything at all. Jumpfreigthers will bridge the gap. Only thing it will do is feed dumb pubbies to lowsec scrubs. |
|
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Space-Brewery-Association 24eme Legion Etrangere
139
|
Posted - 2014.09.13 08:57:00 -
[1591] - Quote
Rather than separate the empires I think it would be more suitable to do the following:
1. Link Jita to Amarr with three stationless low sec superhighway systems 2. Link Dodixie to Hek with three stationless low sec superhighway systems 3. Link the two central super highway systems to eachother. 4. Link the Amarr side superhighway low sec system to an Amarr FW station system (Sahtogas perhaps?) 5. 6. & 7. Link likewise systems for Caldari, Gallente & Minmatar 8. All of the superhighway systems have zero moons.
The old superhighways through Yulai caused problems because the server could not cope. However Jita proved that CCP had to find a way to cope with the numbers. There is, however, one difference here. This would be low sec superhighway. There is likely to be a lower population and thus lower server load.
This would create an excellent choice for those wanting to trade quickly between the hubs but would not force the hand of industrialists who want to stay HiSec safe. Jump Freighters would be usable for quick transit but at a risk. There would be no POS and no stations to cyno in to. Cynos would have to be raised at gates that would be likely camped by Pirates.
There would be no easy option for Pirate camps a this would be (hopefully) be a hot-bed of conflict between FW militias and those capable of hot drop of multiple caps. No easy life for Pirates.
FW capture sits and ihubs could e placed in these systems. Asteroid belts of various richness could be spawned in these systems.
I would make them 0.3 systems and the central 0.1 sec status.
Only downside I can initially see is that it might draw an already shrinking population all to one small area of New Eden. Well, all of those that like to interact.
"Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier" |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
694
|
Posted - 2014.09.13 09:12:00 -
[1592] - Quote
A High way through low sec. Fun joke. Systems linked to remote areas, labeled as High ways. Funnier joke. Limited camping potential (and he even adds "hopefully"). Funny joke. Make it hard to avoid camps on gates without ping spots. Good one.
I get myself another JF and don't care anymore. But all in all I had a good laugh with the last post. |
Wolf Incaelum
State Protectorate Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2014.09.13 16:59:00 -
[1593] - Quote
Daak Elibrium wrote:I like this id+Ža a lot. I feel that Highsec is to secrure as it is. I think people that start playing the game don't really need so much space to learn the ropes of EvE. And those that only likes PvE, could just stay in one section of Highsec and have enough to do. Even if they have to travel to other HighSec-regions there would only be a couple of jumps. Its not THAT hard to survive jumping through LowSec.
I think the Factions will feel more like "real" Factions, with some separation between them. More like "countries" and between them "no mans land."
The possibilites that some corporations will become full-time pirate and that some will be full-time "protectors/merc" etc. sounds exciting, and it would bring some more reason to PvP. The regions between the HighSec regions will probobly fill up with people wanting to PvP, Pirate or defend. Sounds great. It even brings people to communicate more with other players, if you need to haul something you probobly want to hire some protection etc.
Maybe a total of 3-4 jumps tops to get through to another HighSec would be enough, longer than that people might not even want to try.
The id+Ža is great I believe. Just some details to sort out first.
|
Wolf Incaelum
State Protectorate Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2014.09.13 17:02:00 -
[1594] - Quote
Well that didn't work the way I wanted it to. Does anyone else have a problem where they type up a reply, then click post and the stupid thing doesn't post? I typed up an entire reply and the only thing that got posted was the quote. Anyway, I'm not going to type up the whole thing again. Basically, I like the idea. |
Vesess Ond'as
Forged Souls
0
|
Posted - 2014.09.13 17:35:00 -
[1595] - Quote
Love this idea; the notion that security status is set at a certain point forever is foolish.
Real life examples of security status changes: http://www.ijreview.com/2014/06/145906-watch-city-detroit-fall-apart-eyes/
In general, this change is no different from some past content creation. Long ago in eve the Elder fleet blapped a Concord Station, a Nyx crashed into a station, Kador attacked Gallente, sanshas attacked in live events in random high sec areas (not incursions; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vro8SepqkIo and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9fug9akMI0 ), and we see trailers with the Amarr Empire attacking some player alliance over some gate they made. I want to play that game.
Now Incursions are nothing more than an area some IS Boxers can make a few billions doing. Corcord cant control them yet these systems remain 'high sec'...if Concord is overwhelmed and cant stop Sanshas, then why do these areas not become 'temporary low sec' areas as well?
Overall, its about content creation and creating conditions that allow for fun stuff to happen. While the 'sandbox' is a great principle, having events in eve that create content (as propsed here in altering high sec connection systems) is a great way for eve to stay fresh and fun. Just as people debate the nul sec changes, the same notion applies: the promoting the conditions for content creation. Only then can players add their own contributions. If high sec is boring, nul sec is boring, and there is no reason to log on...its hard for eve to stay healthy and grow. The game has a great storyline...use it (just as this proposal hints). |
Vincintius Agrippa
F L O O D
57
|
Posted - 2014.09.13 19:07:00 -
[1596] - Quote
Wolf Incaelum wrote:Well that didn't work the way I wanted it to. Does anyone else have a problem where they type up a reply, then click post and the stupid thing doesn't post? I typed up an entire reply and the only thing that got posted was the quote. Anyway, I'm not going to type up the whole thing again. Basically, I like the idea.
Yes, particularly with long replies. If your using google chrome just click back to last page before you hit post and repost. If using explorer just click on saved draft. Only YOU can prevent internet bullying! |
Vincintius Agrippa
F L O O D
57
|
Posted - 2014.09.13 19:40:00 -
[1597] - Quote
Vesess Ond'as wrote:Love this idea; the notion that security status is set at a certain point forever is foolish. Real life examples of security status changes: http://www.ijreview.com/2014/06/145906-watch-city-detroit-fall-apart-eyes/In general, this change is no different from some past content creation. Long ago in eve the Elder fleet blapped a Concord Station, a Nyx crashed into a station, Kador attacked Gallente, sanshas attacked in live events in random high sec areas (not incursions; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vro8SepqkIo and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9fug9akMI0 ), and we see trailers with the Amarr Empire attacking some player alliance over some gate they made. I want to play that game. Now Incursions are nothing more than an area some IS Boxers can make a few billions doing. Corcord cant control them yet these systems remain 'high sec'...if Concord is overwhelmed and cant stop Sanshas, then why do these areas not become 'temporary low sec' areas as well? Overall, its about content creation and creating conditions that allow for fun stuff to happen. While the 'sandbox' is a great principle, having events in eve that create content (as propsed here in altering high sec connection systems) is a great way for eve to stay fresh and fun. Just as people debate the nul sec changes, the same notion applies: the promoting the conditions for content creation. Only then can players add their own contributions. If high sec is boring, nul sec is boring, and there is no reason to log on...its hard for eve to stay healthy and grow. The game has a great storyline...use it (just as this proposal hints).
Im all for highsec incursions and live (un tidi'd) events. They should add continuous content that is more in depth then 3000 people trying to get into one system to kill CCP "whatever" in his paper thin fit machariel. Of which 95% get smartbombed or alphad by pirates camping every gate en route. Seriously. Gosh, how about a jove incursion or invasion? Or maybe some of those wormhole drones coming through into highsec, something..... Forcing people into gatecamps is not content creation, its tipping the balance ever more to pirates and giving them a higher k/d profit ratio. They wont have to suicide gank in highsec anymore. Your not adding content. Your just serving people on a platter. Most will just say **** it and stay in or around jita or their respective highsec. Nullsec is more boring than highsec. You cant force everyone out of highsec.
The common argument is that highsec is unorganized and/or full of wardeccors. Add more content, customization options, and features that spur corp and alliance development and player interaction to encourage organization. Wheather new pve or pvp activities and/or revamped old ones. It wouldn't hurt to look to other games either...... What exactly these features are would be discussed in a separate thread.
EDIT: Please, Start from the top with High sec, > Low sec, > 0.0. Don't cherry pick. Only YOU can prevent internet bullying! |
Vincintius Agrippa
F L O O D
57
|
Posted - 2014.09.13 20:07:00 -
[1598] - Quote
Oh yeah, in case I didn't make the last edit clear,.... I was stating that highsec should be used as the building block or platform that would be the Launchpad for people to go venture into lowsec. And then low to null. A tiered system of profits that increases as one mores into lower security space with increased complexity for operations. Highsec should be quite profitable enough to support x number of people in a corp for x amount of income, lowsec 2-x profitable or some other multiplier, null is x times as profitable, meaning that each tier has increased resources that require more advanced tactics and gear to survive or make a profit.
Make highsec better. Give us better a corp interface. Only YOU can prevent internet bullying! |
thatonepersone
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2014.09.13 22:23:00 -
[1599] - Quote
I like this idea. |
Fleder Uitoh
Vicis Inter Astrum I'd Rather Be Roaming
0
|
Posted - 2014.09.13 23:59:00 -
[1600] - Quote
I heartily support this idea, though being two years old it could use a revisiting. |
|
Evora Pirkibo
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
29
|
Posted - 2014.09.21 07:41:01 -
[1601] - Quote
I LOVE this!! Would create more opportunities for a small time courrier like myself. |
Jessica Duranin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
278
|
Posted - 2014.09.21 08:15:20 -
[1602] - Quote
If done right, this could be very interesting. |
Haakaa PaaIIe
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2014.09.24 17:07:23 -
[1603] - Quote
Fleder Uitoh wrote:I heartily support this idea, though being two years old it could use a revisiting.
Sure, but it being 2 years old and still around is something to think about. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1202
|
Posted - 2014.10.26 21:37:46 -
[1604] - Quote
Unsubbed for a year and people still posting in my thread.
Seems like this idea would be made more viable after glancing at the new jumping mechanics also.
Also I don't know how to play anymore so if anyone has any suggestions for the OP it would be much appreciated.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
723
|
Posted - 2014.10.26 23:15:36 -
[1605] - Quote
Just been watching the Walking Dead and lo and behold...
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Forged of Fire
581
|
Posted - 2014.10.26 23:52:26 -
[1606] - Quote
Still supported.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
10311
|
Posted - 2014.10.27 01:01:15 -
[1607] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Unsubbed for a year and people still posting in my thread.
Seems like this idea would be made more viable after glancing at the new jumping mechanics also.
Also I don't know how to play anymore so if anyone has any suggestions for the OP it would be much appreciated.
Heck, I'm glad it's still kicking around. The idea merits consideration even now. Moreso with the jump range changes coming down the pipe.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2493
|
Posted - 2014.10.27 01:56:48 -
[1608] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Unsubbed for a year and people still posting in my thread.
Seems like this idea would be made more viable after glancing at the new jumping mechanics also.
Also I don't know how to play anymore so if anyone has any suggestions for the OP it would be much appreciated. Welcome back! o/ Still supported also
-
|
The Hamilton
Outer Ring Sleeper Collective Illusion of Solitude
70
|
Posted - 2014.10.27 09:56:03 -
[1609] - Quote
I definitely support the idea. But think the execution could be done differently. Something that wouldn't spook hi-sec dwellers so easily as low-sec. Perhaps an in between point. No concord, but no scrams either until you have been fired upon. Or just something that would encourage hi-sec players to get their toes a little more wet. |
Tappits
north eastern swat Pandemic Legion
64
|
Posted - 2014.10.27 10:04:36 -
[1610] - Quote
I don't see why not.. but you would need to have like 3,4,5,6 different lowsec routes to make it work and not make a massive bottle neck of death. At least you can do things in lowsec to protect stuff, unlike empire were you can be blaped and there nothing you can do about it. |
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
726
|
Posted - 2014.10.27 10:15:07 -
[1611] - Quote
This would still be a bad idea for all of the reasons previously given. Nothing has appreciably changed that would suddenly make hisec dwellers happy to make themselves targets for losec folks so still nope... |
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
377
|
Posted - 2014.10.27 10:30:26 -
[1612] - Quote
I have never understood why this game needed so mich "safe" space. Plenty of other games have openworld pvp starting just outside any newb zone or city
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015
T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346
LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
|
Foxstar Damaskeenus
Soul Takers
233
|
Posted - 2014.10.27 11:08:05 -
[1613] - Quote
Evora Pirkibo wrote:I LOVE this!! Would create more opportunities for a small time courrier like myself.
This is what I was thinking. My low sec trade hub would become more profitable.
No changes to skill points EVER!!!
|
Dustpuppy
Rox Inc
11
|
Posted - 2014.10.27 12:31:58 -
[1614] - Quote
Have my upvote
I remember how many bears answered in a negative way when I posted the idea of a flexible security status (e.g. Jita drops to 0.5 due to an incursion in the system). I like tears
Oh yes, this would be great. No longer one single hub to rule them all just because everything can be transported in an easy way to Jita. |
Tabyll Altol
Breaking.Bad Circle-Of-Two
32
|
Posted - 2014.10.27 13:06:22 -
[1615] - Quote
Still support it ! |
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
52
|
Posted - 2014.10.27 14:21:06 -
[1616] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:I have never understood why this game needed so mich "safe" space. Plenty of other games have openworld pvp starting just outside any newb zone or city The answer is simple if you open up and think about it from a wider point of view. Other games have no reasonably safe place to play for those that are not into the kill or be killed style of game play. Or they go the other way and there is no place for those who want the kill or be killed style of game play so both types of games suffer because they only appeal to one style of game play. EVE on the other hand appeals to both style of game play and it is the combination of both that makes EVE what it is and I hope they never change that basic balance.
Most of low and nul sec are forgotten waste lands with very few if any players in them at any given moment, high sec on the other hand has very few systems that are empty, why would you want even more empty space to roam around in? If anything shrinking the size of low and nul would force the players that are there into closer contact with each other and that may increase the chance for the fights but I really doubt it.
Like it or not the area of space with the most active player base is high sec, remove that and you remove a large portion of the player that pay for game time with real cash money every month. So look at it this way, it is all the people "in all that safe space" that make it possible for CCP to offer the things you like to do. Force those players to traverse low sec space to get from place to place and you would drive large number of them out of the game, thankfully to this point in time CCP has recognized this and left things as they are with regards to how high, low and nul sec are laid out.
This was a bad idea when it was first posted, it is a bad idea now and the fact that it is 2 years old and still not implemented as the saying goes speaks volumes on how CCP views this idea. |
Evora Pirkibo
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
30
|
Posted - 2014.10.27 14:44:27 -
[1617] - Quote
This proposal in no way advocates the removal of highsec. Yes most people like to minimize their their risk of death, but that doesnt make this idea bad, and it similarly doesn't mean everyone in highsec would unsub. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Forged of Fire
585
|
Posted - 2014.10.27 14:48:50 -
[1618] - Quote
Tappits wrote: At least you can do things in lowsec to protect stuff, unlike empire were you can be blaped and there nothing you can do about it.
This is why low and null will always be better then the security blanket area.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
|
Commander Ted
Quantum Reality R n D The Unthinkables
1204
|
Posted - 2014.10.28 01:40:14 -
[1619] - Quote
Donnachadh wrote:Caleb Seremshur wrote:I have never understood why this game needed so mich "safe" space. Plenty of other games have openworld pvp starting just outside any newb zone or city The answer is simple if you open up and think about it from a wider point of view. Other games have no reasonably safe place to play for those that are not into the kill or be killed style of game play. Or they go the other way and there is no place for those who want the kill or be killed style of game play so both types of games suffer because they only appeal to one style of game play. EVE on the other hand appeals to both style of game play and it is the combination of both that makes EVE what it is and I hope they never change that basic balance. Most of low and nul sec are forgotten waste lands with very few if any players in them at any given moment, high sec on the other hand has very few systems that are empty, why would you want even more empty space to roam around in? If anything shrinking the size of low and nul would force the players that are there into closer contact with each other and that may increase the chance for the fights but I really doubt it. Like it or not the area of space with the most active player base is high sec, remove that and you remove a large portion of the player that pay for game time with real cash money every month. So look at it this way, it is all the people "in all that safe space" that make it possible for CCP to offer the things you like to do. Force those players to traverse low sec space to get from place to place and you would drive large number of them out of the game, thankfully to this point in time CCP has recognized this and left things as they are with regards to how high, low and nul sec are laid out. This was a bad idea when it was first posted, it is a bad idea now and the fact that it is 2 years old and still not implemented as the saying goes speaks volumes on how CCP views this idea.
This doesn't change the amount of safe space, it just makes a more interesting play field for those in safe space. A completely risk averse person would still have an adequately sized sandbox, but now they have multiple sandboxes to choose from. All they have to learn how to use the rope swing to get from one end to another.
They might fall in, they might get a scrape, but it might be fun.
Right now the rope swing doesn't take you anywhere, its just an area aside from the sandbox where some people have some fun, but think of the games you can play when the sandbox and the rope swing become part of each other?
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
|
Gaan Cathal
Angry Mustellid The Periphery
13
|
Posted - 2014.10.28 03:25:26 -
[1620] - Quote
Evora Pirkibo wrote:I LOVE this!! Would create more opportunities for a small time courier like myself.
This is actually why I, a fully paid up NBSI blinky "totally a real life sociopath, some guy said so because he lost his pixels" am in support of this. Do I like that it would help the Lowsec ecosystem? Yes, so would a plethora of other things like..actual lowsec content. But the biggest plus is actually something someone said was a downside in the first few pages with "frog would make more money".
Trading in the sense of actually moving goods isn't a functioning profession in Eve currently. Lazy PVPers like me are keeping it on life support via services like Red Frog but by and large it's the domain of logistics alts from the Great Blue Donut and people afk-hauling their own crap around, if it moves at all. This would allow people to actually make ISK by moving crap. If everything became more Jita-centric as a direct consequence then what will happen is people would be able to make space-money by moving stuff to Rens/Amarr and reselling at a reasonable markup.
Currently there is a spread of different resources between the Empires, however that spread is utterly meaningless because they are functionally one contiguous stretch of space. Given that that spread exists, one has to assume CCP had a purpose for it. Separating the Empires with Low-sec would give meaning to that spread, although the OP is absolutely correct that it would require the addition of a substantial amount of space, but CCP have done this before with Black Rise.
Lowsec overall needs a serious revamp, both FW-specific and otherwise, and this should be a part of it. It would benefit High-sec, Low-sec and Wormhole dwellers directly, and in the long term probably benefit Null-sec industry by making it a relevant alternative to just 99.9% safe transport from Jita. |
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
728
|
Posted - 2014.10.28 09:15:25 -
[1621] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Donnachadh wrote:Caleb Seremshur wrote:I have never understood why this game needed so mich "safe" space. Plenty of other games have openworld pvp starting just outside any newb zone or city The answer is simple if you open up and think about it from a wider point of view. Other games have no reasonably safe place to play for those that are not into the kill or be killed style of game play. Or they go the other way and there is no place for those who want the kill or be killed style of game play so both types of games suffer because they only appeal to one style of game play. EVE on the other hand appeals to both style of game play and it is the combination of both that makes EVE what it is and I hope they never change that basic balance. Most of low and nul sec are forgotten waste lands with very few if any players in them at any given moment, high sec on the other hand has very few systems that are empty, why would you want even more empty space to roam around in? If anything shrinking the size of low and nul would force the players that are there into closer contact with each other and that may increase the chance for the fights but I really doubt it. Like it or not the area of space with the most active player base is high sec, remove that and you remove a large portion of the player that pay for game time with real cash money every month. So look at it this way, it is all the people "in all that safe space" that make it possible for CCP to offer the things you like to do. Force those players to traverse low sec space to get from place to place and you would drive large number of them out of the game, thankfully to this point in time CCP has recognized this and left things as they are with regards to how high, low and nul sec are laid out. This was a bad idea when it was first posted, it is a bad idea now and the fact that it is 2 years old and still not implemented as the saying goes speaks volumes on how CCP views this idea. This doesn't change the amount of safe space, it just makes a more interesting play field for those in safe space. A completely risk averse person would still have an adequately sized sandbox (hisec), but now they have multiple sandboxes to choose from. All they have to learn how to use the rope swing(lowsec) to get from one end to another. They might fall in, they might get a scrape, but it might be fun. Right now the rope swing doesn't take you anywhere, its just an area aside from the sandbox where some people have some fun, but think of the games you can play when the sandbox and the rope swing become part of each other?
The problem is that those in the hisec area absolutely do not want to be in the losec area. This idea would force them to use an area they would never choose to go to or stay in a now stagnating much smaller region. This idea would only benefit those already in losec. The only people it would pursuade to travel losec are those who can and will fly BR's to go across so you would never even see them anyway.
I agree that losec needs some love but I truly don't think that messing with the hisec folks play area would achieve this. it would need focussed attention on giving those % of players who are willing to go to losec a good reason to do so. This just gives them a good reason to train cloakiness which to be honest they probably already will have done to use losec anyway. |
Ben Ishikela
Moira. Villore Accords
1
|
Posted - 2014.10.28 13:43:52 -
[1622] - Quote
i want this. |
Anthar Thebess
779
|
Posted - 2014.10.28 14:28:10 -
[1623] - Quote
Support, and again Support. This will put more life to eve.
New Gate Connections in EVE!
Support idea for new gates that will make some more places to thrive.
|
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
53
|
Posted - 2014.10.28 14:54:38 -
[1624] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:The problem is that those in the hisec area absolutely do not want to be in the losec area. This idea would force them to use an area they would never choose to go to or stay in a now stagnating much smaller region. This idea would only benefit those already in losec. The only people it would pursuade to travel losec are those who can and will fly BR's to go across so you would never even see them anyway.
Agree with this, you cannot force people to do what they do not want to do and this idea is no different. Those that are adventurous in spirit are already exploring low/nul. Those that are not will not be driven there by this idea, it is more likely that they will be driven out of the game. Here and in other forums we can all speculate on how many players this would drive out of the game and we can debate if that would be good or bad for the game because there is no real world dangers to our business no matter what the outcome. For CCP on the other hand there is a significant risk to their real world business even trying a change that is this radical. Guess right and you move on, guess wrong and you just may end up losing it all. Small incremental changes are more likely to happen because of this and this idea is neither small nor incremental.
Everyone talks about this idea and how it would increasing the opportunities for fights, as one who plays primarily in high sec I see it from a different point of view. There is no way that forcing the high sec players to travel through low to get where they want will increase the opportunity for fights.
Those who want to go to low for fights are already doing that so this has no affect so this idea is a fail.
Those high sec players who simply want to travel to another region are not looking for a fight and they are not likely to actively engage in a fight if it finds them so as a tool to increase fights this idea is a fail.
The only way this idea is not fail would be for the countless gate campers that will set up in these pipes/trade routes or whatever the hell you choose to call them.
|
Ceawlin Cobon-Han
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
16
|
Posted - 2014.10.28 17:29:01 -
[1625] - Quote
The Sisters of Eve epic arc would fail immediately, as that has a real noob travelling between empires. Just one more target for the game's socially inept?
This idea makes no sense lore-wise. The Matari and Gallente would have enforced high security between their empires; likewise the Amarr and Caldari.
That traders will continue to go to jita is an assumption. It's possible that the various factions' main hubs will become more active, as risk/reward sky-rockets for the trade routes to jita, causing traders to abandon it for their local and much safer main hub.
Sry if this has been already stated, but I have no intention of wading through 86+ pages of comments.
-1 |
Jezza McWaffle
Pandora Sphere Disavowed.
155
|
Posted - 2014.10.28 17:33:48 -
[1626] - Quote
It makes perfect sense lore wise given the empires power are dwindling and that of Concord too. Also it does not force anyone to leave high sec but if you want to explore other areas of space (changes like this should also come with changes to differentiate the empires) then you need to take a risk. If you don't like going through LS then use a WH to travel. It forces nothing.
C6 Wormhole blog
http://holelotofwaffle.wordpress.com/
|
Ceawlin Cobon-Han
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
16
|
Posted - 2014.10.28 18:47:04 -
[1627] - Quote
Jezza McWaffle wrote:It makes perfect sense lore wise given the empires power are dwindling and that of Concord too. Also it does not force anyone to leave high sec but if you want to explore other areas of space (changes like this should also come with changes to differentiate the empires) then you need to take a risk. If you don't like going through LS then use a WH to travel. It forces nothing. Really? I must have missed that bit about Concord dwindling, they appear to turn up still with deadly force. You're babbling, more so when you talk about leaving hisec as if it refutes what I typed when, in fact, no-one being forced out of hisec was my point. If you think this will give you more easy kills then you're living in cloud cuckoo land.
I noticed you ignored studiously the problem caused to the SoE epic arc. Care to bless us with your wisdom on that little matter? |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
861
|
Posted - 2014.10.28 19:41:23 -
[1628] - Quote
Ben Ishikela wrote:i want this.
EDIT: it has its problems. (JumpFreighters, newRegions, dangerToJita) BUT the point of splitting empires/markets is good!
For moar YARRR!
You should get more active in Placid before you demand more Yarrr. Sitting station spinning in Vlillirier is not creating any Yarr for you. |
Gaan Cathal
Angry Mustellid The Periphery
13
|
Posted - 2014.10.28 19:48:30 -
[1629] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: The problem is that those in the hisec area absolutely do not want to be in the losec area. This idea would force them to use an area they would never choose to go to or stay in a now stagnating much smaller region. This idea would only benefit those already in losec. The only people it would pursuade to travel losec are those who can and will fly BR's to go across so you would never even see them anyway.
It doesn't force them to do anything of the sort. Those who are willing to cross Lowsec space between the Empires will reap the benefits of course, but there's no damage to those who remain in Highsec, merely an opportunity cost - same as whenever you don't do something and someone else does.
If you're not going to go into Lowsec, this change isn't going to make you, and it's not supposed to. It's making room in the game for those traders and industrialists who are willing to. Risk-reward balance doesn't only belong in PVP.
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
728
|
Posted - 2014.10.28 21:11:49 -
[1630] - Quote
Gaan Cathal wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: The problem is that those in the hisec area absolutely do not want to be in the losec area. This idea would force them to use an area they would never choose to go to or stay in a now stagnating much smaller region. This idea would only benefit those already in losec. The only people it would pursuade to travel losec are those who can and will fly BR's to go across so you would never even see them anyway.
It doesn't force them to do anything of the sort. Those who are willing to cross Lowsec space between the Empires will reap the benefits of course, but there's no damage to those who remain in Highsec, merely an opportunity cost - same as whenever you don't do something and someone else does. If you're not going to go into Lowsec, this change isn't going to make you, and it's not supposed to. It's making room in the game for those traders and industrialists who are willing to. Risk-reward balance doesn't only belong in PVP.
There is already room for traders willing to go to losec, they supply the trade areas there and into nullsec. However for any hisec operator to remain competitive they would be foced to cross losec to maintain their margins. They would have no option. Most mission runners would migrate to the largest hub for simplicity so jita would become more crowded, the other regions would stagnate to a degree.
This change purely favours the losec folks and benefits nobody else. It is simply to force more targets into losec and forcing people is a very bad idea. Especially since you'd be imposing such a change onto roughly 80% of the player base. People need enticing into losec not beating into there with a big stick. |
|
King Fu Hostile
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
196
|
Posted - 2014.10.28 22:34:49 -
[1631] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
The problem is that those in the hisec area absolutely do not want to be in the losec area. This idea would force them to use an area they would never choose to go to or stay in a now stagnating much smaller region. This idea would only benefit those already in losec. The only people it would pursuade to travel losec are those who can and will fly BR's to go across so you would never even see them anyway.
I agree that losec needs some love but I truly don't think that messing with the hisec folks play area would achieve this. it would need focussed attention on giving those % of players who are willing to go to losec a good reason to do so. This just gives them a good reason to train cloakiness which to be honest they probably already will have done to use losec anyway.
But in your opinion it's ok to force people to use hisec?
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
728
|
Posted - 2014.10.28 23:20:28 -
[1632] - Quote
King Fu Hostile wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
The problem is that those in the hisec area absolutely do not want to be in the losec area. This idea would force them to use an area they would never choose to go to or stay in a now stagnating much smaller region. This idea would only benefit those already in losec. The only people it would pursuade to travel losec are those who can and will fly BR's to go across so you would never even see them anyway.
I agree that losec needs some love but I truly don't think that messing with the hisec folks play area would achieve this. it would need focussed attention on giving those % of players who are willing to go to losec a good reason to do so. This just gives them a good reason to train cloakiness which to be honest they probably already will have done to use losec anyway.
But in your opinion it's ok to force people to use hisec?
The point being that anyone from lo or null should have nothiing to fear in hisec since they are used to operating in much more dangerous areas. You are in no aditional danger to go about your business unless you have gone pirate and are -5 or less in sec rating. In that case you made your choice to exclude yourself from hisec and therefore live with your choices.
forcing those in hisec to traverse lower sec areas is forcing them to expose themself to more danger than they choose to. Forcing the majority of players into something would be counter productive in the extreme. |
Dustpuppy
Rox Inc
12
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 10:28:39 -
[1633] - Quote
Ceawlin Cobon-Han wrote: That traders will continue to go to jita is an assumption. It's possible that the various factions' main hubs will become more active, as risk/reward sky-rockets for the trade routes to jita, causing traders to abandon it for their local and much safer main hub.
And why is it a problem to reduce Jita a bit? Prices will change as it won't be that easy again to move high volumes of inventory across the four empires (coming from loot of the mission runners), but I would appreciate these effects.
And if Mission runners would focus more on their area - who cares. They will stay in high sec.
The only problem I see at the moment are the required changes. Either the security status of systems near the borders must be changed which will lead to tears of the ones in the affected zones or the four empires must undergo a "continental drift" leading to new systems appearing in the middle between the empires.
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
730
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 10:51:15 -
[1634] - Quote
Dustpuppy wrote:Ceawlin Cobon-Han wrote: That traders will continue to go to jita is an assumption. It's possible that the various factions' main hubs will become more active, as risk/reward sky-rockets for the trade routes to jita, causing traders to abandon it for their local and much safer main hub.
And why is it a problem to reduce Jita a bit? Prices will change as it won't be that easy again to move high volumes of inventory across the four empires (coming from loot of the mission runners), but I would appreciate these effects. And if Mission runners would focus more on their area - who cares. They will stay in high sec. The only problem I see at the moment are the required changes. Either the security status of systems near the borders must be changed which will lead to tears of the ones in the affected zones or the four empires must undergo a "continental drift" leading to new systems appearing in the middle between the empires.
This wouldn't just affect mission runners, it would affect traders (pretty much killing their playstyle), manufacturers who need masses of materials or to ship finished products to the hubs (they simply wouldn't risk losec as to them it's not worth it), the mission arcs would be up the spout especially the SoE arc that's specifically designed to travel newer players around the different hisec regions and no doubt many other professions would be hit too.
It also would not make sense for the Empires to allow this to happen. Whilst nominally at war with one another they always need to trade with each other. The FW is more a case of contested space than all out war as no single Empire could afford such a thing and the Corps that really run the Empires certainly wouldn't allow it.
Read back through the previous replies and you'll see that the losec/null people think this would be great and the hisec folks hate the idea. The losec people seem to want this change to provide them with more easy targets. I would rather there be better incentives for players to travel losec and in turn provide those there with hard targets, something that will require real effort and team work to catch and kill.
Other losec/null players think this would bring life back to losec, but I think not. Those in hisec opposed to this would never go to losec in any circumstances. The few % happy to do so already will be doing so. If there was any increase in pilots flying through losec it would be in BR's so you'd never even see them or in multi-stabbed haulers leading to more boo-hoo-I-can't-catch-them-nerf-WCS posts than we already get. It would be a pointless change with potentially seriously damaging effects on a large portion of the player base. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
866
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 10:59:49 -
[1635] - Quote
King Fu Hostile wrote:But in your opinion it's ok to force people to use hisec?
Who is forcing you?
|
Stellar Tycoon
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 13:00:55 -
[1636] - Quote
Here's my input.
Have the 4 empires segregated by low sec. But, have all 4 empires connected through a central high sec owned by Concord.
The idea is to create these border regions between empires 'No man's land' or what ever it needs to be to justify its existence.
The reasoning would be to break up the pathing between the main market hubs and create a choice for traders. Go though Concord space and spend X amount of extra time. Or risk going through low sec for a much shorter journey.
This would still provide a safety for all the high sec players, but will force a decision on them, risk vs time.
Check out this image to give you an idea of what i mean. Assume low sec surrounds all the empires, except the concord controlled zone. The lines are travel routes.
This may even create a drive for a new trade hub in the Concord controlled area. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
866
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 13:05:25 -
[1637] - Quote
Stellar Tycoon wrote:Here's my input. Have the 4 empires segregated by low sec. But, have all 4 empires connected through a central high sec owned by Concord.
Stationless?
|
Stellar Tycoon
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 13:07:41 -
[1638] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Stellar Tycoon wrote:Here's my input. Have the 4 empires segregated by low sec. But, have all 4 empires connected through a central high sec owned by Concord. Stationless?
It'll have stations, just like all of regular low sec/high sec. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
730
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 13:10:21 -
[1639] - Quote
Stellar Tycoon wrote:Here's my input. Have the 4 empires segregated by low sec. But, have all 4 empires connected through a central high sec region/contesllation owned by Concord. The idea is to create these border regions between empires 'No man's land' or what ever it needs to be to justify its existence. The reasoning would be to break up the pathing between the main market hubs and create a choice for traders. Go though Concord space and spend X amount of extra time. Or risk going through low sec for a much shorter journey. This would still provide a safety for all the high sec players, but will force a decision on them, risk vs time. Check out this image to give you an idea of what i mean. Assume low sec surrounds all the empires, except the concord controlled zone. The lines are travel routes. This may even create a drive for a new trade hub in the Concord controlled area.
This would mean every hauler travelling through the new concord space giving gankers a much easier predictable group of choke points and again there is no reason the Empires would allow this to happen as it would stifle the trade they need to exist. I would rathe time be spent on improving the reasons to go to losec/null rather than mess with the hisec systems which work fine as they are. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
866
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 13:15:07 -
[1640] - Quote
Stellar Tycoon wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Stellar Tycoon wrote:Here's my input. Have the 4 empires segregated by low sec. But, have all 4 empires connected through a central high sec owned by Concord. Stationless? I edited the original text. It'll have stations, just like all of regular low sec/high sec.
Then you have your new super trade hub and nothing changes. Except for that trading has become easier and faster. I could like that idea.
|
|
Stellar Tycoon
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 13:18:52 -
[1641] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: This would mean every hauler travelling through the new concord space giving gankers a much easier predictable group of choke points and again there is no reason the Empires would allow this to happen as it would stifle the trade they need to exist. I would rathe time be spent on improving the reasons to go to losec/null rather than mess with the hisec systems which work fine as they are.
Well this would create a reason for people to go to low sec, to reduce their time spent traveling.
Currently almost everyone passes through Niarja anyway, so your point about traders being predictable is unfounded.
I propose that traders are given the choice. Freighters should either spend 90 minutes active piloting between Dodixie and Jita, vs 30 minutes through low sec. Make it a viable and profitable choice for players. Isk/hour vs Risk etc.
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
733
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 13:29:22 -
[1642] - Quote
Stellar Tycoon wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: This would mean every hauler travelling through the new concord space giving gankers a much easier predictable group of choke points and again there is no reason the Empires would allow this to happen as it would stifle the trade they need to exist. I would rathe time be spent on improving the reasons to go to losec/null rather than mess with the hisec systems which work fine as they are.
Well this would create a reason for people to go to low sec, to reduce their time spent traveling. Currently almost everyone passes through Niarja anyway, so your point about traders being predictable is unfounded. I propose that traders are given the choice. Freighters should either spend 90 minutes active piloting between Dodixie and Jita, vs 30 minutes through low sec. Make it a viable and profitable choice for players. Isk/hour vs Risk etc.
It wouldn't create a reason to go through losec it would force any trader/hauler to do so as a 90 minute manual piloted trip would be a complete no from them. It would simply drive them from the game. Also 30 minutes through losec in a freighter? no way that the average hisec player would even go for 5 minutes let alone 30!
|
Tappits
north eastern swat Pandemic Legion
64
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 13:31:50 -
[1643] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: It wouldn't create a reason to go through losec it would force any trader/hauler to do so as a 90 minute manual piloted trip would be a complete no from them. It would simply drive them from the game. Also 30 minutes through losec in a freighter? no way that the average hisec player would even go for 5 minutes let alone 30!
90mins? 30 mins?
It could/would just be one lowsec jump. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
868
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 13:35:21 -
[1644] - Quote
Stellar Tycoon wrote:I propose that traders are given the choice. Freighters should either spend 90 minutes active piloting between Dodixie and Jita, vs 30 minutes through low sec. Make it a viable and profitable choice for players. Isk/hour vs Risk etc.
ROFL
Are you serious? Do you even have the slightest idea how much preparation is needed to cross even 1 single Low sec system with a freighter? How long you have to wait for a neut free time or time with very few neuts in completely irrelevant systems? Now imagine that in systems which are essential to travel. Getting a freighter through there is nigh impossible and if you want to pull it of, requires immense preparation.
A choice between 90 mins or 30 mins? To pull that off, you need to keep the Concord route at roughly the same length as it is today. And the Low sec route needed to be around 2, maybe 4 jumps. That is not going to happen as it would mean Dodi and Jita have Low sec systems right next to them; otherwise you would have a situation like Vecamia and if there is only 1 Low sec in the route, you'd have a massive choke point.
A choice? Yes. Every trader will take the choice and move business to a station in the Concord space. |
Stellar Tycoon
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 13:37:54 -
[1645] - Quote
Tappits wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: It wouldn't create a reason to go through losec it would force any trader/hauler to do so as a 90 minute manual piloted trip would be a complete no from them. It would simply drive them from the game. Also 30 minutes through losec in a freighter? no way that the average hisec player would even go for 5 minutes let alone 30!
90mins? 30 mins? It could/would just be one lowsec jump.
Exactly. I'd envision at least 2 low sec systems to jump through before getting back to high sec. This would expose the haulers to a reasonable amount of risk. 1 low sec system seems a bit too short, and once you're in warp, the ship is then safe as it jumps when it lands. But with 2 systems, the ship has to jump from low sec to low sec and then to high sec again. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
733
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 13:47:03 -
[1646] - Quote
Stellar Tycoon wrote:Tappits wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: It wouldn't create a reason to go through losec it would force any trader/hauler to do so as a 90 minute manual piloted trip would be a complete no from them. It would simply drive them from the game. Also 30 minutes through losec in a freighter? no way that the average hisec player would even go for 5 minutes let alone 30!
90mins? 30 mins? It could/would just be one lowsec jump. Exactly. I'd envision at least 2 low sec systems to jump through before getting back to high sec. This would expose the haulers to a reasonable amount of risk. 1 low sec system seems a bit too short, and once you're in warp, the ship is then safe as it jumps when it lands. But with 2 systems, the ship has to jump from low sec to low sec and then to high sec again.
How is hisec risk free? Did gankers suddenly say 'Oh well, I can't be arsed anymore...'?
Pushing hisec players to have to use losec areas is simply asking for easy kills. Nothing should be easy so any players wanting those juicy freighters should go gank the the same as the current gankers do. That would provide the increase in risk you are asking for but at a cost to the gankers just as we have now. |
Stellar Tycoon
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 14:06:15 -
[1647] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:How is hisec risk free? Did gankers suddenly say 'Oh well, I can't be arsed anymore...'?
Pushing hisec players to have to use losec areas is simply asking for easy kills. Nothing should be easy so any players wanting those juicy freighters should go gank the the same as the current gankers do. That would provide the increase in risk you are asking for but at a cost to the gankers just as we have now.
I never said hisec was risk free. I'm saying that there is little choice in the matter right now. There are no real short cuts, outside of wormholes and they're too unpredictable for traders. So offering an alternative route to save time gives the option of more conflict. |
Dustpuppy
Rox Inc
12
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 14:07:50 -
[1648] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Stellar Tycoon wrote:Here's my input. Have the 4 empires segregated by low sec. But, have all 4 empires connected through a central high sec owned by Concord. Stationless?
No, one station should be there called "Babylon 5"
But my ultimate dream is to see Jita drop to 0.5 sec over night. Not because I don't use the station but just because for the tears. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
868
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 14:24:01 -
[1649] - Quote
Stellar Tycoon wrote:I never said hisec was risk free. I'm saying that there is little choice in the matter right now. There are no real short cuts, outside of wormholes and they're too unpredictable for traders. So offering an alternative route to save time gives the option of more conflict.
I make it simple: There is no choice. Try it yourself. Try to move a freighter through Aunenen or to Ossa, or through Tama, Rancer, or Bleak Lands. Try it repeatedly. If you succeed, let us know how much time you invested I need max. 2 hours on the safe route to Rens from Jita. Show us what you can do. |
Tappits
north eastern swat Pandemic Legion
64
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 14:59:50 -
[1650] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Stellar Tycoon wrote:I never said hisec was risk free. I'm saying that there is little choice in the matter right now. There are no real short cuts, outside of wormholes and they're too unpredictable for traders. So offering an alternative route to save time gives the option of more conflict. I make it simple: There is no choice. Try it yourself. Try to move a freighter through Aunenen or to Ossa, or through Tama, Rancer, or Bleak Lands. Try it repeatedly. If you succeed, let us know how much time you invested I need max. 2 hours on the safe route to Rens from Jita. Show us what you can do.
Its easy move it with a fleet. and you might get a fleet fight out of it on the way... moving in high sec there is nothing a fleet can do other than web... you cannot have a fight over if your going to loose the freighter in high sec.
Or would you like to do everything solo? |
|
Ceawlin Cobon-Han
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
18
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 15:11:45 -
[1651] - Quote
I think this topic is about talked out.
Pirates want all that extra losec traffic, but the traders and haulers don't. Attempting to force hisec players into losec will backfire badly. This idea doesn't make sense lorewise.
-1 |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
868
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 15:17:03 -
[1652] - Quote
Tappits wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Stellar Tycoon wrote:I never said hisec was risk free. I'm saying that there is little choice in the matter right now. There are no real short cuts, outside of wormholes and they're too unpredictable for traders. So offering an alternative route to save time gives the option of more conflict. I make it simple: There is no choice. Try it yourself. Try to move a freighter through Aunenen or to Ossa, or through Tama, Rancer, or Bleak Lands. Try it repeatedly. If you succeed, let us know how much time you invested I need max. 2 hours on the safe route to Rens from Jita. Show us what you can do. Its easy move it with a fleet. and you might get a fleet fight out of it on the way... moving in high sec there is nothing a fleet can do other than web... you cannot have a fight over if your going to loose the freighter in high sec. Or would you like to do everything solo?
I don't need fleet fights when I want to move a CC or necessary materials for my production. Not to mention that I do not have the time or interest to wait for people to help me, it's bothersome and then there are always pirates who cannot enter High sec and cause even more waiting time. That's ridiculous.
With the "fleet" you mean a fleet that can scale to enormous size as you will need to counter an ever growing number of people attacking you once they got wind of your Low sec freighter travels? Because losing a freighter in Low sec is a lot easier than in High sec due to cynos and indefinite point by opponent ships. Besides, who pay them? The person setting up the CC? The corp/alliance members by paying higher prices?
Taking the above into account: Do I like doing things solo? Yes. Is it unreasonable to expect that I can do things solo? No. Do I want to prevent others from doing things in groups? No. Can others already do things in groups? Yes. Especially with the hauling, the routes are already there. Do many actually uses the routes in groups, who do not use a bigger ship than BR or DST? No. Why? Convenience and laziness. Can you remove the laziness from the game by adding more Low sec and force encourage more players to go through more dangerous space to be farmed by those who cannot fight real fights? No, you just cause more frustration. Do I like frustration? Yes, because it creates lovely friction and causes friends to turn against each other and stab themselves. Nothing is more enjoyable than friends murdering themselves. Will I be frustrated? No, because it won't affect me a lot. I can use JF, BR, Carrier, WH and all sorts of things to just skip the Low sec. I already live EVE how it should be lived in my opinion. The majority does not like that and does not live it this way, among them most if not all Null sec people. Who will be hit most? You, not me. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
733
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 15:20:56 -
[1653] - Quote
Tappits wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Stellar Tycoon wrote:I never said hisec was risk free. I'm saying that there is little choice in the matter right now. There are no real short cuts, outside of wormholes and they're too unpredictable for traders. So offering an alternative route to save time gives the option of more conflict. I make it simple: There is no choice. Try it yourself. Try to move a freighter through Aunenen or to Ossa, or through Tama, Rancer, or Bleak Lands. Try it repeatedly. If you succeed, let us know how much time you invested I need max. 2 hours on the safe route to Rens from Jita. Show us what you can do. Its easy move it with a fleet. and you might get a fleet fight out of it on the way... moving in high sec there is nothing a fleet can do other than web... you cannot have a fight over if your going to loose the freighter in high sec. Or would you like to do everything solo?
The problem being that many people who move or stay in hisec do so as they don't have the playing time available to commit to a large corp and fleet operations. Making them require a fleet for every movement of goods would simply force them out of the game.
The proposed change would not drive comflict as those in hisec would not enter into conflict, that's the very reason they are in hisec. It would simply casue major instability in the economy and more polarization to specific areas in hisec. Such a change simply to deliver easy kills to losec players is a bad change. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
733
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 15:21:45 -
[1654] - Quote
Ceawlin Cobon-Han wrote:I think this topic is about talked out.
Pirates want all that extra losec traffic, but the traders and haulers don't. Attempting to force hisec players into losec will backfire badly. This idea doesn't make sense lorewise.
-1
just about talked out at page 4 I think :D |
Talon SilverHawk
Ronin Cartel The G0dfathers
697
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 16:57:15 -
[1655] - Quote
Like the idea, low sec leading to null sec between empires, but lots of connections not 5 that are camped to sh*t and back
Tal
|
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
56
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 02:19:39 -
[1656] - Quote
I find this and many other topics very enlightening. Low and nul are dead as hell with hardly any activity, yet high sec flourishes with countless players enjoying their time in game. So the obvious answer is to force all of those who are having fun to go into low/nul where they to can be miserable and have no fun. Instead of the relentless topics of how to force people to go to a place they do not want to be, how about we explore how to make low and nul exciting places, places that players WANT to be? |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
868
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 07:05:04 -
[1657] - Quote
Donnachadh wrote:I find this and many other topics very enlightening. Low and nul are dead as hell with hardly any activity, yet high sec flourishes with countless players enjoying their time in game. So the obvious answer is to force all of those who are having fun to go into low/nul where they to can be miserable and have no fun. Instead of the relentless topics of how to force people to go to a place they do not want to be, how about we explore how to make low and nul exciting places, places that players WANT to be?
Would require too much thought and effort. On the other hand, I am absolutely against making Low and Null too interesting and popular. I love the dead and empty reaches of Solitude, Kor-Azor, Aridia, Derelik and Khanid. They are absolutely awesome for more solitary activities and I do not see either necessity or reasons to change that. |
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
187
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 07:23:25 -
[1658] - Quote
It might be interesting as a 2-3 day event. As a week long event, it would deplete the ready reserves of several pockets of HS in terms of isk and stocked modules. A two week event would see miners and haulers unsubbing hard. A month would likely grind most of the economy to a halt in HS, and drive up mineral prices massively in null. Permanently would break much of the current economy and shift the heart of the game out of jita, as caldari space just doesn't have enough resources available in the reliable belts to fuel the HS based production.
Yes, I do incursions. Find out more here
Tech 3 battleships.
Moar battleships
|
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
57
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 14:29:16 -
[1659] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Would require too much thought and effort. On the other hand, I am absolutely against making Low and Null too interesting and popular. I love the dead and empty reaches of Solitude, Kor-Azor, Aridia, Derelik and Khanid. They are absolutely awesome for more solitary activities and I do not see either necessity or reasons to change that.
Thank you for pointing out one of the major issue that we face here. The desires I see posted for low are polar opposites and therefor will never be resolved for all of the players.
The majority of those who have posted here want more targets to be forced into low sec so they can shoot them, but that would eliminate the vast areas of virtually empty space that you and many others I know personally enjoy.
Keep low the way it is so you have the areas of empty space an the group who wants more targets to shoot suffers.
Solving low is a complex issue and I have no idea how to "solve" it. What I do know for sure is that forcing people to make a decision to stay forever in one small area of high sec space or risk moving all of their stuff through low sec is not a viable solution especially when there is no game wide benefit in doing so. And no your desire to have more targets to shoot does not qualify as a game wide benefit, because it comes at the expense of removing freedoms currently enjoyed by the largest single player base in the game, those who choose to call high sec their home. |
Gaan Cathal
Angry Mustellid The Periphery
20
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 18:04:21 -
[1660] - Quote
Donnachadh wrote: Thank you for pointing out one of the major issue that we face here. The desires I see posted for low are polar opposites and therefor will never be resolved for all of the players.
The majority of those who have posted here want more targets to be forced into low sec so they can shoot them, but that would eliminate the vast areas of virtually empty space that you and many others I know personally enjoy.
Keep low the way it is so you have the areas of empty space an the group who wants more targets to shoot suffers.
Solving low is a complex issue and I have no idea how to "solve" it. What I do know for sure is that forcing people to make a decision to stay forever in one small area of high sec space or risk moving all of their stuff through low sec is not a viable solution especially when there is no game wide benefit in doing so. And no your desire to have more targets to shoot does not qualify as a game wide benefit, because it comes at the expense of removing freedoms currently enjoyed by the largest single player base in the game, those who choose to call high sec their home.
The Game Wide benefit is that the regional differences in High Sec actually start to mean something, like the ones in Null already do. That has a plethora of knock-on economic effects that are well worth the mild inconcenience of a High-sec industrialist actually having to import goods they can't directly access. Having to import T2 materials from Null hasn't ruined the game, having to import Sleeper tech from W-Space hasn't ruined the game. Having to import Jaspet to your Caldari-based industrial operation won't ruin the game either.
My personal support for this, as a Lowsec denizen, isn't about having more people for me to shoot. It's about rewarding those people who base in Highsec and are willing to move goods/ships between the prospective Highsec pockets. Risk/reward. At no point does this suggestion force anyone to move through lowsec to play the game. It merely introduces a reward for those who are willing to. |
|
King Fu Hostile
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
199
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 18:25:35 -
[1661] - Quote
Donnachadh wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Would require too much thought and effort. On the other hand, I am absolutely against making Low and Null too interesting and popular. I love the dead and empty reaches of Solitude, Kor-Azor, Aridia, Derelik and Khanid. They are absolutely awesome for more solitary activities and I do not see either necessity or reasons to change that. Thank you for pointing out one of the major issue that we face here. The desires I see posted for low are polar opposites and therefor will never be resolved for all of the players. The majority of those who have posted here want more targets to be forced into low sec so they can shoot them, but that would eliminate the vast areas of virtually empty space that you and many others I know personally enjoy. Keep low the way it is so you have the areas of empty space an the group who wants more targets to shoot suffers. Solving low is a complex issue and I have no idea how to "solve" it. What I do know for sure is that forcing people to make a decision to stay forever in one small area of high sec space or risk moving all of their stuff through low sec is not a viable solution especially when there is no game wide benefit in doing so. And no your desire to have more targets to shoot does not qualify as a game wide benefit, because it comes at the expense of removing freedoms currently enjoyed by the largest single player base in the game, those who choose to call high sec their home.
Game wide benefit, and the whole point of this thread is to give birth to a more complex universal economy consisting of local and inter-regional trades.
Lowsec people dont need more targets, it is the most active pvp region by number of kills per capita, and contrary to your naive beliefs, they arent parricularly interested in shooting hiseccers.
What they do wish, however, is that the people who are currently stuck in hisec would come and experience virtual life in lawless space, because lowsec people know its better. Its just a more immersive, social and overall rewarding gameplay experience, for the same sub price. |
13kr1d1
Hedion University Amarr Empire
21
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 19:11:43 -
[1662] - Quote
VERY liked. It will encourage more PvP and corps to hire PvPers in house or as merc, and it will create more jobs. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
870
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 19:21:16 -
[1663] - Quote
King Fu Hostile wrote:Game wide benefit, and the whole point of this thread is to give birth to a more complex universal economy consisting of local and inter-regional trades.
Lowsec people dont need more targets, it is the most active pvp region by number of kills per capita, and contrary to your naive beliefs, they arent parricularly interested in shooting hiseccers.
What they do wish, however, is that the people who are currently stuck in hisec would come and experience virtual life in lawless space, because lowsec people know its better. Its just a more immersive, social and overall rewarding gameplay experience, for the same sub price.
Then stop the victimization and provide an environment of which one would want to be part of. No additional Low sec is needed for that. For instance, as long as miners are shunned as the bottom of the EVE community, the doormat of the populace, not many of them will be willing to become part of your community. Just as a hint.
In contrast. players out there should search for ways to make Low sec in itself better. More of the same useless rubbish does not achieve anything you want.
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
733
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 21:24:07 -
[1664] - Quote
King Fu Hostile wrote: Game wide benefit, and the whole point of this thread is to give birth to a more complex universal economy consisting of local and inter-regional trades.
Lowsec people dont need more targets, it is the most active pvp region by number of kills per capita, and contrary to your naive beliefs, they arent parricularly interested in shooting hiseccers.
What they do wish, however, is that the people who are currently stuck in hisec would come and experience virtual life in lawless space, because lowsec people know its better. Its just a more immersive, social and overall rewarding gameplay experience, for the same sub price.
If you read back and see the comments from hisec people they flat refuse to travel through losec. How then would this lead to a more complex economy? It would stifle areas and people would simply aggregate to the current largest hub.
If the losec people have plenty of targets and don't like shooting hiseccers then why try to push hisec folks into losec space?
I think if you ask those in hisec they don't feel 'stuck' at all. They could easily run through losec for shorter trade routes right now but *choose* not to. They want nothing of losec. Whether losec is better or worse is completely subjective and those in hisec would mostly say it is far worse. I have plenty of immersive social interactions up in hisec and have a perfectly rewardig game experience. Whislt I enjoy running through losec I wouldn't want to *have* to do so unless I choose to. This change would force anyone who wishes to make a reasonable profit to do so or simply arbitrarily lose any profit margin they have. How long do you think thwey would keep subbing their chars for then?
The sec areas are fine as are, what's missing is reasons to entice those from hisec to losec, and even then it would only be a small %. Most in hisec want to carry out their business without being under constant threat of explosion. That is their choice and to force anything else upon them would be wrong (beyond the acceoted risk every time you undock of course :D ).. |
13kr1d1
Hedion University Amarr Empire
22
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 22:40:20 -
[1665] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:King Fu Hostile wrote:Game wide benefit, and the whole point of this thread is to give birth to a more complex universal economy consisting of local and inter-regional trades.
Lowsec people dont need more targets, it is the most active pvp region by number of kills per capita, and contrary to your naive beliefs, they arent parricularly interested in shooting hiseccers.
What they do wish, however, is that the people who are currently stuck in hisec would come and experience virtual life in lawless space, because lowsec people know its better. Its just a more immersive, social and overall rewarding gameplay experience, for the same sub price. Then stop the victimization and provide an environment of which one would want to be part of. No additional Low sec is needed for that. For instance, as long as miners are shunned as the bottom of the EVE community, the doormat of the populace, not many of them will be willing to become part of your community. Just as a hint. In contrast. players out there should search for ways to make Low sec in itself better. More of the same useless rubbish does not achieve anything you want.
How come people haven't run spacelane protection corps? Or miner defense corps? |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
873
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 22:48:05 -
[1666] - Quote
13kr1d1 wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Then stop the victimization and provide an environment of which one would want to be part of. No additional Low sec is needed for that. For instance, as long as miners are shunned as the bottom of the EVE community, the doormat of the populace, not many of them will be willing to become part of your community. Just as a hint. In contrast. players out there should search for ways to make Low sec in itself better. More of the same useless rubbish does not achieve anything you want. How come people haven't run spacelane protection corps? Or miner defense corps?
Miners don't want to pay unreliable people? Miners don't want to pay ridiculous prices for "protection"? Miners don't want to pay at all (also a problem, but understandable with the love for scaming and awoxing and the 2 previous questions)? PVPers don't want to sit around and wait for something to happen? Too much effort? The "I want to shoot something now!!11!" mentality? The "I want content without me doing something for it!!" mentality? The attitude that miners are not needed in game and that they are all bots or soon-to-be bots? Because mining is boring? Because no one wants to fly around in empty space and cause content? Because people don't undock unless ships are SRP'd? Or unless they get a guaranteed kill/kill streak? Because many players rather sit in station and wait for pings, while playing other games?
I've heard all of these questions and justifications not to do something and the list is by far not exhaustive. So take your pick.
|
13kr1d1
Hedion University Amarr Empire
22
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 23:30:47 -
[1667] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:13kr1d1 wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Then stop the victimization and provide an environment of which one would want to be part of. No additional Low sec is needed for that. For instance, as long as miners are shunned as the bottom of the EVE community, the doormat of the populace, not many of them will be willing to become part of your community. Just as a hint. In contrast. players out there should search for ways to make Low sec in itself better. More of the same useless rubbish does not achieve anything you want. How come people haven't run spacelane protection corps? Or miner defense corps? Miners don't want to pay unreliable people? Miners don't want to pay ridiculous prices for "protection"? Miners don't want to pay at all (also a problem, but understandable with the love for scaming and awoxing and the 2 previous questions)? PVPers don't want to sit around and wait for something to happen? Too much effort? The "I want to shoot something now!!11!" mentality? The "I want content without me doing something for it!!" mentality?
You're right and the biggest problem lies is not wanting to pay. If you have to pay, your produce gets more expensive to cover your costs. That's how the real world works. Why can't people figure that out in Eve?
It's funny that they don't want to sit around and wait for something to happen when that's exactly how FW plays out anyway. Warp here, warp there, warp to station, warp to gate, too little or too much enemy, warp somewhere else, etc.
PvP for low sec miner protection is about as "exciting" as this kind of factional "warfare" I just described. |
Lugia3
Intentionally Dense Easily Excited
1332
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 02:02:49 -
[1668] - Quote
A necessary change.
The new regions should be Sansha + EoM.
"CCP Dolan is full of shit." - CCP Bettik
Remove Sov!
|
J A Aloysiusz
Precision Strike Brigade Easily Excited
91
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 02:36:09 -
[1669] - Quote
Lugia3 wrote:A necessary change.
The new regions should be Sansha + EoM.
+1
(edit) Let me add more: I think this would need to be coupled with more local industry specialization to work properly. Moving things from Jita to Amarr should be both difficult and profitable.
I also think that once local industry is sorted, JFs need to be nerfed. It isn't reasonable that moving things more quickly is also significantly safer. |
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
57
|
Posted - 2014.11.01 02:34:36 -
[1670] - Quote
King Fu Hostile wrote:Game wide benefit, and the whole point of this thread is to give birth to a more complex universal economy consisting of local and inter-regional trades. Do you have any research, market analysis, or player survey data to back this up? I though not. Besides essentially forcing the largest player base in the game to do something they do not want to do you are asking CCP to take a huge gamble on the future of the game we all enjoy.
King Fu Hostile wrote:Lowsec people dont need more targets, it is the most active pvp region by number of kills per capita, and contrary to your naive beliefs, they arent parricularly interested in shooting hiseccers. If you have enough targets to shoot and do not want any more then why does this matter?
If all high sec players do is use low as a freeway to get from a to b how does it impact or change what is going on in low and what would be the impact to the rest of the game especially the markets?
If you are not looking for targets then you would agree to an exclusion zone of say 200,000 meters around all of the gates in low. These exclusion zones would prevent the activation of all modules except a warp drive or micro jump drives. Doing this would let the high sec players into low, without the risk of being killed at every gate they are forced to pass through.
King Fu Hostile wrote:What they do wish, however, is that the people who are currently stuck in hisec would come and experience virtual life in lawless space, because lowsec people know its better. Its just a more immersive, social and overall rewarding gameplay experience, for the same sub price. This one shows just how complete your lack of understanding of the average high sec player truly is. ALL high sec players are aware of low, and most of them are aware of the greater rewards that are to be had there. The issue is simply that THEY DO NOT WANT TO GO THERE at any point or for any reason.
Low sec being better is subjective and it is a personal point of view, the largest block of players in the game would tell you that you are wrong. Me this is just another indicator of how little you and others understand those who choose to make high sec their home in this game.
Low sec being more social is also a personal opinion and my experiences say that you are wrong. But then that is a personal opinion as well. |
|
Commander Ted
Quantum Reality R n D The Unthinkables
1207
|
Posted - 2014.11.01 18:37:02 -
[1671] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
The problem is that those in the hisec area absolutely do not want to be in the losec area.
Then they don't have to go.
Duh.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
|
Ceawlin Cobon-Han
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
20
|
Posted - 2014.11.01 18:45:05 -
[1672] - Quote
Gaan Cathal wrote: My personal support for this, as a Lowsec denizen, isn't about having more people for me to shoot.
You really are some type of comedian, you are! You want people to think you "care" about the earning power of the HS players? Of course it's about getting you more easy action. There is no other reason for wanting this. |
Ceawlin Cobon-Han
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
20
|
Posted - 2014.11.01 18:52:23 -
[1673] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
The problem is that those in the hisec area absolutely do not want to be in the losec area.
Then they don't have to go. Duh. Making redundant the idea that started this topic. All that happens is the HS players have their game crippled, while the LS players experience nothing new. |
Commander Ted
Quantum Reality R n D The Unthinkables
1207
|
Posted - 2014.11.01 19:10:54 -
[1674] - Quote
Ceawlin Cobon-Han wrote: You really are some type of comedian, you are! You want people to think you "care" about the earning power of the HS players? Of course it's about getting you more easy action. There is no other reason for wanting this.
Making redundant the idea that started this topic. All that happens is the HS players have their game crippled, while the LS players experience nothing new.
How would your game be crippled exactly?
People who aren't afraid of lowsec now have an actual advantage in going through it to make isk and people who are afraid of it have an unchanged game.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
875
|
Posted - 2014.11.01 19:15:09 -
[1675] - Quote
What advantage? I remember the times when TEST held sov in Fountain and the terror of Hier. Nothing cloaky made it through there. I thus don't see any advantage. Just easier targets for Low sec people, because the game's population has become so terrible and needs easy content.
On the other hand, the really only advantage I see is that dead areas of today become even deader as people more to these blazing hot areas of Low sec. That is in fact very much in my favor, as I then do not need about pesky neutrals in local any more when I explore and do my stuff. |
Commander Ted
Quantum Reality R n D The Unthinkables
1207
|
Posted - 2014.11.01 19:24:29 -
[1676] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:What advantage? I remember the times when TEST held sov in Fountain and the terror of Hier. Nothing cloaky made it through there. I thus don't see any advantage. Just easier targets for Low sec people, because the game's population has become so terrible and needs easy content. On the other hand, the absolutely only advantage I see is that dead areas of today become even deader as people move to these blazing hot areas of Low sec. That is in fact very much in my favor, as I then do not need about pesky neutrals in local any more when I explore and do my stuff.
Advantage doesn't mean advantage over pirates.
Economic advantage of crossing lowsec.
If there is more money to be made by crossing from A-B then people will be more willing to learn how to get from A-B.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
875
|
Posted - 2014.11.01 19:43:38 -
[1677] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: Advantage doesn't mean advantage over pirates.
Economic advantage of crossing lowsec.
If there is more money to be made by crossing from A-B then people will be more willing to learn how to get from A-B.
Just like people are doing now, I presume? |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
1953
|
Posted - 2014.11.01 20:00:53 -
[1678] - Quote
It would be great if the empires were separated by low sec and faction warfare could effect the security status, and what empire owned these parts of space.
+1
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
875
|
Posted - 2014.11.01 20:02:58 -
[1679] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:It would be great if the empires were separated by low sec and faction warfare could effect the security status, and what empire owned these parts of space.
Empire Space is already divided by Low sec for FW. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
1953
|
Posted - 2014.11.01 20:04:31 -
[1680] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Rek Seven wrote:It would be great if the empires were separated by low sec and faction warfare could effect the security status, and what empire owned these parts of space. Empire Space is already divided by Low sec for FW.
Na i mean that you wouldn't be able to get from Dodixi to Jita without going through low sec if the low sec systems were contested by rival factions.
+1
|
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
875
|
Posted - 2014.11.01 20:20:30 -
[1681] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Rek Seven wrote:It would be great if the empires were separated by low sec and faction warfare could effect the security status, and what empire owned these parts of space. Empire Space is already divided by Low sec for FW. Na i mean that you wouldn't be able to get from Dodixi to Jita without going through low sec if the low sec systems were contested by rival factions.
Only for FW participants, I presume. |
Ezek Price
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
46
|
Posted - 2014.11.01 22:22:08 -
[1682] - Quote
make it so -- more player content
War doesn't determine who is right, only who is left.
My blog, Civire Commander: http://civre.blogspot.co.uk/
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
875
|
Posted - 2014.11.01 22:25:17 -
[1683] - Quote
Ezek Price wrote:make it so -- more player content
You can't even fill the existing Low sec with activity. |
Humang
Sefem Velox Swift Angels Alliance
76
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 00:18:02 -
[1684] - Quote
I'm surprised this thread is still going, but I'll still give it a +1 provided that the idea: separate empires with lowsec, but keep a few regional gate between each that incur a nominal fee to use (based on the ship-mass to cargo-room ratio).
People can still move between high sec systems without ever setting foot in low, but now that have a reason to decide otherwise.
AFK cloaking thread Summary - Provided by Paikis
Good Post Etiquette - Provided by CCP Grayscale
|
Evora Pirkibo
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
37
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 04:21:53 -
[1685] - Quote
Humang wrote:I'm surprised this thread is still going, but I'll still give it a +1 provided that the idea: separate empires with lowsec, but keep a few regional gate between each that incur a nominal fee to use (based on the ship-mass to cargo-room ratio).
People can still move between high sec systems without ever setting foot in low, but now that have a reason to decide otherwise.
Rather than a gate charging a tax, I would suggest an increase in HS-HS wormholes. Some large enough to fit a freighter through, but with an overall mass limitation only allowing a few of them to pass through before collapse. With a bit of effort large scale trade would be possible with variable consistency.
The connecting wormhole spawn rate and mass limitations could then be used to balance the situation. |
Humang
Sefem Velox Swift Angels Alliance
77
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 08:17:44 -
[1686] - Quote
Evora Pirkibo wrote:Rather than a gate charging a tax, I would suggest an increase in HS-HS wormholes. Some large enough to fit a freighter through, but with an overall mass limitation only allowing a few of them to pass through before collapse. With a bit of effort large scale trade would be possible with variable consistency.
The connecting wormhole spawn rate and mass limitations could then be used to balance the situation. The only issue I see with that is that it wouldn't be consistent enough with comparison to current game-play, which would be one of the main points that people would raise. With the tax and region gates (said gates being on the shortest routes between trade hubs) its a more subtle change as people can still auto pilot, and industry haulers/freighters are less effected by the tax.
AFK cloaking thread Summary - Provided by Paikis
Good Post Etiquette - Provided by CCP Grayscale
|
Evora Pirkibo
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
37
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 08:41:51 -
[1687] - Quote
Humang wrote:The only issue I see with that is that it wouldn't be consistent enough with comparison to current game-play, which would be one of the main points that people would raise. With the tax and region gates (said gates being on the shortest routes between trade hubs) its a more subtle change as people can still auto pilot, and industry haulers/freighters are less effected by the tax.
Separating the empires with lowsec is in no way subtle, nor is it intended to be. One of the better ramifications of the proposition is that it stops complete afk freight. The principal behind my suggestion is the ability to mitigate risk with active effort. Maintaining an active gate connection between empires defeats this purpose.
Yes that would help shake the boat less, but i believe much of the benefit lies with rough waters. |
The Hamilton
Outer Ring Sleeper Collective Illusion of Solitude
73
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 09:56:09 -
[1688] - Quote
Humang wrote:I'm surprised this thread is still going, but I'll still give it a +1 provided that the idea: separate empires with lowsec, but keep a few regional gate between each that incur a nominal fee to use (based on the ship-mass to cargo-room ratio).
People can still move between high sec systems without ever setting foot in low, but now that have a reason to decide otherwise.
Not a bad idea, what if players themselves made toll gates though. Like bandits you don't know if they'll kill you or let you pass. Player run convoys similar to the Red Frog corp. Instead you pay for protection through dangerous points. |
Ix Method
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
234
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 10:40:33 -
[1689] - Quote
Humang wrote:I'm surprised this thread is still going, but I'll still give it a +1 provided that the idea: separate empires with lowsec, but keep a few regional gate between each that incur a nominal fee to use (based on the ship-mass to cargo-room ratio).
People can still move between high sec systems without ever setting foot in low, but now that have a reason to decide otherwise. This is interesting but nominal to who? if we're talking nominal to new players its kind of pointless. But if you're talking say 5-10m? Just enough to slowly effect the price of inter-regional trade, making trips to other regions 'special' for new players - that could have genuinely interesting ramifications.
Travelling at the speed of love.
|
Adela Talvanen
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
114
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 13:53:22 -
[1690] - Quote
Just wondering but has CCP ever intergrated any of the ideas about the game and the game mechanics that have been put forward and discussed on this forum? |
|
Davey Talvanen
Zero's Legion
3
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 13:58:16 -
[1691] - Quote
What about a CONCORD system right in the middle that increases travel time by 10-20 times with no stations in a 5 jump vicinity for carebears to use but will severely cut isk/hour
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
737
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 15:33:20 -
[1692] - Quote
Cutting isk per hour of trade is a bad idea as it would raise all prices impacting everybody but new players the most. Increasing travel time is pointless as those who afk freight would just s+Žnd two freighters instead of one. Breakinghisec apart completely would lead to mass hisec unsubs as dtated by those hisec folks who have replied here.
If losec players don't like hisec afk hauling they arre free to gank them. if loseccers can't be bothered then why should hiseccers be forced to make aditional effort? Messing with hieec travel affects so many people for no gain to the game. |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2502
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 15:55:30 -
[1693] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Cutting isk per hour of trade is a bad idea as it would raise all prices impacting everybody but new players the most. Increasing travel time is pointless as those who afk freight would just s+Žnd two freighters instead of one. Breakinghisec apart completely would lead to mass hisec unsubs as dtated by those hisec folks who have replied here.
If losec players don't like hisec afk hauling they arre free to gank them. if loseccers can't be bothered then why should hiseccers be forced to make aditional effort? Messing with hieec travel affects so many people for no gain to the game. Freighters are capital ships. CCP has stated they never intended for capital ships to be solo ships, so weather or not a solo freighter could make it through low sec is irrevilent.
This change would give opprutinities for Blockade Runners and well for t1 industrials.
CCP Greyscale wrote:First, capital ships are not intended to be solo assets, so we don't tend to weight the needs of solo capital pilots when doing balance work.
-
|
Ix Method
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
239
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 15:58:34 -
[1694] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Cutting isk per hour of trade is a bad idea as it would raise all prices impacting everybody but new players the most. Increasing travel time is pointless as those who afk freight would just s+Žnd two freighters instead of one. Breakinghisec apart completely would lead to mass hisec unsubs as dtated by those hisec folks who have replied here.
If losec players don't like hisec afk hauling they arre free to gank them. if loseccers can't be bothered then why should hiseccers be forced to make aditional effort? Messing with hieec travel affects so many people for no gain to the game. Freighters are capital ships. CCP has stated they never intended for capital ships to be solo ships, so weather or not a solo freighter could make it through low sec is irrevilent. This change would give opprutinities for Blockade Runners and well for t1 industrials. That's stunningly disingenuous even for this place.
Travelling at the speed of love.
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
876
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 16:13:10 -
[1695] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Cutting isk per hour of trade is a bad idea as it would raise all prices impacting everybody but new players the most. Increasing travel time is pointless as those who afk freight would just s+Žnd two freighters instead of one. Breakinghisec apart completely would lead to mass hisec unsubs as dtated by those hisec folks who have replied here.
If losec players don't like hisec afk hauling they arre free to gank them. if loseccers can't be bothered then why should hiseccers be forced to make aditional effort? Messing with hieec travel affects so many people for no gain to the game. Freighters are capital ships. CCP has stated they never intended for capital ships to be solo ships, so weather or not a solo freighter could make it through low sec is irrevilent. This change would give opprutinities for Blockade Runners and well for t1 industrials. CCP Greyscale wrote:First, capital ships are not intended to be solo assets, so we don't tend to weight the needs of solo capital pilots when doing balance work.
So ... Will you be the person who plays the webber for your alliance's haulers? Will you be the person scouting them? Will you be the person escorting them on their slow treks through space? Will you be the person responding in favor when your haulers ask for help when they need to move the materials for your toys? Will you be the person driving bumpers away and sacrifice your ship if necessary? Will you do this paid or unpaid? Will you sacrifice your time spinning ships in station or playing other games when your haulers need help? |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2502
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 16:35:04 -
[1696] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Cutting isk per hour of trade is a bad idea as it would raise all prices impacting everybody but new players the most. Increasing travel time is pointless as those who afk freight would just s+Žnd two freighters instead of one. Breakinghisec apart completely would lead to mass hisec unsubs as dtated by those hisec folks who have replied here.
If losec players don't like hisec afk hauling they arre free to gank them. if loseccers can't be bothered then why should hiseccers be forced to make aditional effort? Messing with hieec travel affects so many people for no gain to the game. Freighters are capital ships. CCP has stated they never intended for capital ships to be solo ships, so weather or not a solo freighter could make it through low sec is irrevilent. This change would give opprutinities for Blockade Runners and well for t1 industrials. CCP Greyscale wrote:First, capital ships are not intended to be solo assets, so we don't tend to weight the needs of solo capital pilots when doing balance work. So ... Will you be the person who plays the webber for your alliance's haulers? Will you be the person scouting them? Will you be the person escorting them on their slow treks through space? Will you be the person responding in favor when your haulers ask for help when they need to move the materials for your toys? Will you be the person driving bumpers away and sacrifice your ship if necessary? Will you be the person who does this paid or unpaid? Will you be the person to sacrifice your time spinning ships in station or playing other games when your haulers need help? I expect 3 things when escorting a ship through hostile space; 1. I expect there to be PVP 2. I expect to lose my ship. 3. I expect Corp reimburse the for the lost ship.
-
|
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2502
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 16:37:36 -
[1697] - Quote
Double post.
-
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
876
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 17:24:17 -
[1698] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote: So ... Will you be the person who plays the webber for your alliance's haulers? Will you be the person scouting them? Will you be the person escorting them on their slow treks through space? Will you be the person responding in favor when your haulers ask for help when they need to move the materials for your toys? Will you be the person driving bumpers away and sacrifice your ship if necessary? Will you be the person who does this paid or unpaid? Will you be the person to sacrifice your time spinning ships in station or playing other games when your haulers need help?
I expect 3 things when escorting a ship through hostile space; 1. I expect there to be PVP 2. I expect to lose my ship. 3. I expect Corp reimburse the for the lost ship.
So you only do it if there is PVP. And what if there is no PVP, for many hauls? What if you basically escort your freighter just for the sake of it regardless if it's dangerous territory or not? Not all freighters venture into Low sec, but as they are not supposed to be solo'd, you would have to escort them in safe territory as well. What then? Will you do answer yes to the above questions?
|
Lugia3
Intentionally Dense Easily Excited
1341
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 18:28:37 -
[1699] - Quote
Adela Talvanen wrote:Just wondering but has CCP ever intergrated any of the ideas about the game and the game mechanics that have been put forward and discussed on this forum?
Yes.
"CCP Dolan is full of shit." - CCP Bettik
Remove Sov!
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
737
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 19:08:54 -
[1700] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:... Freighters are capital ships. CCP has stated they never intended for capital ships to be solo ships, so weather or not a solo freighter could make it through low sec is irrevilent. This change would give opprutinities for Blockade Runners and well for t1 industrials. CCP Greyscale wrote:First, capital ships are not intended to be solo assets, so we don't tend to weight the needs of solo capital pilots when doing balance work.
Nobody is saying that a solo freighter should make it through losec, those against the proposal are pointing out that the hisec industrialists have no wish to enter losec so would *never* take a freighter there escorted or otherwise. And the Empires would never allow for their trade to be interupted by losec pirates. It would damage them too much. Such a change would be incredibly bad for the markets, all the hisec folks who put their effort into buy and sell orders, mass movement of goods and manufacture would be crippled by it.
Those who are willing to fly BR already do and they don't have the hold space for bulk goods movement, T1 haulers haven't got the hold for bulk goods movement either. This kind of arbitrary change to such a large portion of the player base in order to fix no actual problem would be plain nuts. |
|
Evora Pirkibo
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
37
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 19:30:36 -
[1701] - Quote
Attempting to generalize all highsec based industrialists into a group that is assumed to never be willing to enter lowsec is a rather narrow viewpoint, indicative of self projection of personal ideals upon other parties. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
876
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 19:34:11 -
[1702] - Quote
Evora Pirkibo wrote:Attempting to generalize all highsec based industrialists into a group that is assumed to never be willing to enter lowsec is a rather narrow viewpoint, indicative of self projection of personal ideals upon other parties.
I am unfortunately not allowed to link killmails in this forum, but freighters who do venture into active and important Low sec and Null sec araes know but one fate. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
737
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 19:36:07 -
[1703] - Quote
Not at all, I regularly run through losec and have absolutely no problem doing so. I was simply representing the general view of the hisec folks who have previously answered here. It isn't an assumption but a re-iteration of the typical response from those players. Those willing to enter losec will already be doing so (except for a small percentage).
This change would not affect my gameplay in any way but I don't support or oppose ideas purely based on how they would affect me. In my view this would be a pointless drastic change to fix an undefined problem. What would this change be a fix for? |
Arthur Aihaken
X A X
3898
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 21:06:07 -
[1704] - Quote
No, no and no. Did I mention no? No.
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Azazel The Misanthrope
Animadversion Tactical Operations Index
0
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 22:36:18 -
[1705] - Quote
Do it. |
Stormfoot Stormfoot
The Sky People Point Blank Alliance
5
|
Posted - 2014.11.03 04:02:15 -
[1706] - Quote
Yes. Please.
Empire needs to feel like a safe(er) haven when you get there. Being able to float around between hubs easily does not allow this... I want folks who are shipping and trading to feel that rush of being chased or running into a gate camp and to feel that relief when they get to new empire space.
Low sec is the pirates den, lets have it mean something more than just being a null buffer that JFs plow right through or FW folks duke it out in. |
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
58
|
Posted - 2014.11.03 16:06:56 -
[1707] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Not at all, I regularly run through losec and have absolutely no problem doing so. I was simply representing the general view of the hisec folks who have previously answered here. It isn't an assumption but a re-iteration of the typical response from those players. Those willing to enter losec will already be doing so (except for a small percentage).
This change would not affect my gameplay in any way but I don't support or oppose ideas purely based on how they would affect me. In my view this would be a pointless drastic change to fix an undefined problem. What would this change be a fix for?
As one of those ignored voices from high sec I appreciate your thoughts and efforts.
What this all boils down to is WE WANT MORE TARGETS to shoot there can be no other explanation because it simply makes no sense otherwise.
High sec players that do not like low will not go there even if this change is made, it is most likely that they will play in the restricted space they area allowed until they get bored and the un-sub. And so as a means to drive content in low this will fail horribly. No I am not speaking for ALL high sec players this is my prediction based on almost 5 years as a primarily high sec player.
This idea fails because those who will go to low already are so this changes nothing.
I have no idea if CCP intended to set up 3 areas that have distinctly different game play styles when they set up the basic structure of high, low and null. Intended or not that is what has happened and it is the support for a variety of game play styles that helps to make EVE unique in the world of MMO. This change would bring a fundamental shift to that balance by radically affecting the largest segment of the games players for little or no improvement for others. I believe that this change would be the end of EVE as we know it. If it survived at all it would be a radically different game than we all play today, if that would be better or not depnds entirely on your personal point of view.
I cannot predict how many players would un-sub if this was brought to the game and neither can any of you. All I can say is after nearly 5 years of primarily being a high sec player I believe that a large majority of the high sec players would un-sub within the first 6 months to a year. If that occurred I wonder if CCP could maintain the game and yet this is exactly the gamble you are asking CCP to take. |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
95
|
Posted - 2014.11.03 19:38:14 -
[1708] - Quote
Only if there the high sec to low sec connects at 3 or more system close by. so that in a high sec system there is a choice of 2-3 low sec gates to take. and the same going the other way when in a low sec system there should be multiple high sec gates one can take.
On the route between empires there should be no bottlenecks always more than one way to get to the other side.
|
Evora Pirkibo
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
39
|
Posted - 2014.11.03 19:57:08 -
[1709] - Quote
Donnachadh wrote:What this all boils down to is WE WANT MORE TARGETS to shoot there can be no other explanation because it simply makes no sense otherwise. Incorrect. Empire trade hubs becoming less homogeneous, increasing the profit margin of sold goods transported across the gap due to the added risk and effort involved is an intended effect. This is described in the third paragraph of the OP of this thread.
Donnachadh wrote:High sec players that do not like low will not go there even if this change is made, it is most likely that they will play in the restricted space they area allowed until they get bored and the un-sub. And so as a means to drive content in low this will fail horribly. I do not agree with your assumption. Some may indeed stay in a local area until they tire of it, at which point would be the time for a change, be that in playstyle or area of operation. If a player chooses to unsubscribe due to a lack of willingness to explore other avenues of operation, i agree with the opinions of certain members of CCP being that these are ok customers to lose. Your determination of the result of this proposition is based upon your previous assumptions, making it less than well founded.
Donnachadh wrote:This change would bring a fundamental shift to that balance by radically affecting the largest segment of the games players for little or no improvement for others. I believe that this change would be the end of EVE as we know it. If it survived at all it would be a radically different game than we all play today, if that would be better or not depnds entirely on your personal point of view. Then potential gains of this idea are either missed, or willingly ignored. There are many positive ramifications possible to players of many kinds, including those that live primarily in high security. Your belief is again based upon assumptions of questionable credibility.
Donnachadh wrote:I cannot predict how many players would un-sub if this was brought to the game and neither can any of you. All I can say is after nearly 5 years of primarily being a high sec player I believe that a large majority of the high sec players would un-sub within the first 6 months to a year. If that occurred I wonder if CCP could maintain the game and yet this is exactly the gamble you are asking CCP to take. I disagree with this assumption as well, I foresee a net gain in active subscriptions for CCP. When the graphs of active subscriptions are compared to in game fluctuations, periods of high unsubs coincide with the reduction in conflict drivers, and player matriculation.
Also consider that last time space was added in the scale of this proposition was the Apocrypha expansion, renowned as the singularly best expansion to eve online in its history. Subscriptions rose considerably in this time. Now this idea in its entirety is not comparable to the Apocrypha expansion. However if included in an expansion focusing on lowsec, faction warfare, and inter-empire economics; I would predict many re-subscriptions and new subscriptions. |
Evora Pirkibo
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
39
|
Posted - 2014.11.03 19:58:18 -
[1710] - Quote
double post |
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
738
|
Posted - 2014.11.03 20:18:44 -
[1711] - Quote
Evora Pirkibo wrote: Empire trade hubs becoming less homogeneous, increasing the profit margin of sold goods transported across the gap due to the added risk and effort involved is an intended effect. This is described in the third paragraph of the OP of this thread.
Being described in the OP doesn't make this true and the hisec people who have replied in the past have flat out stated they would not travel through any losec space
Evora Pirkibo wrote: I do not agree with your assumption. Some may indeed stay in a local area until they tire of it, at which point would be the time for a change, be that in playstyle or area of operation. If a player chooses to unsubscribe due to a lack of willingness to explore other avenues of operation, i agree with the opinions of certain members of CCP being that these are ok customers to lose. Your determination of the result of this proposition is based upon your previous assumptions, making it less than well founded.
You believe that players unsubbing and therefore less money being paid to CCP is a good thing? I most definitely do not.
Evora Pirkibo wrote: Then potential gains of this idea are either missed, or willingly ignored. There are many positive ramifications possible to players of many kinds, including those that live primarily in high security. Your belief is again based upon assumptions of questionable credibility.
This is your opinion with regards to gains (one that I do not share) but the response of hisec players here would back up Donnachadh's view 9i.e. give it credibility. Your opinion of positive benefits is unsupported by any such evidence though.
Evora Pirkibo wrote: I disagree with this assumption as well, I foresee a net gain in active subscriptions for CCP. When the graphs of active subscriptions are compared to in game fluctuations, periods of high unsubs coincide with the reduction in conflict drivers, and player matriculation.
I cannot see that turning areas into empire ghettos and making travel between regions more difficult would improve new player experience and therfore retention. I'm pretty sure it would seriously **** off ~%80 of the current player base though.
Evora Pirkibo wrote: Also consider that last time space was added in the scale of this proposition was the Apocrypha expansion, renowned as the singularly best expansion to eve online in its history. Subscriptions rose considerably in this time. Now this idea in its entirety is not comparable to the Apocrypha expansion. However if included in an expansion focusing on lowsec, faction warfare, and inter-empire economics; I would predict many re-subscriptions and new subscriptions.
This was WH's I think? What % of players live in them or run through them compared to hisec? It was by all accounts a great expansion but it didn't have droves of players previously living in hisec thinking 'That's it, off I go to PvP land...'.
So many people would hate this kind of change and it is way too drastic with way too many risks to be a benefit to the game. Consider that those in hisec could already make more money by going through losec systems yet they choose not to. Why do you think that forcing them to do so to trade and manufacture effectively would have them thinking 'Ho-Hum I'd better get my lumbering hulk of a freighter into losec where any passing pirate can take potshots at me'? They never would, it would be suicide.
People suggest multiple entry points into losec but this is easy to circumvent by having alt fleets in each entry system and one scout watching the gates. I don't know how losec you have to be for cynos to work but if these are available it becomes even more simple to bounce the freighters. The proposed change would seriously impact a large portion of the player base and also prices for just about every item in game. |
Ceawlin Cobon-Han
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
20
|
Posted - 2014.11.03 20:38:03 -
[1712] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Ceawlin Cobon-Han wrote: You really are some type of comedian, you are! You want people to think you "care" about the earning power of the HS players? Of course it's about getting you more easy action. There is no other reason for wanting this.
Making redundant the idea that started this topic. All that happens is the HS players have their game crippled, while the LS players experience nothing new.
How would your game be crippled exactly? People who aren't afraid of lowsec now have an actual advantage in going through it to make isk and people who are afraid of it have an unchanged game. HS not wanting to use LS can atm fly between the 4 trade hubs. This change stops that, so the game is crippled for people wanting to stay out of losec. It's not rocket science. |
Ceawlin Cobon-Han
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
20
|
Posted - 2014.11.03 20:55:29 -
[1713] - Quote
I'll take this opportunity to remind everyone of the new player's first taste of epic stuff. The Sisters of Eve epic arc has the noob travelling between all four empires, giving the player a taste of the scale of Eve. How do you intend to cater for them? Remove the arc from the game? Have bully-boys griefing the unaware noob while he's in losec?
Some people think this game is all about "me me me", and never give a damn about how others will have their enjoyment of eve diminished. Stop coming out with ever more ridiculous reasons for why this is a good idea, which it isn't, and think about how this will affect players who almost certainly do not want it. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
1954
|
Posted - 2014.11.06 07:31:32 -
[1714] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Rek Seven wrote:It would be great if the empires were separated by low sec and faction warfare could effect the security status, and what empire owned these parts of space. Empire Space is already divided by Low sec for FW. Na i mean that you wouldn't be able to get from Dodixi to Jita without going through low sec if the low sec systems were contested by rival factions. Only for FW participants, I presume.
No, the systems security rating would be the same for everyone.
+1
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
885
|
Posted - 2014.11.06 07:38:32 -
[1715] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Rek Seven wrote: Na i mean that you wouldn't be able to get from Dodixi to Jita without going through low sec if the low sec systems were contested by rival factions.
Only for FW participants, I presume. No, the systems security rating would be the same for everyone.
Well, of course it would be Low sec, but only FW people couldn't dock there in stations and and all the other FW rubbish. Right? |
Evora Pirkibo
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
58
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 16:10:21 -
[1716] - Quote
Ceawlin Cobon-Han wrote:HS not wanting to use LS can atm fly between the 4 trade hubs. This change stops that, so the game is crippled for people wanting to stay out of losec. It's not rocket science.
Just to clarify, being unable to access all 4 major trade hubs without crossing lowsec cripples the game? If thats true wouldn't that be a very meaningful player choice? And the consequence for that choice of perceived security is a lack of freedom? Sounds pretty logical, a player crippled chose to be crippled, and can choose not to be whenever they are ready.
On a long enough timeline, the life expectancy of everyone drops to zero.
|
Zimmer Jones
Aliastra Gallente Federation
65
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 16:46:36 -
[1717] - Quote
empire has gotten far too homogenized, far too understanding and at the same time, apathetic and greedy have grown. Sansha invasion has gotten old, and the reason to band together is pretty well over. Studies of history show that great coalitions become lumbering monsters of bureaucracy and eventually fall apart due to self interest and lack of a single enemy to unify in the face of.
Make content by taking some away, and give lowsec some purpose. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
914
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 19:29:35 -
[1718] - Quote
Zimmer Jones wrote:empire has gotten far too homogenized, far too understanding and at the same time, apathetic and greedy have grown. Sansha invasion has gotten old, and the reason to band together is pretty well over. Studies of history show that great coalitions become lumbering monsters of bureaucracy and eventually fall apart due to self interest and lack of a single enemy to unify in the face of.
Make content by taking some away, and give lowsec some purpose.
As pointed out by meyself and many others this would not create content, rather it would remove some as hisec players would never choose to go through losec if they already don't. All this idea would do is hand all high value trade to the huge alliances that already control losec regions
It's been still longer since this idea was proposed and it still isn't a good idea. Given that it's never been implemented I believe that CCP are inclined to agree. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
914
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 19:31:50 -
[1719] - Quote
Evora Pirkibo wrote:Ceawlin Cobon-Han wrote:HS not wanting to use LS can atm fly between the 4 trade hubs. This change stops that, so the game is crippled for people wanting to stay out of losec. It's not rocket science. Just to clarify, being unable to access all 4 major trade hubs without crossing lowsec cripples the game? If thats true wouldn't that be a very meaningful player choice? And the consequence for that choice of perceived security is a lack of freedom? Sounds pretty logical, a player crippled chose to be crippled, and can choose not to be whenever they are ready.
It doesn't cripple the game but rather cripples the playstyles of many in hisec (the 80% of players if that's still the right statistic).
Such a change would not give players the choice of going through losec (which they already have by the way) but rather would mean they have no choice but to go through hisec to remain competitive in trade and market buy/sell actions. Forcing people to do something never works. |
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus Get Off My Lawn
10
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 21:50:54 -
[1720] - Quote
I'll do you one better.....make it null sec between empires ;), low-sec is full of stupid mechanics and grief-arounds...as was so eloquently said in Godzilla "Let them fight" |
|
Evora Pirkibo
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
58
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 13:58:24 -
[1721] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:As pointed out by meyself and many others this would not create content, rather it would remove some as hisec players would never choose to go through losec if they already don't. All this idea would do is hand all high value trade to the huge alliances that already control losec regions
I do not agree with the assumption that highsec players would never choose to cross lowsec. Evidence from my perspective shows that for enough profit, most will accept more risk. For example, when CCP first deployed wormholes they did not believe that players would attempt to live there as it would be too high risk.
I'm curious as to these huge alliances that control lowsec regions though, as I've never found a "lowsec region" controlled at all. A gate, a few systems, or a popular pipe sure, but never a region, and never consistantly.
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Such a change would not give players the choice of going through losec (which they already have by the way) but rather would mean they have no choice but to go through losec to remain competitive in trade and market buy/sell actions. Forcing people to do something never works.
The choice presented now is take highsec, or take lowsec and shave a jump or 3 for a disproportionate increase in risk. Currently in all but a few cases, if you can make the trip entirely in highsec there isn't much sense in taking a lowsec route. That doesn't sound like any kind of meaningful choice to me.
I'm also curios as to the competition component of the reasoning. Seeing as the assumption that almost no highsec exclusive players would choose to cross lowsec has been established. Who are they competing against? Keep in mind that competition in its diversity across eve is the driving force behind many a subscription, plex sale, and returning player.
I would also like to take a moment to point out that the proposition is to separate the empires with many systems. Enough that there would be multiple possibilities and combinations of routes to choose from. Not to funnel the playerbase into the few existing pipes and chokepoints.
On a long enough timeline, the life expectancy of everyone drops to zero.
|
Godfrey Silvarna
Arctic Light Inc. Arctic Light
211
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 14:36:10 -
[1722] - Quote
Yes please. Highsec is too convenient. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
914
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 14:45:21 -
[1723] - Quote
Evora Pirkibo wrote:...stuff....
Hisec players will not accept the risk of losec now, so forcing them to stay in one place or risk hisec would simply annoy them more. Making reasonable profit would also *require* travelling across losec rather than having the choice to do so as now. Your position takes away any choice in this. I'm also working on the assumption that the seperation of hisec would have to be total for this to impact those who afk freight stuff around as they wouldn't care if the alt autopilots twice as far. Only pilots ATK would be affected by this and would be irritated even more.
Such a change would nerf the playstyles of missioners, traders, manufacturers and anyone running the Epic arcs and for no reason as those who chooce hisec for their owns reasons still wouldn't use losec. |
Zimmer Jones
Aliastra Gallente Federation
66
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 15:19:30 -
[1724] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: stuff +
Such a change would nerf the playstyles of missioners, traders, manufacturers and anyone running the Epic arcs and for no reason as those who chooce hisec for their owns reasons still wouldn't use losec.
Then that would be their loss. Currently there is very little risk ( provided you fit your ship properly and don't haul bling in a freighter) in hauling everything you have to jita, a gigantic trade hub that stifles all real competiton and makes everything available at one price, less 0.01 isk ever 5 minutes or so. Yes, through emergent gameplay that CCP has let gankers and griefers become very powerful, with high DPS cheap hulls. Well the pendulum swings, Do you think CCP will let this continue? There will always be ganking, but right now the risk is very low for the OCD routines gankers have developed. There have been changes made to be a little more inconvenient to gankers, and probably more on the way.
Nullsec has just had its board shaken,the rest of eve should not be left stagnant, and highsec is stagnant. Nullsec has had more changes to space than any other "area" ( highsec, WH's, Lowsec). Highsec has been left entirely alone for fear that it might disturb the bears.
Running an epic arc? have to travel through lowsec to get a craploads of isk/mods/lp? Have some risk for your payout, if you read eve guides, they cover everything quite nicely, risk is absolutely minimized.
Trading? local markets trade hubs will dissapear? oh noes, jita will dissapear! But jita has ALWAYS been the trade hub!!!!!! /massive sarcasm Market(s) will continue to exist, just splintered and the local price variance will stimulate the people willing to take the risk for the isk to haul from one market to the other.
Missioners will likewise have no problems, I see most of them staying close to their mission hubs, as i they do currently.
Manufaturers will still have markets. The game will change, and surprise surprise, people will adapt.
Same old complaints, same old knee jerk arguements. I'm surprised that "terror" and "think of the children" haven't been thrown in here. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation The Kadeshi
1140
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 15:19:58 -
[1725] - Quote
Evora Pirkibo wrote:The choice presented now is take highsec, or take lowsec and shave a jump or 3 for a disproportionate increase in risk. Currently in all but a few cases, if you can make the trip entirely in highsec there isn't much sense in taking a lowsec route. That doesn't sound like any kind of meaningful choice to me. Dividing the Empires with Low sec does not create choice either. Low sec areas connecting otherwise separated empires are not by any means comparable to the other Low sec areas. The only thing that comes close to such new special Low sec ares would be Rancer in its best days, or Hagilur today during some hours of the day, or Amamake: Trying to move a freighter or hauler through there is absolutely infeasible, hence no choice is created. Not even cloakies would be safe as there would undoubtedly be many cans, drones, corpses, wrecks around certain gates to prevent cloaking. So, in contrast of today where you can chose between taking a JF a couple of cyno mids to Jita or a freighter by gates, or a DST or Cloaky via gates through Low/High sec, this choice would be completely eliminated to only JF being able to reliably skip these areas and move things around. I, henceforth, call your "kind of meaningful choice" in terms of hauling, as per quote, self-delusion. |
Zimmer Jones
Aliastra Gallente Federation
66
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 15:29:24 -
[1726] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote: Dividing the Empires with Low sec does not create choice either. Low sec areas connecting otherwise separated empires are not by any means comparable to the other Low sec areas. The only thing that comes close to such new special Low sec ares would be Rancer in its best days, or Hagilur today during some hours of the day, or Amamake: Trying to move a freighter or hauler through there is absolutely infeasible, hence no choice is created. Not even cloakies would be safe as there would undoubtedly be many cans, drones, corpses, wrecks around certain gates to prevent cloaking. So, in contrast of today where you can chose between taking a JF a couple of cyno mids to Jita or a freighter by gates, or a DST or Cloaky via gates through Low/High sec, this choice would be completely eliminated to only JF being able to reliably skip these areas and move things around. I, henceforth, call your "kind of meaningful choice" in terms of hauling, as per quote, self-delusion.
Funny, i recall the existence of blockade runners, and Black ops battleships. More than that, and it has been pointed out, just because empires would be separated does not mean there would be low sec choke points. Likely the choke points would still be high security, but a good selection of low systems to go to, and not just one route/choke point to get to other empires.
The cloaking is a non-issue, its already in the rules you are not allowed drop cans/ litter for de-cloaking purposes, CCP can and have done their best to make sure people have a good chance to run away from a poorly run gate camp, and at least a chance from a good camp. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation The Kadeshi
1141
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 15:55:36 -
[1727] - Quote
Zimmer Jones wrote: Funny, i recall the existence of blockade runners, and Black ops battleships. More than that, and it has been pointed out, just because empires would be separated does not mean there would be low sec choke points. Likely the choke points would still be high security, but a good selection of low systems to go to, and not just one route/choke point to get to other empires.
The cloaking is a non-issue, its already in the rules you are not allowed drop cans/ litter for de-cloaking purposes, CCP can and have done their best to make sure people have a good chance to run away from a poorly run gate camp, and at least a chance from a good camp.
Granted, I missed the Blops Bridge of Covert Ops, which is essentially the same as a JF jump: You skip the Low sec by jumping above it.
With regards to the "no choke points": You don't get it, do you? Any. Low sec area. Between. Empires. That. Cannot. Be. Reached. Otherwise. And. Have. Major. Trade hub. IS. A. Choke point. It does not matter if you make it 2 or 10 systems, there is alway only so many entries, so many feasible routes and so many feasible exits. However, there are a lot of people who are after easy kills these days and the small number of possible entries, exits and routes is easily campable by these people. 24 hours, 7 days a week. The introduction of Low sec probably won't be a situation like in Aunenen or Rancer, which have no way around them, but instead the entire area of that Low sec is a huge choke point. And quite frankly, it could not be different as a non choke point area is basically pointless and would just turn into yet another area of dead space. If you want kills and destruction in Empires dividing Low sec, you need to make them choke points. |
Evora Pirkibo
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
58
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 15:55:43 -
[1728] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Hisec players will not accept the risk of losec now, so forcing them to stay in one place or risk hisec would simply annoy them more. Making reasonable profit would also *require* travelling across losec rather than having the choice to do so as now. Your position takes away any choice in this. I'm also working on the assumption that the seperation of hisec would have to be total for this to impact those who afk freight stuff around as they wouldn't care if the alt autopilots twice as far. Only pilots ATK would be affected by this and would be irritated even more.
Such a change would nerf the playstyles of missioners, traders, manufacturers and anyone running the Epic arcs and for no reason as those who chooce hisec for their owns reasons still wouldn't use losec.
Evora Pirkibo wrote:The choice presented now is take highsec, or take lowsec and shave a jump or 3 for a disproportionate increase in risk. Currently in all but a few cases, if you can make the trip entirely in highsec there isn't much sense in taking a lowsec route. That doesn't sound like any kind of meaningful choice to me. You are correct that the separation would have to be total, or it would not affect AFK traffic nearly to the degree of someone at the keyboard. However its simple logic that a total separation would benefit a player ATK rather than AFK for the reasoning you were kind enough to point out.
In order to make a reasonable profit among the competition that would be crossing lowsec, it is reasonable to expect to have to cross lowsec. If noone is crossing lowsec, then the competition is at a common level. If competition is importing across lowsec, and a player adheres to the self imposed limitation of not crossing lowsec, then they bear the responsibility of that choice.
Missions do not require you to cross empires. Traders trade plenty in stations, niches, and islands within an empire. Manufacturing is unaffected, only the trading/importing component of material aquisition.
There are 7 epic arcs, two of which are pirate arcs picked up in null, and they can only be completed once every 3 months. Of the 5 remaining, the majority of their arcs stay within their empire. I'm not convinced that crossing lowsec to complete them would be an overly negative repercussion. As to the level 1 SOE arc designed for the less experienced, a tour of the 4 empires and the lowsec separating them sounds like an educational and gratifying experience for those with a lot to learn and little to lose. This could be expanded upon to guide a player into awareness of and how to use the tools at their disposal.
On a long enough timeline, the life expectancy of everyone drops to zero.
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
914
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 16:04:37 -
[1729] - Quote
Evora Pirkibo wrote:... However its simple logic that a total separation would benefit a player ATK rather than AFK for the reasoning you were kind enough to point out. ...
It most certainly would not benefit the hisec ATK player who doesn't want to fly thorugh losec. At all. They don't want to go to losec for whatever their reasons are and so they wouldn't. Bulk goods would be sent by the frogs, expensive items would be carried via BR's that losec players wouldn't even see. There would be no difference at all in terms of people in losec and a huge difference in how much the changes would annoy the largest segment of players. It makes no sense. |
Zimmer Jones
Aliastra Gallente Federation
66
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 16:15:22 -
[1730] - Quote
Not going to lowsec is their choice, they get to make it easily because there is no reason, currently, to go to or through low. Your argument is tautological. It makes no sense. |
|
Evora Pirkibo
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
59
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 17:07:46 -
[1731] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:With regards to the "no choke points": You don't get it, do you? Any. Low sec area. Between. Empires. That. Cannot. Be. Reached. Otherwise. And. Have. Major. Trade hub. IS. A. Choke point. It does not matter if you make it 2 or 10 systems, there is alway only so many entries, so many feasible routes and so many feasible exits. However, there are a lot of people who are after easy kills these days and the small number of possible entries, exits and routes is easily campable by these people. 24 hours, 7 days a week. The introduction of Low sec probably won't be a situation like in Aunenen or Rancer, which have no way around them, but instead the entire area of that Low sec is a huge choke point. And quite frankly, it could not be different as a non choke point area is basically pointless and would just turn into yet another area of dead space. If you want kills and destruction in Empires dividing Low sec, you need to make them choke points.
Evora Pirkibo wrote: I would also like to take a moment to point out that the proposition is to separate the empires with many systems. Enough that there would be multiple possibilities and combinations of routes to choose from. Not to funnel the playerbase into the few existing pipes and chokepoints.
I would like to further point out that the residents of lowsec are not on the same team, and that a camp by nature is stationary and easily scouted. Because of the inherent risk of a static deployment, commonly a gang may camp a gate for a bit, then move on.
It could be different and easily so. Yes there have to be pipes of movement, they also need to intersect. Therefore a traveler has options to choose from if they encounter a problem. A pursuer will then have to track and hypothesize which way they went, the longer it takes to figure out the more variables a pursuer has to cover untill they are spread too thin to be effective. It is however content to be had, even if either parties efforts end fruitlessly.
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:It most certainly would not benefit the hisec ATK player who doesn't want to fly thorugh losec. At all. They don't want to go to losec for whatever their reasons are and so they wouldn't. Bulk goods would be sent by the frogs, expensive items would be carried via BR's that losec players wouldn't even see. There would be no difference at all in terms of people in losec and a huge difference in how much the changes would annoy the largest segment of players. It makes no sense.
This logic is solely based upon the assumption that faced with the proposed choice, a highsec player will not cross low. It also merges the two groups described; the highsec %80, and the highsec players that will refuse lowsec at all costs. I fundamentally challenge these assumptions.
Also frogs can be blocked, the blacklist is rather easily made. Blockade runners are caught more often then you think, human error usually. And both are examples of danger mitigation strategies to be used by those wary of crossing low.
On a long enough timeline, the life expectancy of everyone drops to zero.
|
Zimmer Jones
Aliastra Gallente Federation
66
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 17:41:27 -
[1732] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Zimmer Jones wrote: Funny, i recall the existence of blockade runners, and Black ops battleships. More than that, and it has been pointed out, just because empires would be separated does not mean there would be low sec choke points. Likely the choke points would still be high security, but a good selection of low systems to go to, and not just one route/choke point to get to other empires.
The cloaking is a non-issue, its already in the rules you are not allowed drop cans/ litter for de-cloaking purposes, CCP can and have done their best to make sure people have a good chance to run away from a poorly run gate camp, and at least a chance from a good camp.
Granted, I missed the Blops Bridge of Covert Ops, which is essentially the same as a JF jump: You skip the Low sec by jumping above it. With regards to the "no choke points": You don't get it, do you? Any. Low sec area. Between. Empires. That. Cannot. Be. Reached. Otherwise. And. Have. Major. Trade hub. IS. A. Choke point. It does not matter if you make it 2 or 10 systems, there is alway only so many entries, so many feasible routes and so many feasible exits. However, there are a lot of people who are after easy kills these days and the small number of possible entries, exits and routes is easily campable by these people. 24 hours, 7 days a week. The introduction of Low sec probably won't be a situation like in Aunenen or Rancer, which have no way around them, but instead the entire area of that Low sec is a huge choke point. And quite frankly, it could not be different as a non choke point area is basically pointless and would just turn into yet another area of dead space. If you want kills and destruction in Empires dividing Low sec, you need to make them choke points.
I don't think you understand the meaning of choke point, so from merriam-webster:
Definition of CHOKE POINT : a strategic narrow route providing passage through or to another region
so, if the "choke point" is highsec ( .5 or above), and has multiple choices of initial direction through lowsec, and multiple choices after that, as long as every route from A to B has more than one choice per jump through lowsec, that route through lowsec does not contain a "choke point."
Do. You. Understand. Now? |
Helios Panala
25
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 14:07:53 -
[1733] - Quote
This sounds like a good idea to me.
Provides plenty of opportunity for meaningful PvP clearing gate camps for traders. Provides plenty of opportunity for meaningless PvP attacking the constant gate camps for fun. Makes piracy a potentially very profitable career.
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
930
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 14:16:55 -
[1734] - Quote
Helios Panala wrote:This sounds like a good idea to me.
Provides plenty of opportunity for meaningful PvP clearing gate camps for traders.
This assumes that hisec traders will travel through losec, they won't. Every hisec player who has responded here has stated this.
Helios Panala wrote: Provides plenty of opportunity for meaningless PvP attacking the constant gate camps for fun.
See above, for attacking gatecamps to be viable they have to be there. To be there they have to have people to hunt. Which they won't.
Helios Panala wrote: Makes piracy a potentially very profitable career.
Refer to points 1 and two above :D
Pilots can use losec now but they don't because they do not want to. This is not about it being an easy or hard decision to make, it is a 'Will they or won't they' question. We already know the answer to that so to try to mess around so fundamentally with an area of space where the majority of characters are played would just be silly. |
Helios Panala
25
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 14:57:06 -
[1735] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:This assumes that hisec traders will travel through losec, they won't. Every hisec player who has responded here has stated this.
Except me. I would. They could pay me to do it for them if they like .
I doubt I'm the only one who would. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation The Kadeshi
1162
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 15:02:56 -
[1736] - Quote
Zimmer Jones wrote: I don't think you understand the meaning of choke point, so from merriam-webster:
Definition of CHOKE POINT : a strategic narrow route providing passage through or to another region
so, if the "choke point" is highsec ( .5 or above), and has multiple choices of initial direction through lowsec, and multiple choices after that, as long as every route from A to B has more than one choice per jump through lowsec, that route through lowsec does not contain a "choke point" in lowsec.
Do. You. Understand. Now?
A narrow route is very relative. A low sec area between Caldari space and Amarr space with 3 entrances and 3 exits, which have each routes between 3, 5 and 7 jumps in between them is a choke point. Why? Because only the short route is viable, because only the 1 entry and the 1 entry/exit which requires 5 jumps from Amarr is viable as the other require 10, 15 jumps, or 7 jumps from Jita while the others require 11,13 jumps to get to that other Low sec. Furthermore, a choke point is an area which people must pass to get to another area, meaning it does not matter if there are 1 or 3 or 5 entries/exits, it is an unavoidable area and therefore a choke point. Besides, I am very generous with the assumption that these Low sec areas have 3 entries/exits: the more they have, the easier it is to avoid the camps for the intended victims and the harder it is to spark PVP; henceforth, in order to not make these Low sec areas unattractive hunting grounds they cannot have too many entries/exits and 3 already poses a significant amount of effort imposed on pirates to find targets.
Let's look at an example: The route from Amarr in Domain to Lisudeh in Devoid. Let's further imagine that Domain is Amarr and Devoid Minmatar, so 2 empires that needed to be cut off by Low sec, therefore the border gate Yuhelia-Hati is cut. Instead, the route now inevitably brings you through The Bleak Lands.
- That's the fastest route already today, so the closure of Yuhelia has not caused changes. Entry is Huola, exit is Raa.
- Let's avoid Huola because it's a popular entry system on the route and camped. Entry now is Kamela, exit is still Raa. You might also notice that the 3 systems before Raa have not changed, so they are very nice camping systems as people must pass through there. Despite 2 different entry points. Next.
- Since Kamela is also a nice entry system and one of the core systems in TBL, we do not want to enter from their either. Entry now is Saikamon, exit still Raa, still a very good camping systems. You might also notice that this route is already 20 jumps long, up from 12 in the first and 13 in the second example. Now:
- We do not want to go via Raa anymore, instead we avoid it and take another route. Entry now is Sosala, exit is Sosala. Or Kamela, but then we are back in a very popular system for camps.
So, effectively we have 5 different routes. 2 lead through the same systems, 3 have the same entry point, 3 the same exit. The last 2 examples with the single Low sec system will be among the prime camp systems as they obviously require the lowest Low sec exposure, however, I doubt that the newly introduced Low sec areas had such short Low sec bridges. Even if, they'd be completely out of question to use. That leaves me with 3 routes, all via very similar or the same systems. And these systems are easily campable by a limited number of people. Now tell me that this is not a choke point or that it requires too much effort to shut these systems down. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
930
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 15:12:51 -
[1737] - Quote
Helios Panala wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:This assumes that hisec traders will travel through losec, they won't. Every hisec player who has responded here has stated this. Except me. I would. They could pay me to do it for them if they like . I doubt I'm the only one who would.
There's plenty of players who will go into losec. my point is that those who won't would not suddenly think "I'd better start using losec now" if you implemented this idea. These players are happy where they are and need to be given an incentive that is attractive to them to try different areas. |
Helios Panala
25
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 15:25:44 -
[1738] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:There's plenty of players who will go into losec. my point is that those who won't would not suddenly think "I'd better start using losec now" if you implemented this idea. These players are happy where they are and need to be given an incentive that is attractive to them to try different areas.
My theory is that this change would provide that incentive. There are plenty of people who would transport goods across low-sec if it was necessary, as a result almost everything would still be available in the local trade hubs. People would have to pay a little more to buy imported goods (unless they're willing to risk the trip) but it's not like they would be totally locked out of any of the current high-sec activities.
Those that are willing to take the risk would make more isk than those who aren't. Those who aren't willing to take the risk would still have all their regular high-sec activities available to them, albeit at a potentially higher cost. It's a carrot and stick approach, but I doubt it would take anything away from anyone completely. |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
166
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 16:11:15 -
[1739] - Quote
Helios Panala wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:There's plenty of players who will go into losec. my point is that those who won't would not suddenly think "I'd better start using losec now" if you implemented this idea. These players are happy where they are and need to be given an incentive that is attractive to them to try different areas. My theory is that this change would provide that incentive. There are plenty of people who would transport goods across low-sec if it was necessary, as a result almost everything would still be available in the local trade hubs. People would have to pay a little more to buy imported goods (unless they're willing to risk the trip) but it's not like they would be totally locked out of any of the current high-sec activities. Those that are willing to take the risk would make more isk than those who aren't. Those who aren't willing to take the risk would still have all their regular high-sec activities available to them, albeit at a potentially higher cost. It's a carrot and stick approach, but I doubt it would take anything away from anyone completely.
or everyone moves to one region for the cheaper stuff and things continue like they do today but with much less space being used. |
Aiyshimin
Shiva Furnace
380
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 16:14:58 -
[1740] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Helios Panala wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:This assumes that hisec traders will travel through losec, they won't. Every hisec player who has responded here has stated this. Except me. I would. They could pay me to do it for them if they like . I doubt I'm the only one who would. There's plenty of players who will go into losec. my point is that those who won't would not suddenly think "I'd better start using losec now" if you implemented this idea. These players are happy where they are and need to be given an incentive that is attractive to them to try different areas.
If they are happy where they are, then this change doesn't affect them at all.
But it will reward those who are willing to take the risk. Separate markets in the four faction spaces will create more price gaps, fluctuations in supply and therefore more opportunities. |
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
930
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 16:31:04 -
[1741] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Helios Panala wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:This assumes that hisec traders will travel through losec, they won't. Every hisec player who has responded here has stated this. Except me. I would. They could pay me to do it for them if they like . I doubt I'm the only one who would. There's plenty of players who will go into losec. my point is that those who won't would not suddenly think "I'd better start using losec now" if you implemented this idea. These players are happy where they are and need to be given an incentive that is attractive to them to try different areas. If they are happy where they are, then this change doesn't affect them at all. But it will reward those who are willing to take the risk. Separate markets in the four faction spaces will create more price gaps, fluctuations in supply and therefore more opportunities.
They are happy where they are as in hisec as it is now, change that and you mess with a lot of paystyles unecessarily.
Also it wouldn't create opportunities as such since everyone would simply move to one system region, probably Jita as its the biggest currently for the simplicity of buying and selling. Interfere with the game that they also pay for to play and they'll be wondering where else to spend there cash. It's a balancing act and screwing around with something that works fine to provide easy target for those in losec is just never going to work out well. |
Aiyshimin
Shiva Furnace
382
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 16:36:01 -
[1742] - Quote
Why is their happiness more important than others? Why is their "playstyle" so important? Who says this change is unnecessary?
People use the other hubs now because they happen to be closer to them.
Please note that everyone pays for this game, not only the people who sit in hisec with their victim mentality.
|
Zimmer Jones
Aliastra Gallente Federation
91
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 17:24:51 -
[1743] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:
- That's the fastest route already today, so the closure of Yuhelia has not caused changes. Entry is Huola, exit is Raa.
- Let's avoid Huola because it's a popular entry system on the route and camped. Entry now is Kamela, exit is still Raa. You might also notice that the 3 systems before Raa have not changed, so they are very nice camping systems as people must pass through there. Despite 2 different entry points. Next.
- Since Kamela is also a nice entry system and one of the core systems in TBL, we do not want to enter from their either. Entry now is Saikamon, exit still Raa, still a very good camping systems. You might also notice that this route is already 20 jumps long, up from 12 in the first and 13 in the second example. Now:
- We do not want to go via Raa anymore, instead we avoid it and take another route. Entry now is Sosala, exit is Sosala. Or Kamela, but then we are back in a very popular system for camps.
So, effectively we have 5 different routes. 2 lead through the same systems, 3 have the same entry point, 3 the same exit. The last 2 examples with the single Low sec system will be among the prime camp systems as they obviously require the lowest Low sec exposure, however, I doubt that the newly introduced Low sec areas had such short Low sec bridges. Even if, they'd be completely out of question to use. That leaves me with 3 routes, all via very similar or the same systems. And these systems are easily campable by a limited number of people. Now tell me that this is not a choke point or that it requires too much effort to shut these systems down.
Your route assume gates will only be cut, and no additional gates created. In the past CCP have rerouted to break up a trade hub and yes this would be on a much larger scale. The seperation also does not mean there won't be highsec Islands in the clustering of lowsec systems, which I would expect to be the case, forming "depots" because as you probably guess, people will try to avoid the risk of the initial jumps via blops, associated blockade runners, and jump freighters.
The new jump rules would require something like to exist, for people to trade off pilots, or if they do not have multiple jump toons, to rest. If they do not want to make the rest of the trip, minor island trade hub(s) would be incentive to bring people through those systems.
Speaking as someone who has consistently made it through multiple double sided 8+ person gatecamps in a blockade runner through 1 system choke points(spent time in omist and made frequent trips through torrinos/EC-pr8 choke point sans blops), and JFs from Deklein/pure blind (npc) to Daras slowboating from daras to nonni repeatedly, I see no difficulties in hauling. Proper tools for the job, and proper rewards for training, risk and investment in JF's.
That was all done on this toon, and while my KB is obviously laughable(including that raven BP-ah the joys of being a newbie), there is not one loss of a freighter or jump freighter. Luck, scouts, timing, proper cyno placement. The losses I have incurred are through me being dumb, not because I was caught in a gate camp. And I am BAD at eve.
For the regular joe sixpack wanting to get from empire to empire, once again, timing and scouts. Sure you can solo jump and hope and pray after reading the stats in the maps, and gatecampers may be happy. It would not take too much effort to camp the narrowest path gates as you have said, or you can hire someone to move your stuff with collateral and buy your ship in another empire if that hauler fails.
I still state that if there are multiple choice routes to get to and from the same system, even just 2, it is not a choke point and there is a choice regardless of effort to camp those gates. |
Van Beyus
Hedion University Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 18:00:46 -
[1744] - Quote
I think this change is bad because it changes the game. And we all know that anything that changes the game is bad. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation The Kadeshi
1163
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 18:03:57 -
[1745] - Quote
Naturally, there will be new gates if there's new systems added to the universe. But I cannot assume where they are or if they come. Hence, I took the only example I know that resembles remotely what such a choke point region could look like.
With your examples of Aunenen or EC- you don't even get close to what is bound to happen in these new low sec systems. The economic value of the Pietanen constellation or Tribute, any 00 up there to be honest, is not comparable to what is transported between Jita and Amarr daily. Absolutely no system's camp indices of today's low sec choke points is comparable to the importance of such new low sec routes between the major hubs, especially if people like you feel adventurous. No NOBODY camp in Aunenen, no Rancer, no EC-, no HED-, no Hier, no PF-, no Oulley, no 7Q, no N-RAEL, no M-O etc comes close to what these systems camp potential will be. Multiple routes or not, every viable entry and important pass-through systems will be easily campable and will be camped. |
HTC NecoSino
No Vacancies
134
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 18:04:55 -
[1746] - Quote
I'm sure it's already been mentioned, but why not variable security?
The more "illegal" acts that happen in a system, the lower the sec status. Alternatively, the more "good" acts (killing suspect/criminals, running security missions, etc) raise the sec status. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation The Kadeshi
1163
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 18:17:20 -
[1747] - Quote
HTC NecoSino wrote:I'm sure it's already been mentioned, but why not variable security?
The more "illegal" acts that happen in a system, the lower the sec status. Alternatively, the more "good" acts (killing suspect/criminals, running security missions, etc) raise the sec status. Capitals. Drug Labs. Pirates. Reaction Towers. For instance. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
930
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 18:25:40 -
[1748] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:Why is their happiness more important than others? Why is their "playstyle" so important? Who says this change is unnecessary?
Their happiness and playstyle isn't more important, but then neither is the losec gate campers' that this change would pander to.
Aiyshimin wrote: People use the other hubs now because they happen to be closer to them.
And if its made impossible to travel between hubs without losec traversal then those players would simply move to the biggest hub for convenience.
Aiyshimin wrote: Please note that everyone pays for this game, not only the people who sit in hisec with their victim mentality.
That was my point, the hisec folks pay for the game just as much as the losec/null/WH players. Why should they have an inherent nerf on income foisted upon them to suit one are of the game? They need to be enticed into other areas as force simply will not work. |
HTC NecoSino
No Vacancies
135
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 19:03:21 -
[1749] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:HTC NecoSino wrote:I'm sure it's already been mentioned, but why not variable security?
The more "illegal" acts that happen in a system, the lower the sec status. Alternatively, the more "good" acts (killing suspect/criminals, running security missions, etc) raise the sec status. Capitals. Drug Labs. Pirates. Reaction Towers. For instance.
Right, so you end up with a pull from both sides, people wanting to raise the status and those wanting to lower it. Maybe it could be region-based, so people running HS missions next door lead to the LS system slowly raising its sec status.
|
Zimmer Jones
Aliastra Gallente Federation
91
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 19:15:50 -
[1750] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: Their happiness and playstyle isn't more important, but then neither is the losec gate campers' that this change would pander to.
And if its made impossible to travel between hubs without losec traversal then those players would simply move to the biggest hub for convenience.
That was my point, the hisec folks pay for the game just as much as the losec/null/WH players. Why should they have an inherent nerf on income foisted upon them to suit one are of the game? They need to be enticed into other areas as force simply will not work.
In the interest of copy pasting later to save time:
Nobody is forcing anybody anywhere, they are restricting absurdly open borders. Risk adverse players will gather at the biggest hub they see to be the most profitable for their usage and play style. To claim everyone will only flock to ONE region is rediculous. There are plenty of things in each region that are not available readily in the others, the demand for things that are not available will drive the price to a point where they are worth moving, either by market saturation or scarcity.
Multi-Market and empire diversity is not a nerf, it is much the opposite, allowing more people to get in on the game by shaking up a market long cornered and stagnant. How are they to be enticed to lowsec? The only way can be: profit
You may be willing to go through lowsec as you have claimed in other posts, but claim that others will not. Good. You would profit, and others would profit from you. Nothing stops people from having alts in other empires. Hiring you to move their things, or just selling to you and you profit from the demand elsewhere.
ED: removed a poor choice of quote |
|
Helios Panala
26
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 19:39:31 -
[1751] - Quote
I don't think many people avoid low-sec because they think it's some scary dangerous place, they avoid it because at the end of the day going there is pretty pointless for them. This would add an immediate reason to go & fight in low, it creates a reason to bring high-sec players together to do something.
High-sec is currently to safe and frankly a bit to unfair in it's application of what danger does exist, breaking it all up into pockets of high-sec with dangerous roads between would be a good start to rectifying that. |
Aiyshimin
Shiva Furnace
385
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 21:52:46 -
[1752] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: That was my point, the hisec folks pay for the game just as much as the losec/null/WH players. Why should they have an inherent nerf on income foisted upon them to suit one are of the game? They need to be enticed into other areas as force simply will not work.
What nerf to income? This wouldn't have any effect on bounties etc. The enticements are already there, if they don't want to make more it's their loss tbh.
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
932
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 23:17:12 -
[1753] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: That was my point, the hisec folks pay for the game just as much as the losec/null/WH players. Why should they have an inherent nerf on income foisted upon them to suit one are of the game? They need to be enticed into other areas as force simply will not work.
What nerf to income? This wouldn't have any effect on bounties etc. The enticements are already there, if they don't want to make more it's their loss tbh.
The nerf to income that would people be required to force people to use losec otherwise why would they? squash into smaller areas and produce more of the same items from ratting. The nerf that would come for traders and manufacturers who now either have to buy more expensive items from the market or pay people to haul them across losec(which would obviously be the same large groups who could easily camp the main routes)
The nerf that would come from prices on modules crashing as more squash into smaller areas and produce more of the same items from ratting. The nerf that would come for traders and manufacturers who now either have to buy more expensive items from the market or pay people to haul them across losec(which would obviously be the same large groups who could easily camp the main routes).
If there was not a nerf to hisec income why would people go through losec? Even if they did it would be in BR's or inty's that would never be seen/caught unless there are choke points that can be camped by instlock groups.
As you say the enticements are already there so clearly those players have nil interest in losec. Adding more losec space between the empires would do nothing but stifle the trade and manufacturoing sectors that thrive there. |
Aiyshimin
Shiva Furnace
385
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 00:15:57 -
[1754] - Quote
I'm sorry but now you are confusing inability and impotence with nerfs. New opportunities, new gameplay, new markets aren't nerfs to anyone.
For everyone who has to pay more, there's someone who gains more.
Being weak and incapable of adaptation is nerfing yourself. If the players you describe exist, they don't need CCP to hold them down.
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
934
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 02:00:36 -
[1755] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:I'm sorry but now you are confusing inability and impotence with nerfs. New opportunities, new gameplay, new markets aren't nerfs to anyone.
For everyone who has to pay more, there's someone who gains more.
Being weak and incapable of adaptation is nerfing yourself. If the players you describe exist, they don't need CCP to hold them down.
They aren't weak and incapable as you put it (remember this is just a game, you know? Funa nd that...) they have a different focus. Of course they would adapt and I've said how I believe they would do this. If they can no longer enjoy the game the way they wish (within reason, most people welcome change in some areas ) they will quit , and this would* affect CCP and the rest of us. |
Helios Panala
27
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 02:58:02 -
[1756] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:They aren't weak and incapable as you put it (remember this is just a game, you know? Funa nd that...) they have a different focus. Of course they would adapt and I've said how I believe they would do this. If they can no longer enjoy the game the way they wish (within reason, most people welcome change in some areas ) they will quit , and this would* affect CCP and the rest of us.
I doubt any section of the playerbase would leave in large numbers as a result of this proposed change. I don't think high-sec carebears are as risk-averse as they're commonly made out to be. My theory is they just don't see the point in fighting when most of the time nothing will be gained from it. The opportunity to fight players to clear camps to get freight through to make isk though? I think quite a few would go for that.
Basically I don't think you're giving high-sec players enough credit. |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Prolapse.
1224
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 03:15:31 -
[1757] - Quote
Helios Panala wrote:
I doubt any section of the playerbase would leave in large numbers as a result of this proposed change. I don't think high-sec carebears are as risk-averse as they're commonly made out to be. My theory is they just don't see the point in fighting when most of the time nothing will be gained from it. The opportunity to fight players to clear camps to get freight through to make isk though? I think quite a few would go for that.
Basically I don't think you're giving high-sec players enough credit.
More people than you think have easily rustled jimmies.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
|
Miss Everest
Elysium Accord
4
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 06:12:06 -
[1758] - Quote
This isnt bad but I would rather just have Jita and systems around Jita be owned and run by Concord with links to all the empires! That would be a true tradehub... but that would never happen. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2305
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 06:38:39 -
[1759] - Quote
What if CONCORD just didn't respond as fast to capital ship ganks? Now there's more reason to go through lowsec. Leave highsec chokepoints, but make a whole bunch of alternate paths through lowsec all with similar numbers of jumps. Lowsec might end up being the safer option.
CSM X: Sabriz Adoudel, Mike Azariah, Sugar Kyle, Corbexx, Jenshae Chiroptera
Highsec reform thread
|
Aiyshimin
Shiva Furnace
386
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 07:37:58 -
[1760] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:They aren't weak and incapable as you put it (remember this is just a game, you know? Funa nd that...) they have a different focus. Of course they would adapt and I've said how I believe they would do this. If they can no longer enjoy the game the way they wish (within reason, most people welcome change in some areas ) they will quit , and this would* affect CCP and the rest of us.
No they are just as weak as incapable in this game as you put it. Remember this is a game, you know? Games have winners and loosers, good players and bad players.
Sometimes bad players get tired of being losers and either become good or give up. MMOs are about the players as much as the game itself, and most players rather play with good than bad players. There'll be new players. |
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
936
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 10:11:18 -
[1761] - Quote
Helios Panala wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:They aren't weak and incapable as you put it (remember this is just a game, you know? Funa nd that...) they have a different focus. Of course they would adapt and I've said how I believe they would do this. If they can no longer enjoy the game the way they wish (within reason, most people welcome change in some areas ) they will quit , and this would* affect CCP and the rest of us. I doubt any section of the playerbase would leave in large numbers as a result of this proposed change. I don't think high-sec carebears are as risk-averse as they're commonly made out to be. My theory is they just don't see the point in fighting when most of the time nothing will be gained from it. The opportunity to fight players to clear camps to get freight through to make isk though? I think quite a few would go for that. Basically I don't think you're giving high-sec players enough credit.
I'm pointing out the responses made here by hisec only players. They do not want to fight and therefore wouldn't. They would stay where they are or simply learn to bypass losec with WH's or BR's. This proposal would not lead to more losec living without nerfing hisec income possibilities into the ground which would then destroy a large chunk of manufacturing at least. Thaat's why I can't support the proposal |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
936
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 10:21:22 -
[1762] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:They aren't weak and incapable as you put it (remember this is just a game, you know? Funa nd that...) they have a different focus. Of course they would adapt and I've said how I believe they would do this. If they can no longer enjoy the game the way they wish (within reason, most people welcome change in some areas ) they will quit , and this would* affect CCP and the rest of us. No they are just as weak as incapable in this game as you put it. Remember this is a game, you know? Games have winners and loosers, good players and bad players. Sometimes bad players get tired of being losers and either become good or give up. MMOs are about the players as much as the game itself, and most players rather play with good than bad players. There'll be new players.
You put it as 'Weak and incapable' not I. By your logic the hisec ratter can be seen as a winner as they are making a good living by understanding the mechanics they are operating in. This doesn't make them a bad player, maybe bad at PvP and that's why they avoid it but not a bad player overall.
You seem to only be thinking from a losec/null perspective in that a player who does not engage in PvP combat is a bad player (please correct me if I'm wrong that's just the impression). How then would that cover a manufacturing player, someone who builds tech II stuff for instance. I can make a good living from a complex area of the game without ever engaging in combat with another player. Does that make me a good or bad player? Given that I supply a good number of hulls and modules into the game I'm enabling other players to enjoy their area of the game. In doing so I regularly run through losec gathering up my PI ( along with hitting combat sites) so know both of those areas of space at least. This change would not affect me, if anything it would provide more losec space to explore but I'm not selfish enough to ask for boosts to myself at the expens of others.
I honestly cannot see how this would benefit the game. Those who mission would still do so without going to losec (they would adapt to avoid it in different ways). Those who trade would most likely suffer. Those who manufacture would suffer or simply work around the new areas without ever interacting with them in any meaningful way. It would be wasted effort to introduce this to the game. |
Shai'd Hulud
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
11
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 15:19:16 -
[1763] - Quote
No thank's -1 Reason : You will isolate a lot of player. |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Prolapse.
1225
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 18:21:38 -
[1764] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:What if CONCORD just didn't respond as fast to capital ship ganks? Now there's more reason to go through lowsec. Leave highsec chokepoints, but make a whole bunch of alternate paths through lowsec all with similar numbers of jumps. Lowsec might end up being the safer option.
Hi-sec would be completely unsurvivable.
You wouldn't even make it to low sec.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
|
Zlake
Haul Miners Union
16
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 19:03:46 -
[1765] - Quote
When are they going to implement this? It makes so much sense with cannon too. Pirate factions hate the empire factions. Can easily be pushed forward with the pirate factions trying to destabilize the empires. We all ready have Sansha nation in a all out war in side of empire. |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2705
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 19:34:36 -
[1766] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: They do not want to fight and therefore wouldn't.
And they should not have to should they not want to.
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:They would stay where they are Which is their choice
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: or simply learn to bypass losec with WH's or BR's. Which is great should they do this!
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: This proposal would not lead to more losec living without nerfing hisec income possibilities into the ground which would then destroy a large chunk of manufacturing at least. Thaat's why I can't support the proposal Many areas of high sec have plenty of low end minerals and high end minerals will still come from the same places they currently come from, so very little industry would actually be affected. |
Frankinator
Haul Miners Union
1
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 21:14:12 -
[1767] - Quote
+1 |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 59 :: [one page] |