It doesn't make sense that bitter enemies highsec systems are next to each other.

You are going to far IMHO. But I agree that empire highsec should be islands surrounded by lowsec. It doesn't make sense that bitter enemies highsec systems are next to each other. As a twist I would make FW have an impact by temporarily open up a highsec corridor between allies when certain FW objectives are met.

It might be better otherwise, but it certainly makes sense. You can think of it as the north/south Korean border zone. The close proximity is actually a reason for increased security presense, since both sides recognize the necessity to keep tight control of such an area and can't afford any vulnerabilities or disruptions there.

Sure it does. Why wouldn't you increase security in and fortify a system right next door to your enemy?

It might be better otherwise, but it certainly makes sense. You can think of it as the north/south Korean border zone. The close proximity is actually a reason for increased security presense, since both sides recognize the necessity to keep tight control of such an area and can't afford any vulnerabilities or disruptions there.

Won't work. People would stay in thier "island".

Fair points. Though I would expect some "lower sec" between two empires such as the demilitarised zone between north/south Korea and perhaps also eastern Europe between the Russia and the western part of Europe after ww2.

Fair points. Though I would expect some "lower sec" between two empires such as the demilitarised zone between north/south Korea and perhaps also eastern Europe between the Russia and the western part of Europe after ww2.

FYI: There is a 4km wide 'DMZ' between north and south Korea filled with mines and covered by snipers waiting to do target practice..... aka Losec/nullsec :)

Sadly, I think this is the case.

I think the map is fine as is.

The EVE universe map with respect to how hisec, losec and null interact should be redrawn to encourage....

- More players transiting losec or null
- More players living or travelling to losec or null
- Less incentive to stay in hisec & carebear forever
- Break up the huge swaths of nullsec sov grind and allow smaller alliances to get some null

The solution.....

- Make hisec 4 faction pockets of smaller size
- Bisect the hisec & nullsec pockets with losec pockets
- Place a trade-boosted hub in each faction losec bisect (i.e. Super Jita)
- Reduce mission & mineral payouts in hisec, boost them in losec and super-boost them in null

The sample...

http://i1307.photobucket.com/albums/s591/evegod/HowItShouldBe_zps1b44428b.jpg

(Obviously VERY ROUGH -- but something to get people thinking...ultimately its time for a rethink of the map to resolve the issues mentioned....)

Sincerely,
The Dark Lord of Crux,

F

Fair points. Though I would expect some "lower sec" between two empires such as the demilitarised zone between north/south Korea and perhaps also eastern Europe between the Russia and the western part of Europe after ww2.

Nothing I proposed actually forces empire players to change, its about incentivizing transits through losec, and aquisition of sov in null -- with the ability for smaller organizations to actually aquire sov (by breaking up null)

Imagine small pockets of null that aren't worth the trouble for big alliances to take, but well worth small alliances or big corps to constantly fight over....breaking up null with losec pockets will do this.

No, there was no demilitarized zone between Eastern and Western Europe during the Cold War.

Just a thin 100 yard or so 'no man's land' leading up to a fence.


And it was not low sec or null sec in equivalence. It was Death sec.

The problem with a map change like this is that is done entirely outside of the player's activities.

You are suggesting that CCP turn its back on emergent gameplay and the core philosophy of EVE to force people into doing things instead of providing more game mechanics that allow for changes to happen (regardless of if the change happens there is a option there that allows for it.)

I'd rather see CCP implement a more flexible security status / control mechanic for systems. Basically, the more options that CCP gives to players to alter how the Universe is structured the better.

I would love to see faction warfare result in space being completely converted into the domain of the faction that held it and to see the security status of that held space slowly rise. So, if Minmatar forces pushed to the edge of Amarr space and held the territory for a long time (a RL month perhaps?) over that period the control influence (and security status) would solidify and the war would shift into what is currently immutable Amarr territory.

That would mean that Minmatar space would expand, the low security space would shift, and Amarr territory would contract.

As a twist I would make FW have an impact by temporarily open up a highsec corridor between allies when certain FW objectives are met.

While the thoughtful and intelligent responses so far have been heartwarming...allow me to carry on...

- Jita is emergent, but why not trade-boosted hubs in the losec bisects shown to encourage travel to losec? i.e. All trades done there get less tax/boosted/etc
- Its not about 'the right way..' to play EVE, its about making it better without changes to mechanics at all.
- To wit, having 'chunks' of null allow for smaller alliances or large corps to aquire SOV, rather than just the big guys always owning all the big swaths

Give it some thought before knee-jerk dissing this idea guys, and with some tweaks I am confident it has merit.

F

While the thoughtful and intelligent responses so far have been heartwarming...allow me to carry on...

- Jita is emergent, but why not trade-boosted hubs in the losec bisects shown to encourage travel to losec? i.e. All trades done there get less tax/boosted/etc
- Its not about 'the right way..' to play EVE, its about making it better without changes to mechanics at all.
- To wit, having 'chunks' of null allow for smaller alliances or large corps to aquire SOV, rather than just the big guys always owning all the big swaths

Give it some thought before knee-jerk dissing this idea guys, and with some tweaks I am confident it has merit.

F

The EVE universe map with respect to how hisec, losec and null interact should be redrawn to encourage....

- More players transiting losec or null
- More players living or travelling to losec or null
- Less incentive to stay in hisec & carebear forever
- Break up the huge swaths of nullsec sov grind and allow smaller alliances to get some null

The solution.....

- Make hisec 4 faction pockets of smaller size
- Bisect the hisec & nullsec pockets with losec pockets
- Place a trade-boosted hub in each faction losec bisect (i.e. Super Jita)
- Reduce mission & mineral payouts in hisec, boost them in losec and super-boost them in null

The sample...

http://i1307.photobucket.com/albums/s591/evegod/HowItShouldBe_zps1b44428b.jpg

(Obviously VERY ROUGH -- but something to get people thinking...ultimately its time for a rethink of the map to resolve the issues mentioned....)

Sincerely,
The Dark Lord of Crux,

F

FYI: There is a 4km wide 'DMZ' between north and south Korea filled with mines and covered by snipers waiting to do target practice..... aka Losec/nullsec :)

Jita is an emergent thing, CCP can't just add more trade hubs.

And why would anyone want to segregate nullsec into pockets?

people who play less than other are poor while these who play a lot are rich.

Nothing I proposed actually forces empire players to change, its about incentivizing transits through losec, and aquisition of sov in null -- with the ability for smaller organizations to actually aquire sov (by breaking up null)

Imagine small pockets of null that aren't worth the trouble for big alliances to take, but well worth small alliances or big corps to constantly fight over....breaking up null with losec pockets will do this.

Moar juicy targets