However, the kind of player who doesn't have any characters or alts in null isn't going to be forced into null economically. You aren't going to be able to do that.

You might as well try to force a miner into nullsec. Good luck.

The only way to lure them in would be with fun.

I've never seen anyone credible say they want to force anyone to go to nullsec.

I've never seen anyone credible say they want to force anyone to go to nullsec.

Seconded

My combat character was the only one ever worth being in null.

What we want really is that my industry alt/invention alt/ incursion alt/ missions alt have a reason to be moved into null as well.

Null sec people DO NOT want to force anyone to come to null. We just want to stop being forced to stay in hi-sec because it's better than null when everything is taken into account.

No, there really shouldn't be. The only sad part is that so everyone lets them own so much.

Jenn's argument is basically that if the relative economic incentives were higher (for instance by nerfing highsec), a large number of players who never previously played in null, would start playing in null.

Or in other words, a form of economic persuasion. "Force" might be too harsh a word - but my point stands.

I don't see it happening.

At best, what I see happening is the alts of highsec players would move to nullsec - but that's not the same as new players moving to nullsec.

To be fair, sov mechanics are stacked against any smaller independent entity.

I would love, when they do balance sov, to have a use it or easily lose it system. For example, if you don't use a system you get no RF timers on your IHUB's & Stations, thereby enabling the system to fall from a single attack.

The tricky part is defining system "use". We have 2 indexes that show ratting and mining activity, and could easily form a basis for this new mechanic. However, these are very limited, as you can use a system for much, much more than that ratting and mining: Industry, Logistics, PvP, PI, S&I, and more.

Part of the biggest problem seems to be people not willing to do what it takes. We've already seen two examples of people not willing to play politics or participate in diplomacy in the zone specifically designed for it. This could be minimized too if you give people a reason to want nullsec space, like economic incentives, that you could get by nerfing highsec.

Sure the leader takes a hit to their own pride and submits to someone more powerful or agrees to take a deal that doesn't leave them with the better part of the bargain but, it gets them into nullsec and to a starting point. Everyone has to start out somewhere and you won't get to be a power player right from the start.

I see this mindset in highsec a lot though where after awoxing someone they outright refuse to negotiate with me which gets more of them killed. Instead of reasoning with me or bargaining when I say 250,000,000.00 isk and I'll drop corp or give me a medal they decide to spew profanity at me. For more examples look at any interaction between highsec miners and CODE., there are very reasonable and economically sound bargains being made yet probably <~1% of the miners will actually take the good deal and instead will resist which further hurts their own position.

I'm not really sure what causes this but, perhaps the NPE needs to be adjusted, maybe during the NPE the newbie needs to be give something of value, be allowed to have something of value to fly and have a scripted engagement where they get cornered by a more powerful force which requires them to negotiate giving up some of that value to have their valuable ship survive. If they act stubborn they get the chance to fight it out which it would result in the destruction of that ship but, if they try to give up some of the value they were given that ship gets to live and the npcs that cornered them join them further on in the tutorial.

I think it would help get people to consider the idea that negotiation might be a good thing instead of something to be avoided at all cost because reasons.

You keep talking about the economic incentives of living in null.

You do not, however, talk about the economic incentives of trying to stake a claim to your own sov. I don't see any incentive to do that.

Anything I would gain from that, I could gain just as easily and with less effort by joining an established group that has thousands of players set blue to myself.

And this is what the OP was really talking about. "Do you have a chance?"

The answer is no - but not because it's impossible to rally forth with thousands of players - but because it's pointless.

Again - all those people who could have started a new group could just join an existing group and get all the same crap with much less effort.

The only thing that would prompt the creation of a new group would be fun - not economics.

They'd also just join the same tired coalitions already there .

because of the nullsec depopulation being caused by highsec..

highsec depopulated your braincells, keep crying

Part of the biggest problem seems to be people not willing to do what it takes. We've already seen two examples of people not willing to play politics or participate in diplomacy in the zone specifically designed for it. This could be minimized too if you give people a reason to want nullsec space, like economic incentives, that you could get by nerfing highsec.

Sure the leader takes a hit to their own pride and submits to someone more powerful or agrees to take a deal that doesn't leave them with the better part of the bargain but, it gets them into nullsec and to a starting point. Everyone has to start out somewhere and you won't get to be a power player right from the start.

I see this mindset in highsec a lot though where after awoxing someone they outright refuse to negotiate with me which gets more of them killed. Instead of reasoning with me or bargaining when I say 250,000,000.00 isk and I'll drop corp or give me a medal they decide to spew profanity at me. For more examples look at any interaction between highsec miners and CODE., there are very reasonable and economically sound bargains being made yet probably <~1% of the miners will actually take the good deal and instead will resist which further hurts their own position.

You know? The last couple awoxes I have pulled off, it was the same thing. No acknowledging the superior position of the other player, just vitriol and trying to bullshit me that a 5,000 man merc alliance will hound me until the end of my days.

But if they would just show some freaking humility, some small willingness to eat a little crow, it wouldn't have to end in tears. But it's very rarely the case that they actually bother to talk to me besides questioning my parentage.

As for why, here is something my dad told me once. "I shouldn't have to" is one of the most dangerous things humans tell themselves. It leads to being intellectually dishonest with yourself, and that's a dark road to be walking down.

You know? The last couple awoxes I have pulled off, it was the same thing. No acknowledging the superior position of the other player, just vitriol and trying to bullshit me that a 5,000 man merc alliance will hound me until the end of my days.

Jenn's argument is basically that if the relative economic incentives were higher (for instance by nerfing highsec), a large number of players who never previously played in null, would start playing in null.

Yeah no timers is a bad thing because it means we can steamroll half the galaxy over night especially because of the nullsec depopulation being caused by highsec. If anything your idea would further encourage renting because it would mean we have to stuff renters in every system.

The best idea I've seen is nerfing highsec and changing sov to be based on multiple objectives so you have to split forces. However I haven't seen a good idea that does the second part of that well.

Also, Marlona sky had a very interesting idea to curb power projection in EvE, something that is truly needed. Read it, as it is a good article.

I won't discuss anything with you until you can prove you can discuss things honestly and that your opinion can be changed by fact/data.

Lots of high sec posters

Actually that's a horrible idea. Marlona is just mad that they lost the war.

There are currently no drawbacks to teleportation in EvE, and this is something that should exist. To be honest, I really don't care about the movement of capitals via teleportation, but I very much think bridging needs to have some limits similar to Marlona's suggestion.

You know? The last couple awoxes I have pulled off, it was the same thing. No acknowledging the superior position of the other player, just vitriol and trying to bullshit me that a 5,000 man merc alliance will hound me until the end of my days.

Stopped reading here.

It seems that anybody who disagrees with you automagically lives in high sec. Well, I live in nullsec, so there goes that.

It would be AWFUL for goons - they will never support it.

The current status quo of defending and attacking anything from anywhere benefits them far too much for them to ever want that changed.

It would be AWFUL for goons - they will never support it.

The current status quo of defending and attacking anything from anywhere benefits them far too much for them to ever want that changed.

Where you live is irrelevant. You can take the rat out of the hood but they's still a hoodrat.

Did you miss the qualifier: If you don't use a system you get no RF timers on your IHUB's & Stations, thereby enabling the system to fall from a single attack.

I fully support timers on systems you are using. I fully support the CFC owning all of nullsec if they can take it. I don't support easily holding onto it unless they use it.

Also, Marlona sky had a very interesting idea to curb power projection in EvE, something that is truly needed. Read it, as it is a good article.