Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Rivr Luzade
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
2155
|
Posted - 2015.12.14 11:56:24 -
[31] - Quote
I kindly leave this here: Agent Shuffling based on events and activity
UI Improvement Collective
My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions The-Company
948
|
Posted - 2015.12.14 12:40:34 -
[32] - Quote
I hear you but wasn't that fixed when CCP got rid of the quality value of agents? The reason people clump together at specific agents is the LP store associated with them.
People "see" more value in x LP store items as in others. Mix the LP store items up a bit and make some items more "affordable" in terms of tags and people look for agents they want the modules from - as easy as that.
Let's say faction mag stabs. They either drop from a Serpentis faction ship in an anomly in Gallente space or are available in any Gallente Federation LP store and cost y amount of tags +42000LP and some isk (I haven't seen the value so I cannot recall).
The general market pricetags on any of the mag stabs or heats sinks is around 100m.
The change to the LP store would be the removal of tags and increase the isk value to 100m + the amount of lp you "pay" now which is 42000 or 45000LP.
Voil+á you also created a high value isk sink which everyone can benefit from.
Remember Toras Egassu? She used to be the highest quality level 4 agent that could not send you to lowsec by begin too far away from any lowsec system to send the pilots to. Anyway they changed all agents to be -20q in access and +20q in payout and the only reason some people stayed is historic or novelty (SOE probes and stuff).
For many months very early in my EVE time I ran missions in lowsec but the difference in payout was to tiny that I gave up upon the risk for minimal returns.
Eve Minions is recruiting. Learn from about pvp, learn about ships and how to fly them correctly. Small gang and solo action in high, low and nullsec and w-space alike.
We will teach you everything you need and want to know.
|
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
681
|
Posted - 2015.12.14 15:51:52 -
[33] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Because there are other areas of the game. Highsec should not get special treatment merely because the trade hubs are there to increase population density.
One area of the game should not be allowed to prosper at the detriment of all four of the others (I count NPC null as it's own area for various reasons).
Highsec is not the game, and the game is not highsec. And honestly, if your mentality is what you described, then you are just holding the game hostage against any real growth anyway, which will lead to it's inevitable death regardless of what CCP does.
They've taken steps to shake things up everywhere else in the game. It'll be your turn sooner or later. In time we will see if there is any truth to these things.
In the mean time CCP has repeatedly added nerfs to the high sec income capabilities, over my years in the game there have been Reductions in LP and ISK payouts for missions. Then they removed the materials drops from rouge drones and replaced it with metal scraps. Then there was the huge change to reprocessing that dropped the max efficiency from 100% to somewhere around 60%. Then they changed the loot and salvage drop tables in missions lowering income even more. Then they changed exploration by making it easier, because it was easier and more players were doing it they changed the loot / salvage tables dropping earning power in high sec even farther. Still not happy with the income restrictions and in part to appease the nul sec players they changed the low level ore distributions in nul sec to make it easier for them and no doubt it was done as a potential nerf to high sec incomes as well.
Have any of these changes taken players out of high sec and moved them into the wilds of low or into nul sec in significant numbers? Not really, in my experience it has driven dozens of players I know out of the game but only a very few have decided to move to low or nul. In fact what all of these changes have done is drive players to the blitz style of missions as a means of replacing the income that was taken away. Nerfs to income are a stick used to try and beat people out of one game play style and move them into a different game play style. They have been a dismal failure every time they have been tried and they will continue to be a dismal failure if they are tried again. If you want players out of high sec then CCP needs to change low and nul to make them a place that players want to go to and want to be in.
To repeat making high sec less profitable, making it more dangerous will not drive players into low and nul it will simply drive them out of the game, and whether you like it is not relevant CCP needs those subscription fees as badly as they need yours.
A short detour to explain my nul sec ore comment from above Yes I agree with nul sec players it made little sense for those who are supposed to live in a self sufficient world to have to go to high sec for your ore needs so in that regard I agree that the changes were good. On the other hand I still think the ability to further nerf high sec incomes was a factor in the decision as well. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
15471
|
Posted - 2015.12.14 15:57:27 -
[34] - Quote
Donnachadh wrote: In time we will see if there is any truth to these things.
Well, the funny thing is that, either way it turns out, your side gets condemned.
See, if they do change highsec and you all quit and the game does actually die, then all you've proved is that CCP should have addressed your particular tumor a decade ago, before it grew too large to be cut out without endagering the host(the self inflicting feedback loop of constantly adding more safety being the prime culprit there).
And if the game doesn't die because they changed highsec, then all your decade of bluster and trying to hold the game hostage will be for naught.
Either way, you lose. It's just up to see whether the game itself loses at that point. But maybe we'll still have Valkyrie, although I don't think that fighting will be optional in that game, lol.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1670
|
Posted - 2015.12.14 16:21:50 -
[35] - Quote
It's pretty easy to make lowsex the place to be.
Step 1. Drifters enter incursions sites - sometimes they wipe out all the Sansha ships and sometimes the wipe out all they player ships.
Step 2. Dial back level 4 missions a bit (60% should do it).
Step 3. Remove system upgrades from SOV null.
Step 4. Make it so the only way to produce the new gimmick ships.... er T2 destroyers is to get parts that come specifically from the far reaches of lowsex (faction them out, some of the parts only come from one region and other parts from other regions). For a better effect: tie all T2 production to getting parts from the far reaches of lowsex.
Follow these 4 simple steps and most players will be living in lowsex w/in 2 years.
Here's the thing about 'forcing' folks to move - no one likes to be pushed around w/ a hot poker.
Here's the thing to incentivising w/ carrots - it's already been done w/ SOV upgrades (there is no such thing as bas space anymore), incursions and missions. I mean, what would CCP have to offer to get folks to stop farming incursions/anoms because farming lowsex is better??? Incetives have already been overdone.
Just make more ways for pvp to be fun, interesting and meainingful and all will be well. |
Amber Starview
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2015.12.14 18:22:29 -
[36] - Quote
Rework faction warfare to where it should be ....a fun fast paced pvp battleground battling for something other than lp
Random events like this frost thing and blood thing should have imo had escalations into lowsec to just boost the numbers also get rid of gate camps just because they are boring =ƒÿü |
Paul Pohl
blue media poetry
57
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 02:30:48 -
[37] - Quote
Donnachadh wrote: In the mean time CCP has repeatedly added nerfs to the high sec income capabilities, over my years in the game there have been Reductions in LP and ISK payouts for missions. Then they removed the materials drops from rouge drones and replaced it with metal scraps. Then there was the huge change to reprocessing that dropped the max efficiency from 100% to somewhere around 60%. Then they changed the loot and salvage drop tables in missions lowering income even more. Then they changed exploration by making it easier, because it was easier and more players were doing it they changed the loot / salvage tables dropping earning power in high sec even farther. Still not happy with the income restrictions and in part to appease the nul sec players they changed the low level ore distributions in nul sec to make it easier for them and no doubt it was done as a potential nerf to high sec incomes as well.
Have any of these changes taken players out of high sec and moved them into the wilds of low or into nul sec in significant numbers? Not really, in my experience it has driven dozens of players I know out of the game but only a very few have decided to move to low or nul. In fact what all of these changes have done is drive players to the blitz style of missions as a means of replacing the income that was taken away. Nerfs to income are a stick used to try and beat people out of one game play style and move them into a different game play style. They have been a dismal failure every time they have been tried and they will continue to be a dismal failure if they are tried again. If you want players out of high sec then CCP needs to change low and nul to make them a place that players want to go to and want to be in.
Yes it's rather funny that on the on hand CCP emphasizes the sandbox, and on the other obsesses that people do not play the game they way they 'want' it to be played.
If they just left people to do want they want they'd go to low sec and null sec on their own
|
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
718
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 03:24:09 -
[38] - Quote
Highsec offers incomes above what you achieve in null. The argument of security is kind of moot. In highsec you can't really stop someone from finding you, in nullsec you can't reasonably stop them from attacking you.
I'd open the debate for having bombs in lowsec as a way of dealing with certain grossly abused blob tactics.
Realistically the lines delineating null from low are mostly social rather than mechanical, npc null and lowsec are almost functionally identical apart from a few minor points.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
685
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 03:54:47 -
[39] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Well, the funny thing is that, either way it turns out, your side gets condemned.
See, if they do change highsec and you all quit and the game does actually die, then all you've proved is that CCP should have addressed your particular tumor a decade ago, before it grew too large to be cut out without endagering the host(the self inflicting feedback loop of constantly adding more safety being the prime culprit there).
And if the game doesn't die because they changed highsec, then all your decade of bluster and trying to hold the game hostage will be for naught.
Either way, you lose. It's just up to see whether the game itself loses at that point. But maybe we'll still have Valkyrie, although I don't think that fighting will be optional in that game, lol. Oh you are so wrong on this, I have enjoyed 6 marvelous years in this game, I have met and talked to 100's maybe even a 1,000 or more players from all over the world. Many of them have become friends in real life and even though they checked out of the game years ago we still have the friendships, the experiences shared and we still talk to one another to this day. If CCP changes the game to the point that I no longer find any enjoyment then I will simply quit and find something else to do with my time with no regrets being much wiser about the real world around me and with a great many friends from places around the world that I would never have met if it were not for Eve. If the future of the game brings new challenges and new opportunities for me to explore and enjoy then I will continue this journey making new friends with new experiences shared.
Your bias is clearly showing here as is your lack of a historical base for your comments. I am not by any means an old timer but even going back to 2009 when I started my first character the vast majority of the characters in the game called high sec home. Based on the information that has been made available over the years low and nul combined have NEVER had as many characters active in them as high sec. So it is obvious at least from the beginning for me anyway it is clear that a lot of players prefer the lower hassle and relative safety of high sec to the other areas of space.
To your contention that high sec is safer now than years past that is your opinion. To me it is neither more or less safe now than in 2009, what has changed is the nature of the threats caused by other players. Even if we accept your assessment that high sec is safer now than it was in 2009 who is to blame for those changes? You are quick to point the finger at the so called "risk averse whinny care bears" but in the end they are not the ones designing the game, releasing new features or curbing some activities while buffing others. If CCP has sided with those carebears and made high sec more safe then the lesson for you is that CCP will at least to a point do what they need to do to protect ALL of their players.
Another of your contentions is that the game needs to be more dangerous overall and they need to nerf or outright get rid of a lot of the not shooting other players in the face aspects, and yet CCP recently released a road map that will put even more emphasis on the industrial (not shooting other players in the face) aspects of the game. Are we to blame the whinny carebears for this as well, or is it simply that your personal opinions on what the game needs are completely out of sync with CCP's vision? |
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
185
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 04:10:09 -
[40] - Quote
My experience with lowsec is that it's fine... But let's say it's not, making high sec less fun won't make people move to low sec. I mean, it might for some but if they didn't go there before I doubt they'll be motivated to go there now. They could just as likely quit the game entirely.
If you want more people in low, add things you can do in low that you can't do anywhere else. Faction warfare was one of the things that moved a number of people to low. People won't move to low because you've made it less convenient to manage faction standings because having your mission ship blown up is far less convenient that that could ever be.
|
|
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
4858
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 04:13:09 -
[41] - Quote
You know, it would be a refreshing change if someone could actually come up with an idea for buffing low/null-sec that doesn't constantly involve nerfing high-sec or otherwise relocating high-sec content to low/null-sec. I hate to break it to those of you, but a lot of us high-sec players just have no interest in low/null-sec. It's akin to going to Vegas and thinking we're going to take the House when we know full-well the odds are stacked against us...
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
4066
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 04:22:45 -
[42] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:You know, it would be a refreshing change if someone could actually come up with an idea for buffing low/null-sec that doesn't constantly involve nerfing high-sec or otherwise relocating high-sec content to low/null-sec. I hate to break it to those of you, but a lot of us high-sec players just have no interest in low/null-sec. It's akin to going to Vegas and thinking we're going to take the House when we know full-well the odds are stacked against us...
I think that is precisely what some of have been saying.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Caleb Ayrania
TarNec Invisible Exchequer
260
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 09:22:50 -
[43] - Quote
There are most likely plenty of high sec players that would like to go to low and null, but the style of play is a bit like letting your young kids try and play FPS on a clan server. He might have like the game if it was not endless pushing respawn after being 360 scoped.
I am sure many high sec players would go and throw low end content gallore as soft targets, if the benefits and excitement was not draining their resources dis proportionally. Add the fact that getting replacement out there is terribad.
How many systems in low have even high priced equipment available for something as simple as endless low sec mining?
Which brings back the problem that too few market orders and contracts makes it impossible to supply casual and solo carebears, or even small scale low and mid corp adventures.
Yes there are ways to facilitate such things with planning and what not, but that is demanding more than many are willing to or capable of administering. Sure you can plan a venture into low and black frog material in there and so on, but would it not be a lot more fun if it was possible to casually go and be soft targets?
If low and null pvpers want more soft targets they should consider what type of changes could make them their content. It might also get a lot more gankers into low, where suddenly a lot more action would be available. The frustration might also then make pvpers of the carebears.. and more fun would develop.. |
Tabyll Altol
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
139
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 09:39:59 -
[44] - Quote
Mr Mieyli wrote:So first off I'll just come out and say this is an idea that has just come to me and there may be something glaringly wrong with it that I've not seen.
My idea is that highsec missions should be more heavily against other empire factions; the idea being that if you want to run missions in highsec then you will suffer from not being able to freely travel all empires (unless you manage your standings well). Near lowsec systems and lowsec systems could have a larger amount of missions versus pirate factions saving your standings and paying better but putting yourself at risk.
I would see the effect of this being to break up the solidarity of Jita as the one true trade hub of new Eden with more people unable to travel across the whole of highsec. This would in turn boost profits for traders moving items between hubs and increase camping opportunities for gankers. For missioners they would have to dip their toes into lowsec if they want to keep standings high all around and if they do they will be rewarded with the higher payouts lowsec already has. If they want to stay risk free they will have to sacrifice faction standings to do so. For PvPers they will see more targets in space in lowsec and this could then lead to corps moving into lowsec systems to defend their mission runners.
Seems legit, i can-¦t understand where those pirats come from and why concord doesn-¦t see them when they see me ganking a barge -.-.
+1 |
Mr Mieyli
Hedion University Amarr Empire
119
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 11:35:19 -
[45] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Carebears are NEVER going to leave highsec. We see the game as, "I'll play in highsec or I'll quit". There is NO way to change a persons personality with game mechanics, so stop trying. You risk losing a chunk of the playerbase and there is zero upside.
I am not trying to change anyone's personality with this change and I perfectly understand that even after my idea went into effect some would decide they still want to stay in highsec. That's their decision and I'm fine with it.
I expect though that the attitude shown in the quote about doesn't represent the attitudes of the majority of highsec players but rather a select few who want the game to exist their way. My idea aims to provide an incentive for mission runners to go to lowsec without actually making any mechanics changes which would force them. I have made the incentive non-financial as we have seen the success financial incentives have had at providing incentive to move. I believe this is because the additional safety in more secure space outweighs the small gain in income from more dangerous space. More profit in more dangerous space however just leads to groups collaborating to milk the most money from their income source. Therefore I want the incentive to be something that is at a personal, pilot level such as the inconvenience of not being able to freely travel all of highsec.
I understand this won't magically empty highsec and I'm OK with that. I think that it will provide a reason for people to consider missioning in lowsec, and that it will bring about a whole slew of other benefits like I've mentioned in the OP.
A case for more AoE in EvE
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
15482
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 12:29:48 -
[46] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:You know, it would be a refreshing change if someone could actually come up with an idea for buffing low/null-sec that doesn't constantly involve nerfing high-sec or otherwise relocating high-sec content to low/null-sec.
The nail that stands up gets pounded down.
It is easier to adjust highsec, which is the outlier, than it is to adjust every single other area of space.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
2025
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 15:05:45 -
[47] - Quote
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all areas of space are created equal..."
In other words, stop trying to make someone else play the game the way you think they should. It does not hurt me one bit if someone else spends his entire career sniping people on the Jita undock, or sitting in a FW plex, gas mining in a WH, or lurking in a back corner of deep 0.0. All those players are part of the Eve universe. If I want to interact with them, I can do it.
I may think that someone else is insane for running the same Level IV missions over and over again in his Golem (been there, done that, got the sec status to prove it), just as he thinks I am insane for spending two hours last night sitting on a Titan waiting to go to a fight that never materialized. But that does not mean either of us should hate the other, or seek to destroy that play style. We should be looking for as many ways as possible to improve the Eve experience across the board.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Morrigan LeSante
Senex Legio The OSS
858
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 15:17:02 -
[48] - Quote
I'm sure I've seen it here before but frankly the biggest problem lowsec has is its reputation.
If you want to nerf highsec, remove burners from there and drop LP/mission payouts a little but honestly the biggest highsec bugbear is lolcursions. |
aldhura
Bartledannians
19
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 19:58:00 -
[49] - Quote
I go to hs for a break from from null or wh every now and again. Some casual mission running is great to reset your mind set. Nerf HS where will I go for my 2-3 month break break every now and again ?? maybe another game ?? will I then bother coming back ??
Bartledannians are recruiting.. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6150832#post6150832
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions The-Company
957
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 20:09:43 -
[50] - Quote
Morrigan LeSante wrote:I'm sure I've seen it here before but frankly the biggest problem lowsec has is its reputation.
If you want to nerf highsec, remove burners from there and drop LP/mission payouts a little but honestly the biggest highsec bugbear is lolcursions.
I wouldn't be very sad if our chief Sansha would retire his effords to "recruit" people to his cause and hence end the incursions alltogether. But if someone gets more not funny ideas to reduce my main income - which is low enough now - I get mad really quick.
Maybe I am a rarity item but I fly one ship at a time so my options in making isk is limited. Maybe you cannot read, which isn't so bad these days, but I can and when I need about a week to come close to 300m isk because I do other things than running missions all day long and I read the pricetags of things on my shopping list it is more than upsetting.
I don't mind the work but getting paid less for more than twice the price they used to have, getting gear is a long process. My isk doesn't come by magic or software programs that run in the backgroud it comes from shooting red thingies with a bounty tag on or red thingies that drop something blue.
I also get upset when some dude in local tells me that his vanguard buddies are making 11 billion a day - what??
This last thing is supposed to sound a much condecending as possible when I say I do not under any circumstance even think about putting one of my ships into the hands of total incompetent logistic pilots, so incursions for me.
Now explain why my income should be decreased again? How about increasing payouts in high-risk places to an appropiate level like unknown space instead?
Eve Minions is recruiting. Learn from about pvp, learn about ships and how to fly them correctly. Small gang and solo action in high, low and nullsec and w-space alike.
We will teach you everything you need and want to know.
|
|
Vic Jefferson
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
746
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 20:28:00 -
[51] - Quote
Eh, lowsec has some pretty good rewards in it. It's just not all that accessible. I mean you need to be in the winning side of FW (so alts), or have the tools and means to do L5s efficiently (alts). Whereas in sov space you can just pick up your VNI or mackinaw and get to work. It doesn't spur enough content and it certainly doesn't grab the attention of new players.
The Mordu rats were an excellent idea, as were the clone soldier tags. The more people are out and about looking for things, the more they will interact, and that's where interesting things happen. That's sort of the thing though; we all want a wild west type deal in low and npc null, but the stuff that's easily accessed doesn't pay nearly enough to be competitive vs Sov Null or High Sec versus the respective risks taken.
Add more random stuff in space. These areas should be a nomad's paradise. If 5 newbies in newbie fit ships can venture into low, blow up some rats, evade actual player pirates, and get the goods back to HS, and exceed the income they would have got by just skilling into a L4 mission boat, and have actual fun interacting with the universe, then lowsec is working.
Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM XI
|
Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
343
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 22:02:10 -
[52] - Quote
Making lowsec safer will encourage people to come in from highsec.
Everyone, to some degree is both loss-averse and risk-averse. Increasing the reward doesn't overcome loss-aversion. Increasing safety does. People with low loss-aversion already come to lowsec (or null, or w-space) chasing the ISK which is there for the taking, increasing the loot and ISK will only make those existing people richer. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
4071
|
Posted - 2015.12.16 00:14:20 -
[53] - Quote
Rawketsled wrote:Making lowsec safer will encourage people to come in from highsec.
Everyone, to some degree is both loss-averse and risk-averse. Increasing the reward doesn't overcome loss-aversion. Increasing safety does. People with low loss-aversion already come to lowsec (or null, or w-space) chasing the ISK which is there for the taking, increasing the loot and ISK will only make those existing people richer.
Exactly this. Increasing rewards for those who tend more towards loss aversion will not have much effect until the increased rewards are substantially higher. For example, the rewards might need to be doubled or more.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Mr Mieyli
Hedion University Amarr Empire
120
|
Posted - 2015.12.16 00:20:34 -
[54] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Rawketsled wrote:Making lowsec safer will encourage people to come in from highsec.
Everyone, to some degree is both loss-averse and risk-averse. Increasing the reward doesn't overcome loss-aversion. Increasing safety does. People with low loss-aversion already come to lowsec (or null, or w-space) chasing the ISK which is there for the taking, increasing the loot and ISK will only make those existing people richer. Exactly this. Increasing rewards for those who tend more towards loss aversion will not have much effect until the increased rewards are substantially higher. For example, the rewards might need to be doubled or more.
Or they need to be able to put less at risk to be able to make their money in lowsec. You should be able to make decent money in assault frigates or similar sized ships. Battleships in lowsec are huge slow targets and people are understandably afraid to use them much. Perhaps level 4 lowsec missions could be group based instead of requiring battleships to make them more difficult but not suicidal to run.
I should make clear that when I say risk averse in my posts I do not attach anything negative to it, I am just as risk averse as most people.
A case for more AoE in EvE
|
Max Muni
Muni Corp
2
|
Posted - 2015.12.16 00:23:58 -
[55] - Quote
The only way to make LOWSEC more populated is to
REMOVE LOCAL, as it's a stupid concept for immersion anyways.
It will make the residents work a bit more to play the pirate game, and the visitors get a head start on the ninja game.
Anything else really is just changing stuff for nothing. You don't have to balance out the rewards, just the starting line. As is, it's far too easy to hunt in Low/Null. It's like a DEER just walking by the hunter with a sign on his back before he tries to run away so the that hunter can have a fair chance at killing him. |
Paul Pohl
blue media poetry
60
|
Posted - 2015.12.16 01:57:09 -
[56] - Quote
Perhaps the answer lies in the rigid and unchanging nature of the universe
I was looking at dotlan today, and there's some rather curious stats....
The most ship kills is in Jita - high sec - 14734 then comes Tama - low sec - 10005 then Amarr and Udemma - both high sec - 8845 and 8556 and then comes the a null sec region - W-4NUU - 8333
After that the top ten of both High sec and Low sec are both far more violent than null sec - with Ultra - the state war academy (where supposedly CCP supposedly frowns on PvP) being the fifth highest in lhigh sec - with almost twice as many ship kills as the second most violent in null-sec - 7066 vs 4392
When you then look at the NPC kills - and the carebear statistics - it becomes apparent that null-sec is on a par with high-sec for mission running
So here is my suggestion...
A fluid universe...
Set a cap on the rewards offered by mission agents per station, based on the number of NPC kills the previous day - or some other relevant metric - (it can be staggered to take account of time zones) - after all there can only be so many pirate invasions in a day that need taking care of - when the quota is reached, the rewards and the loot goes down.
Make the security status reflect the number of ship kills. The more ship kills the lower the security status. This could also be tied into an attriional factor that affects the regeneration of astroids, PI, moon-goo etc - the more fighting the less yield - and conversely if you drive down the security status of a high sec system, suddenly the null-sec minerals start spawning.
You could also drag in the factions and NPCs, who faced with prospect of losing territory declare war on the pirates in Udemma (who are busily playing the fozziesov game on the system - having dragged it's sec status lower that the carebears in null-sec could ever dream of) - which then drags in all those 'carebears' hiding in NPC corps that the bored and bloodthirsty have been dying to get their hands on for years.
Meanwhile those who want to just be left alone and do their high-sec thing will move to the areas of low-sec and null-sec that have now become high-sec on account of nothing happening there for years, and the mega payments available from mission agents who have been waiting months to get the DNA in level 1 mission analysed
Oh and of course new markets and trade routes would open - after-all why would you go to Jita when it has 0.0 security rating and the dock-campers don't even need to bother about a dual, as they smart bomb the marginal traders scrambling to get their stuff out ( cursing their API linked phone Apps for not predicting this swing in the market)
.....
But of course the answer is no....
Hence the warning sign that you are entering low-sec....
And the endless whining by the 'big name null sec carebears' that if they only nerf high sec some more, then they will have more people to kill, to supplement their mission running habit (they have to fight battleships you know)(yeah we know)(hence why high-sec types in cruisers and T1 weapons don't go out there) |
Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
346
|
Posted - 2015.12.16 02:32:11 -
[57] - Quote
Max Muni wrote:The only way to make LOWSEC more populated is to
REMOVE LOCAL, as it's a stupid concept for immersion anyways.
It will make the residents work a bit more to play the pirate game, and the visitors get a head start on the ninja game. Then pirates will do nothing but camp entrances.
Quote:Anything else really is just changing stuff for nothing. You don't have to balance out the rewards, just the starting line. As is, it's far too easy to hunt in Low/Null. It's like a DEER just walking by the hunter with a sign on his back before he tries to run away so the hunter can have a fair chance at killing him. Hunting itself is too easy with a good prober. Make that more difficult and you don't need to remove local.
Once I know you're in system, it's not going to take me long to probe you out. It becomes a very binary thing - you're either safe because nobody knows about you, or you're equally as vulnerable as you are today (but in a worse position because you can't see if you're being hunted). |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
4073
|
Posted - 2015.12.16 05:34:43 -
[58] - Quote
Mr Mieyli wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Rawketsled wrote:Making lowsec safer will encourage people to come in from highsec.
Everyone, to some degree is both loss-averse and risk-averse. Increasing the reward doesn't overcome loss-aversion. Increasing safety does. People with low loss-aversion already come to lowsec (or null, or w-space) chasing the ISK which is there for the taking, increasing the loot and ISK will only make those existing people richer. Exactly this. Increasing rewards for those who tend more towards loss aversion will not have much effect until the increased rewards are substantially higher. For example, the rewards might need to be doubled or more. Or they need to be able to put less at risk to be able to make their money in lowsec. You should be able to make decent money in assault frigates or similar sized ships. Battleships in lowsec are huge slow targets and people are understandably afraid to use them much. Perhaps level 4 lowsec missions could be group based instead of requiring battleships to make them more difficult but not suicidal to run. I should make clear that when I say risk averse in my posts I do not attach anything negative to it, I am just as risk averse as most people.
It is not risk. It is the notion of a loss. Loss averse people strongly avoid losses even at the expense of gains. Reducing the risk a little bit will have little to no effect, just as boosting the rewards a little bit would have no effect.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
1077
|
Posted - 2015.12.16 05:55:36 -
[59] - Quote
Reading the thread I have a few comments...
First, you cannot nerf high sec enough to make lowsec be attractive. It's not the rewards that drive that, it's the security. Beyond the pure account book view of profit and loss there is the personal threshold of how much hassle it is to operate PvE there. Some people enjoy it, the overwhelming vast majority do not. Faction War seems to attract some, but missions aren't terribly popular despite the availability of level 5, and mining is relatively limited as well.
Most people do not enjoy being soft targets. The most profit is in soft target activities, or in preying on where the proceeds are accumulated (freighters, mostly), so those activities remain popular even among PvP oriented players, but most will not willingly do that sort of thing while being pestered constantly by profit killing attacks as someone else's 'content'.
We want to be the hero in our own narrative. Playing as someone else's loot pinata is simply not fun, no matter how profitable it can be. |
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
539
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 01:10:07 -
[60] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Its been said a million times but lets go over it again.
Carebears are NEVER going to leave highsec. We see the game as, "I'll play in highsec or I'll quit". There is NO way to change a persons personality with game mechanics, so stop trying. You risk losing a chunk of the playerbase and there is zero upside.
The EVE playerbase has already started to decline why push more people to consider quitting? Oh, that's simple. Because there are other areas of the game. Highsec should not get special treatment merely because the trade hubs are there to increase population density. One area of the game should not be allowed to prosper at the detriment of all four of the others (I count NPC null as it's own area for various reasons). Highsec is not the game, and the game is not highsec. And honestly, if your mentality is what you described, then you are just holding the game hostage against any real growth anyway, which will lead to it's inevitable death regardless of what CCP does. They've taken steps to shake things up everywhere else in the game. It'll be your turn sooner or later.
1. Wait, you think the trabe hubs are in highsec to increase the population density of highsec...................LOL !
OMG, you dont need to say anything more to prove how utterly clueless you are about EVE.
2. There is nothing wrong with highsec or any other area of the game. Its just people hate to have their multi-billion ISK ships go BOOM so they play in highsec. Destroying highsec wont help the rest of the game, it wont populate them it will instead crush CCPs income stream and destroy EVE entirely.
3. If your mentality is as you state im happy to announce that CCP wont follow through with your request because they are smart enough not to bite off the hand that feeds them.
4. EVE was never a truly successful game because CCP is a poor steward of economics. A certain new upcoming game has already acquired one million accounts and growing and it is still in pre-alpha; that is how you win the economics game so you can support all the areas of your game both pve and pvp. If CCP had provided an environment suitable to a larger pve playerbase its finances would have allowed it to create pvp content it cannot even dare to dream with its current income stream.
CCP and many of its playerbase call EVE a niche game but that is just hollow justification for the horrible financial acumen of CCP.
5. LOL, you think the trade hubs are in highsec to increase highsec's player density ! (I had to state this one twice because im still laughing.)
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |