| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Brujo Loco
Amarr Brujeria Teologica
|
Posted - 2007.10.07 21:16:00 -
[1]
After seeing all these threads on how to fix low sec, I have been seeing a common number of things people agree on. Mostly that Risk vs. Reward in Low Sec is worthless/nil and whatever variables out of that corollary might sprout. So, I have been thinking lately on this theory I dubbed "The Archipelago Theory". In RL an Archipelago is chain or cluster of islands. They are relatively close to each other and were, in ancient times, according to the needs of expansion and trade of the empires that dwelt upon them at the time, localized market hubs and centers of culture expansion. The Ancient Mediterranean and Asian Powers come to mind readily , there were also Indian/Caribbean counterparts during our history. What I have been trying to collide and conclude into a readily accesible feature for eve is this:
Envision EVE as a boundless sea, the empires as a single mega continent with rivulets, deltas and swamps. All of 0.0 will be "lawless" seas, Low sec as the space between the shores of the single mega continent and hi sec as the main body of the mega continent. Now, with sovereignity and the usual "safety" of 0.0 as long as you dont fall in NBSI mode, you can see 0.0 as the new borders of Pirate Nations gone civilized/Mercantile Trading Companies Hq's. Whatever is left in the middle is the stagnant, dangerous, lonely waters of the shores between 0.0 and Empire. What I propose is a radicalization of the Concept of the Mega Continent that exists as it is now. This fix, won't affect PVE'ers nor PVP'ers negatively (OMG IM gonna quit factor). What I envision is a sharding of the Mega continent (considered as such as you can safely use roadways that connect them all through hi sec) into smaller Islands, creating an Archipelago composed of the different Empires working as Island Nations. They would be surrounded by low sec areas, but at the core they would all be high sec. What I propose is a blurring of the homogenous feel of Empire as a single continent. If factional warfare would bring this blurring, then this idea is moot, if not, it would be at least something people might consider.
What this would create is this: Racial Empire areas will be more prevalent. Market hubs might be descentralized, mission runners/miners will still have their favorite spot to grind missions/mine available, but to travel to another Racial Empire will require the player to brave out the sea shores (wich will be rife with pirates/Empire patrols/Bounty Hunters/Mercenaries/Convoys etc.) Establishing protected trade routes can and will become a priority of the Capsuleer Community. Since all Empires will still be hi sec, trade within them will keep on flourishing and revitalize some systems, descentralizing others. No need to move agents, minerals, etc. Just create a gap, isolate the Empires (they are already on this path, so it even works within the storyline). As this state of affairs continues, a new face will theoretically crop up on the EVE Universe. We need to make use of the Sea surrounding us, calling us. The unity of the Pan Continent is fictional and hurting us conglomerating everybody in the center of the EVE Map.
This has been proven to work somehow with CVA space, as I have seen it firsthand down there. Alliances might eventually control, protect and eventually tax these routes. (just an idea).
This idea can work too as creating pockets of Hi Sec systems within Low sec with Agents for mission runners/minerals/exploration. Not everybody wants/has the time to join a specific alliance to play in low sec, this MUST be understood, hence why NPC controlled Hi sec Pockets in Low sec can work as a starter for repopulation by Industrialists, PVE'rs and Miners. (The lifeblood of EVE)
Just some thoughts, as usual , please discuss, thanx for reading 
Viva VENEZUELA!!! Archipelago Theory
|

Siren Sylvanis
Gallente Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2007.10.07 21:21:00 -
[2]
Sounds like a really good idea, if it could have been implemented when the Eve map was drawn. But since the map's already set, you really can't just rearrange every single star system in Eve. --- What doesn't manage to kill you... has made a tactical error.
That is a Templar, an Amarr fighter. It is a combat drone used by carriers. |

Acoco Osiris
Gallente Sublime.
|
Posted - 2007.10.07 21:24:00 -
[3]
What she said. EVE is already too far along for such a total map change. Maybe it would've been nice had it come at the start, but it's just too late. ------------------------------ One more soldier off to war... And one Velator in my hangars. |

Cailais
Amarr VITOC Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.07 21:32:00 -
[4]
Its a nice idea, but these low sec 'no mans land' between empires could become heavily camped 23/7 if there were too few 'crossing points'
Something to consider is placing new high sec regions around or on the edges of .0 space so from the center outwards the eve cluster would go something like:
High Sec, Low Sec, 0.0, Low Sec, High Sec.
C.
- sig designer - eve mail |

Ed Anger
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2007.10.07 21:43:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Ed Anger on 07/10/2007 21:44:31
Originally by: Siren Sylvanis Sounds like a really good idea, if it could have been implemented when the Eve map was drawn. But since the map's already set, you really can't just rearrange every single star system in Eve.
why not? they could easily add in new systems between the current empires. yes, people would freak at first, then adjust. there would just need to be enough systems added so that 1 or 2 systems wouldnt become the chokepoints between two empires.
and as far as i know they have rearraigned the map in the past... there were super highways connecting regions added in, then removed, etc...
|

Brujo Loco
Amarr Brujeria Teologica
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 05:31:00 -
[6]
As I said before, borders don't need to shift at first, but by adding small Hi sec islands deep within low sec the idea could be tested, without much trouble. I can't stress enough what I think is the need for the decentralization of the Center of the EVE Map. It's theoretically a simple fix in my eyes.
Viva VENEZUELA!!! Archipelago Theory
|

Mister Xerox
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 05:39:00 -
[7]
Wow, you guys are new... *LOL*
Before the Castor expansion (which was over 3 years ago), you it was once neccessary to pass through lowsec just to get from one empire to its neighbor. It was the age of high piracy where the few avenues between empires were massively camped by massive pirate fleets in almighty cruisers (and BS, as they became more prevalent). I believe that one of the most notorious was the m0o pirate corp at a chokepoint not far from Yulai.
You want to go /back/ to that? *LOL*
|

murder one
Gallente Blood Corsair's
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 07:10:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Mister Xerox Wow, you guys are new... *LOL*
Before the Castor expansion (which was over 3 years ago), you it was once neccessary to pass through lowsec just to get from one empire to its neighbor. It was the age of high piracy where the few avenues between empires were massively camped by massive pirate fleets in almighty cruisers (and BS, as they became more prevalent). I believe that one of the most notorious was the m0o pirate corp at a chokepoint not far from Yulai.
You want to go /back/ to that? *LOL*
Do I want to go 'back' to that? HELL YES. Sounds great. When do we start?
[07:13:55] doctorstupid2 > what do i train now? [07:14:05] Trista Rotnor > little boys to 2 Fleet Combat Ships |

SoftRevolution
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 07:25:00 -
[9]
Edited by: SoftRevolution on 09/10/2007 07:25:48 What does this help?
You're back to trying to force people into low sec.
Doesn't this just create more bottleneck systems?
|

Kastar
Memphis Technologies Intergalactic Brotherhood
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 07:30:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Mister Xerox Wow, you guys are new... *LOL*
Before the Castor expansion (which was over 3 years ago), you it was once neccessary to pass through lowsec just to get from one empire to its neighbor. It was the age of high piracy where the few avenues between empires were massively camped by massive pirate fleets in almighty cruisers (and BS, as they became more prevalent). I believe that one of the most notorious was the m0o pirate corp at a chokepoint not far from Yulai.
You want to go /back/ to that? *LOL*
I miss the times of Yulai... 11K online and 90 people in sys tops. We really need lowsec again between all empires. Keep all those bloody minmatar in check please -----------------------------------------------
|

Cornucopian
Gallente Orias Fringe Enterprises United Freemen Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 07:46:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Brujo Loco
After seeing all these threads on how to fix low sec, I have been seeing a common number of things people agree on. Mostly that Risk vs. Reward in Low Sec is worthless/nil and whatever variables out of that corollary might sprout. So, I have been thinking lately on this theory I dubbed "The Archipelago Theory". In RL an Archipelago is chain or cluster of islands. They are relatively close to each other and were, in ancient times, according to the needs of expansion and trade of the empires that dwelt upon them at the time, localized market hubs and centers of culture expansion. The Ancient Mediterranean and Asian Powers come to mind readily , there were also Indian/Caribbean counterparts during our history. What I have been trying to collide and conclude into a readily accesible feature for eve is this:
Envision EVE as a boundless sea, the empires as a single mega continent with rivulets, deltas and swamps. All of 0.0 will be "lawless" seas, Low sec as the space between the shores of the single mega continent and hi sec as the main body of the mega continent. Now, with sovereignity and the usual "safety" of 0.0 as long as you dont fall in NBSI mode, you can see 0.0 as the new borders of Pirate Nations gone civilized/Mercantile Trading Companies Hq's. Whatever is left in the middle is the stagnant, dangerous, lonely waters of the shores between 0.0 and Empire. What I propose is a radicalization of the Concept of the Mega Continent that exists as it is now. This fix, won't affect PVE'ers nor PVP'ers negatively (OMG IM gonna quit factor). What I envision is a sharding of the Mega continent (considered as such as you can safely use roadways that connect them all through hi sec) into smaller Islands, creating an Archipelago composed of the different Empires working as Island Nations. They would be surrounded by low sec areas, but at the core they would all be high sec. What I propose is a blurring of the homogenous feel of Empire as a single continent. If factional warfare would bring this blurring, then this idea is moot, if not, it would be at least something people might consider.
What this would create is this: Racial Empire areas will be more prevalent. Market hubs might be descentralized, mission runners/miners will still have their favorite spot to grind missions/mine available, but to travel to another Racial Empire will require the player to brave out the sea shores (wich will be rife with pirates/Empire patrols/Bounty Hunters/Mercenaries/Convoys etc.) Establishing protected trade routes can and will become a priority of the Capsuleer Community. Since all Empires will still be hi sec, trade within them will keep on flourishing and revitalize some systems, descentralizing others. No need to move agents, minerals, etc. Just create a gap, isolate the Empires (they are already on this path, so it even works within the storyline). As this state of affairs continues, a new face will theoretically crop up on the EVE Universe. We need to make use of the Sea surrounding us, calling us. The unity of the Pan Continent is fictional and hurting us conglomerating everybody in the center of the EVE Map.
This has been proven to work somehow with CVA space, as I have seen it firsthand down there. Alliances might eventually control, protect and eventually tax these routes. (just an idea).
This idea can work too as creating pockets of Hi Sec systems within Low sec with Agents for mission runners/minerals/exploration. Not everybody wants/has the time to join a specific alliance to play in low sec, this MUST be understood, hence why NPC controlled Hi sec Pockets in Low sec can work as a starter for repopulation by Industrialists, PVE'rs and Miners. (The lifeblood of EVE)
Just some thoughts, as usual , please discuss, thanx for reading 
I stopped reading at the word 'sharding'
----------------------------------------------- "post with your main. delete your alt, you sad little exploiting metagamer."
Originally by: Royaldo
complete win by Cornucopian!
|

Frug
Zenithal Harvest
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 08:50:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Cornucopian
I stopped reading at the word 'sharding'
Then you fail because he doesn't mean sharding the server at all.
It's actually a great idea.
- - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - - If you think I'm awesome, say BOOO BOOO!! - Ductoris Neat look what I found - Kreul Hey, my marbles |

Emina
No Quarter. Vae Victis.
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 11:27:00 -
[13]
I like this idea very much. There would be the need to add loads of systems in between the empires so there would not be the one bottleneck but loads of possible routes from one Empire to the other.
Pros: Every Empire sub-region would have their own trading hub (or maybe even more)
Cons: Everyone and their dog would try to camp all possible routes between the empires for easy prey.
Addition: Disallow production of specific modules or whole groups of modules in specific regions, make rats (mission rewards) and what they drop region specific in empires. This would make trading necessary.
How to do it all in a cool way? Start up a lore conflict. Make the empires want to move out and grab parts of that 0.0 space for themselves. Make them slowly loose their grip on the inner systems basically shifting their influence circle outward. Make system security fluid (we already have sovereignty, adapt that to empire system security)
Damn, I do not really see that happening, but it sure feels nice dreaming about it :)
|

Ichabod Dirange
Backwater Security Systems
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 12:44:00 -
[14]
A series of clustered systems for every major bottleneck to begin with would be nice so that you have a chance in hell to circumvent a gatecamp if you're playing it smart.
That's how I see the archipelago theory, instead of jump A to B it has A-F to choose from and then a myriad of systems to run the gauntlet in before making it to point B and 'safe' passage. Not just jumping smack into a meatgrinder every time.
|

Cpt Branko
The Bloody Red
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 13:29:00 -
[15]
Yes. People who listen to their autopilot 100% would die, but who cares?
As long as there are enough routes so travelling isn't certain death, this is a great idea.
|

Grapez
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 14:19:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Mister Xerox Wow, you guys are new... *LOL*
Before the Castor expansion (which was over 3 years ago), you it was once neccessary to pass through lowsec just to get from one empire to its neighbor. It was the age of high piracy where the few avenues between empires were massively camped by massive pirate fleets in almighty cruisers (and BS, as they became more prevalent). I believe that one of the most notorious was the m0o pirate corp at a chokepoint not far from Yulai.
You want to go /back/ to that? *LOL*
That sounds like good fun. Signing this.
|

Kelron Queldine
Infinitus Odium The Church.
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 14:36:00 -
[17]
I like this idea. People say it will just mean the routes are camped all the time, but if we're talking about a belt of low sec around each empire, then there should be plenty of routes between 2 empires. It would also create the ideal area for factional warfare to take place, as it has already been stated that it will mostly be done in low sec.
It would also make low sec a much more interesting and dangerous place for everyone, not just the haulers getting blown up by pirates. There would be the potential for good profit to be made hauling items between empires, so people would want to risk flying through them. Pirates would obviously be attracted to these areas, but a lot of high-sec players make the mistake of lumping 'Pirates' together as a singular entity- there would be competition between pirates to control the most lucrative areas. And who knows, people might actually work together to try and drive off a pirate camp if it was seriously affecting their income, instead of just hanging around in the last high sec system yelling "Pirate camp, don't jump!" ---------------------------
Signatures are for the weak. |

Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 14:41:00 -
[18]
This is a pretty good idea, actually. /signed ------------ Whiners - Unite! | Posting and You Tarminic - Forum Warfare Specialist. |

Kruel
Blunt Force Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 14:51:00 -
[19]
Sounds great! Add a few hisec "islands" out in deep space.
I've also wondered how different Eve could be if hisec was on the outside, and nosec on the inside of the galaxy.
|

Fenderson
Finite Horizon Synchr0nicity
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 15:13:00 -
[20]
this is the first "fix lowsec" idea that i have ever really liked.
if the map were to be redrawn, great care would need to be taken to provide lots of alternate routes through lowsec so that nothing short of a massive force of hundreds of players would be able to totally block all the routes between 2 empires.
i really like this idea because lowsec mainly restricts the movement of stuff without restricting the movement of players. with the exception of smartbombing motherships, shuttles are mostly invincible in lowsec. so players would be able to move from one empire to another without too much trouble, but ships and large amounts of goods would be alot more difficult.
this would also have the positive effect of decentralizing trade hubs. every empire would now need its own trade hub, and industrialists would be encouraged to operate within the empire where they want to sell their products.
|

Tortun Nahme
Minmatar Heimatar Services Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 16:31:00 -
[21]
this wont change anything except the profit to be had in high sec, the carebears will still never go there and regional tradehubs will get more popular
no one wants to be a victim, so low sec will never be busy, deal with it or move to 0.0
Originally by: Akita T No, it's a trap ! I can tell from some of the modules and from seeing quite a few traps in my time...

|

Saffron Reynoldes
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 17:18:00 -
[22]
I think this is a cool idea. I've also always wanted to see the Empire navies floating about on patrol in the border systems. Would be an interesting way to help limit gate camping in these "border" areas of lowsec if large fleets of npc Navy ships would move about the systems breaking up camps.......
|

Fenderson
Finite Horizon Synchr0nicity
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 17:47:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Saffron Reynoldes I think this is a cool idea. I've also always wanted to see the Empire navies floating about on patrol in the border systems. Would be an interesting way to help limit gate camping in these "border" areas of lowsec if fleets of player ships would move about the systems breaking up camps.......
fixed 4 u...
|

Fenderson
Finite Horizon Synchr0nicity
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 17:49:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Tortun Nahme this wont change anything except the profit to be had in high sec, the carebears will still never go there and regional tradehubs will get more popular
no one wants to be a victim, so low sec will never be busy, deal with it or move to 0.0
care to back up this argument with some logic?
|

Kelron Queldine
Infinitus Odium The Church.
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 17:58:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Fenderson
Originally by: Saffron Reynoldes I think this is a cool idea. I've also always wanted to see the Empire navies floating about on patrol in the border systems. Would be an interesting way to help limit gate camping in these "border" areas of lowsec if fleets of player ships would move about the systems breaking up camps.......
fixed 4 u...
I'm still not entirely clear how factional warfare will work, but that could be interesting. Say 1 corp gets given a mission to camp a system and intercept ships of X empire (maybe NPC ships could come through to make it a bit more interesting). After that mission had been given, another corp working for an opposing empire could get given a mission to clear the trade routes. ---------------------------
Signatures are for the weak. |

Gabriel Magnar
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 18:54:00 -
[26]
Imo that sounds like a good idea, but yeah, too far along now to change it I'm afraid...
I would like to see stargates disappear really, but that's also a game altering change that would probably never be done (though we DID get in-game market and autopilot so never say never...). I think the whole concept of gates blows huge chunks. One of the reasons they were put in I hear is so that players would meet eachother more often, but now with with such hoopla as POSes and scanners this is happening (or could) more and more away from gates.
EVE has come quite a ways considering it's roots as a mining simulator. But still, I think the designers aren't bold enough in their ideas. A lot of cool stuff just isn't possible because of the conventions that are in place.
|

General StarScream
THE DECEPTIC0NS
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 19:02:00 -
[27]
ye there should be alot better spawns in low sec,
most of the time its frigs or des, and not cruisers wich is kinda sad.
|

Haradgrim
Caldari The Wild Bunch INTERDICTION
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 20:51:00 -
[28]
Factional Warfare would be a great way to implement this, the empires could go to war, the low-sec zones between them could be effective neutral zones / front line areas, pirates would profit, alliances would rise / fall, and trade margins would increase (and to add to the poster suggesting regional production limitations: if its impossible to produce item X in Y empire's space and the way between Y Empire and Z Empire (where item X can be produced) is fraught with danger; the margin on item X in empire Y's space will be very high, this is good ).
The only thing that could make this idea better is the possibility of dynamic security status, it would be awesome if they tied this to factional warfare and had the security status of the relevant systems be variable depending on their proximity to the fighting and the outcome of said fighting. Properly engineered this could be designed so that choke points would not be an issue (not that they really are in the "carrier age" anyhow).
However, this would likely cause more problems than its worth and high-sec only players would throw a hissy fit, that being said; I would love to see CCP create some kind of frontier between the empires (or even within the empires), there is far too much high-sec space in my opinion .
/signed, in blood (preferably yours) . --
|

Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 20:58:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Emina I like this idea very much. There would be the need to add loads of systems in between the empires so there would not be the one bottleneck but loads of possible routes from one Empire to the other.
Indispensable, or it will only increase people density in the high sec systems. And it willr equire adding high sec systems too (caldari space is relatively small and overcrowded).
Originally by: Emina
Pros: Every Empire sub-region would have their own trading hub (or maybe even more)
Cons: Everyone and their dog would try to camp all possible routes between the empires for easy prey.
True, think rancer: pirates gatecamping in a mothership.
Originally by: Emina
Addition: Disallow production of specific modules or whole groups of modules in specific regions, make rats (mission rewards) and what they drop region specific in empires. This would make trading necessary.
Very bad idea. You can ask of the NPC not to produce some module (with the esclusion of the civilian models, they must be available everywhere), and the NPC alredy drop different items depending on the faction, but disallowing production of some module only because you have the BPO/BPC in the wrong system is a very bad idea.
Originally by: Emina
How to do it all in a cool way? Start up a lore conflict. Make the empires want to move out and grab parts of that 0.0 space for themselves. Make them slowly loose their grip on the inner systems basically shifting their influence circle outward. Make system security fluid (we already have sovereignty, adapt that to empire system security)
Damn, I do not really see that happening, but it sure feels nice dreaming about it :)
Feasible, but think about the 0.0 people whinage if even 1 system was lost to the empires. 
|

Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 21:05:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Kelron Queldine I like this idea. People say it will just mean the routes are camped all the time, but if we're talking about a belt of low sec around each empire, then there should be plenty of routes between 2 empires. It would also create the ideal area for factional warfare to take place, as it has already been stated that it will mostly be done in low sec.
It would also make low sec a much more interesting and dangerous place for everyone, not just the haulers getting blown up by pirates. There would be the potential for good profit to be made hauling items between empires, so people would want to risk flying through them. Pirates would obviously be attracted to these areas, but a lot of high-sec players make the mistake of lumping 'Pirates' together as a singular entity- there would be competition between pirates to control the most lucrative areas. And who knows, people might actually work together to try and drive off a pirate camp if it was seriously affecting their income, instead of just hanging around in the last high sec system yelling "Pirate camp, don't jump!"
You think someone would "lump togheter" with unknow people to "dive off pirates" in EVE?
Maybe some too trusthing player will do it the first time, but after being lured in a motership gatecamp by the pirate alt he will stop doing that.
That is the death of most of those potentially good ideas. They require trust and trust get you killed, scammed and mocked in EVE.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |