EVE Search - Idea on how to get more people in low sec/0.0

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Idea on how to get more people in low sec/0.0

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Hook1971	Posted - 2008.01.10 21:27:00 - [1] I know there have a lot of discussions on this but the real solution all comes down to the death penalty. How many people can honestly say "If the death penalty wasnt so bad, I would go to low sec or 0.0" I know I would. Now I'm not saying to change the penalty to that of WoW. That would be terrible. But just tweak it a little. 1. Make insurance payouts better. Or make insurance be a monthly bill. Say 1% a month of the price of the ship. And the payout would be 100% of the average price of the ship. The longer you go without making a claim, the lower the monthly bill will be. The more claims you make, the higher the monthly bill. 2. This one may be a little more radical. But when you lose an insured ship, your insurance agent will automatically scan the market for you and buy you a new ship from the lowest bidder in the region the agent is in. That way, after you ship goes pop. You get an email from your agent saying "Sorry about your ship, your new ship is in a hangar in (name of system) Then all you have to do is go get it. You will of course have to refit it which I think is a fair penalty in itself. Implimenting something like this would get me to venture out. Anyone else think this is a good idea or am I just being silly?
Hannobaal Gallente Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.01.10 21:34:00 - [2] Edited by: Hannobaal on 10/01/2008 21:36:37 Originally by: Hook1971 2. This one may be a little more radical. But when you lose an insured ship, your insurance agent will automatically scan the market for you and buy you a new ship from the lowest bidder in the region the agent is in. That way, after you ship goes pop. You get an email from your agent saying "Sorry about your ship, your new ship is in a hangar in (name of system) Then all you have to do is go get it. You will of course have to refit it which I think is a fair penalty in itself. Why???? And as for the post in general, if it was up to me I'd rather see insurance removed completely. If you want to venture out in to low-sec all you have to do is: 1. Not be a risk-averse sissy, and stop being afraid of losing stuff. 2. Only fly what you can afford to lose. 3. Go there in something cheap and survivable at first (like a fast tech 1 frig) and move around, get to know what it's like, learn the tricks to survive there. 4. Then when you know how to live there safely (and low-sec is very safe when you know what you're doing), move there. Edit: And as for 0.0 (just noticed that in the title), just join a territory holding alliance that lives there and isn't at war, and you can live out there relatively safely. There's not much to it. (Rules 1 and 2 from above apply here as well.)
wierchas noobhunter Cosmic Fusion When Fat Kids Attack	Posted - 2008.01.10 21:39:00 - [3] NO!
Cybarite Gallente Aristotle Enterprises	Posted - 2008.01.10 21:40:00 - [4] Honestly, lowsec is more dangerous than 0.0 due to the piracy, but if they really wanted people to move out of highsec they'd do something about the profit potential of lowsec. as it is you can have a highsec trade alt to make money or run missions, but 0.0 ratting is where it's at for making money without having to think to hard or be skilled at it. I'd like to see the rats in lowsec improved, BC rats should be just a little bit worse than BS rats not pitiful like they are. ... Why do I PvP? Because I love the feeling I get when I see the pretty lights and know that someone somewhere is screaming incoherently at their computer screen.
Hannobaal Gallente Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.01.10 21:47:00 - [5] Originally by: Cybarite lowsec is more dangerous than 0.0 due to the piracy, That's rubbish. Low-sec is almost as safe as high-sec to anyone who lives in 0.0. There are more people willing to shoot you in 0.0, and it's far, far easier for them to catch you. I haven't lost a ship in low-sec (where I didn't willingly engage someone myself) for like 10 months or so.
Cpt Branko The Bloody Red	Posted - 2008.01.10 21:50:00 - [6] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 10/01/2008 21:50:51 Originally by: Hannobaal If you want to venture out in to low-sec all you have to do is: 1. Not be a risk-averse sissy, and stop being afraid of losing stuff. 2. Only fly what you can afford to lose. 3. Go there in something cheap and survivable at first (like a fast tech 1 frig) and move around, get to know what it's like, learn the tricks to survive there. 4. Then when you know how to live there safely (and low-sec is very safe when you know what you're doing), move there. This. Low-sec survival is preety easy. Saying that low-sec is riskier then 0.0 is sheer idiocy. Rifters!
Isan Danderoda Strix Armaments and Defence	Posted - 2008.01.10 21:53:00 - [7] Remember that the overall reason for the different sec zones is to allow different types of players to enjoy different aspects of the game. I think the high numbers of high-sec pilots generally has more to do with the fact that lots of people don't want to factor PvP in to their experience beyond the general hazards found in high-sec. Honestly you could make the payouts in low-sec and null-sec even higher and it still won't encourage too many people to hazard the areas. Let's face it. PvP simply isn't appealing to a lot of people. They have different game goals, and do their thing. What's wrong with that?
An Anarchyyt Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.01.10 21:56:00 - [8] Originally by: Hannobaal Originally by: Cybarite lowsec is more dangerous than 0.0 due to the piracy, That's rubbish. Low-sec is almost as safe as high-sec to anyone who lives in 0.0. There are more people willing to shoot you in 0.0, and it's far, far easier for them to catch you. I haven't lost a ship in low-sec (where I didn't willingly engage someone myself) for like 10 months or so. Exactly. At least 90% of the people who talk about Low-sec being more dangerous than 0.0 have never lived in 0.0 at all. Not only are there more people to shoot you and easier to catch you, there is even less to protect you, and on top of that, due to conquerable stations, it is infact possible to lose a lot more. Running a gate camp in low-sec is easy if you're paying attention. Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
Cailais Amarr VITOC	Posted - 2008.01.10 22:16:00 - [9] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
MEGA KILL	Posted - 2008.01.10 23:14:00 - [10] Originally by: Hook1971 Idea on how to get more people in low sec/0.0 replace ( 0.0 ) term with - carebear paradise - and promise them PHat roids
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2008.01.10 23:17:00 - [11] Originally by: Hook1971 I know there have a lot of discussions on this but the real solution all comes down to the death penalty. Though I have to agree it would lead to more people doing PVP, it would also cheapen the PVP experience. I also have to agree that low-sec and no-sec are far too under populated, but feel there are better solutions. The Real Space Initiative - V5 (Forum Link)
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2008.01.10 23:17:00 - [12] Edited by: Crumplecorn on 10/01/2008 23:17:22 How many people can honestly say "If I wanted the death penalty to not be so bad, I would go to WoW or Hello Kitty online"? - DesuSigs
Cpt Branko The Bloody Red	Posted - 2008.01.10 23:19:00 - [13] Originally by: Adunh Slavy I also have to agree that low-sec and no-sec are far too under populated, but feel there are better solutions. If low-sec was any more populated, it would've been impossible to do anything in it. Low-sec population is fine. Rifters!
Lt Angus Caldari the united	Posted - 2008.01.10 23:24:00 - [14] Low sec is full enough already Shhhh, Im hunting Badgers
The Djego Minmatar FORTES FORTUNA ADIUVAT CORP. The Dawn of Darkness	Posted - 2008.01.10 23:24:00 - [15] This would simply remove the reason why Corps and Alliances loose Space. Simply because you need to pay for your ships and if you loose to may you have to fly cheaper ones or retreat. If you remove this EvE would become some kind of test server Combat area. People hop in and don¦t mind to loose 30 BS in a hour because the can replace them. Mostly People don¦t move to low Sec or 0.0 because they are scared of loosing ships. This is actual a process of your own EvE experience if you start to see that you WILL lose ships and ISK. This is where you start fighting, thinking and play tactical. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank!
Yohanes Flame Point-Zero SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.10 23:25:00 - [16] Edited by: Yohanes Flame on 10/01/2008 23:25:14 Low sec is riskier simple due to the higher population in comparison to 0.0. More people = more guns. You can fly for 20 jumps in 0.0 without seeing another pilot. EDIT: op go play wow ____________________________ One Thead to rule them all - Boot.ini pre-patch thread
Hook1971	Posted - 2008.01.10 23:26:00 - [17] Originally by: Cpt Branko Originally by: Adunh Slavy I also have to agree that low-sec and no-sec are far too under populated, but feel there are better solutions. If low-sec was any more populated, it would've been impossible to do anything in it. Low-sec population is fine. I think this is what you meant to say If low-sec was any more populated, it would've been impossible for pirates to do anything in it.
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Phalanx Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.10 23:27:00 - [18] Big help would be to move higher level Agents to lowsec / 0 sec, this would also force a more natural wealth distribution linked to Risked versus Reward and gradually move players from high sec to lower sec. I.e. Sec 1.0 quality -20 to -18 Sec 0.9 -17 to -15 Sec 0.8 -14 to -12 Sec 0.7 -11 to -9 Sec 0.6 -8 to -6 Sec 0.5 -5 to -1 Sec 0.4 0 to +3 Sec 0.3 +4 to +6 Sec 0.2 +7 to +8 Sec 0.1 +9 to +10 Sec 0.0 +11 to +20 - - - Originally by: CCP Wrangler If you can understand our goal, disagree with our solution and offer a solution that is equal or better your opinion has a better chance of being heard...
The Djego Minmatar FORTES FORTUNA ADIUVAT CORP. The Dawn of Darkness	Posted - 2008.01.10 23:28:00 - [19] Originally by: Lt Angus Low sec is full enough already Not realy you have many PVP People there(like myself) that like the style of Low Sec PVP or simpy Pirating. It lacks a bit the rewards to bring more people in that are interested in making money wihout the 0.0 requirments and risks. So mostly by boosting the rewards of Low Sec you will have more targets and more Market/Population. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank!
The Djego Minmatar FORTES FORTUNA ADIUVAT CORP. The Dawn of Darkness	Posted - 2008.01.10 23:29:00 - [20] Originally by: Yohanes Flame Edited by: Yohanes Flame on 10/01/2008 23:25:14 Low sec is riskier simple due to the higher population in comparison to 0.0. More people = more guns. You can fly for 20 jumps in 0.0 without seeing another pilot. EDIT: op go play wow You even were in Great Wilderlands? ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank!
Yohanes Flame Point-Zero SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.10 23:29:00 - [21] Edited by: Yohanes Flame on 10/01/2008 23:30:32 isn't living in High sec kinda like having a second job? or is there something i am missing? Edit: previous poster not all time or all places but it is defiantly less crowded than low sec by many many multiples. ____________________________ One Thead to rule them all - Boot.ini pre-patch thread
Hook1971	Posted - 2008.01.10 23:32:00 - [22] Edited by: Hook1971 on 10/01/2008 23:35:18 Originally by: The Djego Originally by: Lt Angus Low sec is full enough already Not realy you have many PVP People there(like myself) that like the style of Low Sec PVP or simpy Pirating. It lacks a bit the rewards to bring more people in that are interested in making money wihout the 0.0 requirments and risks. So mostly by boosting the rewards of Low Sec you will have more targets and more Market/Population. Didnt CCP already try increasing rewards in low sec by having the ability to extract zyd from jaspet? Thats pretty good. How did that work out by the way? Its the risks, not the rewards that will get more people there IMHO
Zinras Caldari	Posted - 2008.01.10 23:59:00 - [23] Edited by: Zinras on 11/01/2008 00:00:57 I think something that could help lure carebears into lowsec would be that if you lose your ship during an aggro timer, you'd get no insurance, whereas if someone killed you without you shooting first, you'd get the full payout. This rule would not apply during wars where everything functions as it does now. Then there should also be higher rewards in general to lure people out there. Maybe bounty payouts shifting as you get to lower sec areas, so while you can still get some profit from level 4s in high sec, you might get much more from doing those missions in lowsec. I think CCP in general also need to open up more entry ways into a lot of low sec areas, so there won't be lots of high sec entry points camped 23/7 that you have almost no chance escaping if you transport your mission ship there (which will usually be a BS). Maybe also switch the missions in general to require a more PvP oriented setup, to give people a somewhat fighting chance when probed out (because obviously, pirates will attempt to do this constantly). If these things were implemented I'd be more willing to venture into lowsec (I usually run misions in high sec, which is boring but needs to be done until I am able to support myself better and I get to 0.0 with my corp). Currently, lowsec holds zero interest to me, as all that can possibly happen is that I get blown up, or if I'm the one hunting, which I sometimes do, blow other people up. Basically, I only go there if I wish to blow something up and not because it could make my goal of supporting myself in 0.0 easier to meet. There might be flaws in my ideas but these are my best bet for luring carebears out to lowsec without hurting either side too much.
Leora Nomen Amarr	Posted - 2008.01.11 00:11:00 - [24] Eliminate the security status penalty. How many times have I heard from rookie pirates and other peeps who occasionally pvp "OMG! I'm going to be below -2.0 after all this roaming!!! Sorry peeps, I better go to empire spend the next few days grinding missions and not come out to low sec for more piracy." I really do not understand why the game punishes people for PVPing in PVP areas like low sec. Having negative sec status is a big pita. There are a few pirates who carry their -10 as an honor badge but they are a minority. If you want to make up your sec status, you're forced to grind belt or mission rats that pay 20-30 mil per hour. The same time you could have spent pvping. And if you can earn over 30 million ISK per hour otherwise, you'll also being punished financially, because you're losing out on ISK while spending your time on rats. All of this you get for engaging in PVP in low sec where theoretically you are supposed to engage in it. And for those few anti-pirates who would like to hunt pirate this also makes their anti-piracy difficult. The game punishes them equally with the pirates for engaging in pvp in low sec. Pretty soon they start looking like pirates themselves. So remove sec status loss for PVPing in low sec and keep it only for high sec for the suicide gankers. Introduce some kind of another meter that measures how many engagements you've been in so that pirates can wear it as an honor badge, but make it be irrelevant as to whether you can or cannot enter low sec space. This will increase amount of PVP happening in low sec. The carebear population is not interested in low sec because for the amount of losses it just doesn't pay. I've heard the following from mission runners who ran missions in low sec: - bounties on NPCs are same as in high sec - loot dropped is same as in high sec - LP and agent rewards increase slightly but do not make up for periodically losing of a battleship or battlecruiser to pirates - level 5 missions are totally not worth it For miners the value of ore present in low sec is also not worth the risk of mining there. Of the carebear empire population the only peeps who would have a good reason of venturing out to low sec would be traders and haulers, but they obviously don't stay for long. guide to game time codes
The Djego Minmatar FORTES FORTUNA ADIUVAT CORP. The Dawn of Darkness	Posted - 2008.01.11 00:14:00 - [25] Originally by: Hook1971 Edited by: Hook1971 on 10/01/2008 23:35:18 Originally by: The Djego Originally by: Lt Angus Low sec is full enough already Not realy you have many PVP People there(like myself) that like the style of Low Sec PVP or simpy Pirating. It lacks a bit the rewards to bring more people in that are interested in making money wihout the 0.0 requirments and risks. So mostly by boosting the rewards of Low Sec you will have more targets and more Market/Population. Didnt CCP already try increasing rewards in low sec by having the ability to extract zyd from jaspet? Thats pretty good. How did that work out by the way? Its the risks, not the rewards that will get more people there IMHO My Idea is mostly spawn more factions, and give better Loot to bring people into the belts again. Mining is a very risky thing in Low Sec that needs nearly the same amount of protection like 0.0. Only deadend systems without Stations are good for mining atm. I would mostly prefere that people hunting for Factionspawns and good Loot so Pirates that like Belt PVP get more Targets. Belthunting actualy is worth someting if you stick around 1-2 hours in a system with 10+ Belts and going for factions. I like this my self, so boosting the spawn rate make it more Risk/Reward. The people have better chances to get something valuable and the Pirates get more targest. Win - Win from my point of view(and I am on both sides ). ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank!
Cpt Branko The Bloody Red	Posted - 2008.01.11 00:17:00 - [26] Originally by: Hook1971 Originally by: Cpt Branko If low-sec was any more populated, it would've been impossible to do anything in it. Low-sec population is fine. I think this is what you meant to say If low-sec was any more populated, it would've been impossible for pirates to do anything in it. It'd be impossible to do any, for example, ratting/missioning/complex-running etc if it were more populated. Would you really want to do anything in a system with ten people in? I mean, really ;P Rifters!
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2008.01.11 02:51:00 - [27] Originally by: Leora Nomen Eliminate the security status penalty. How many times have I heard from rookie pirates and other peeps who occasionally pvp "OMG! I'm going to be below -2.0 after all this roaming!!! Sorry peeps, I better go to empire spend the next few days grinding missions and not come out to low sec for more piracy." I really do not understand why the game punishes people for PVPing in PVP areas like low sec. Agreed. For a PVP game, why penalize PVP? There's a great idea here by Reggie Stoneblower. Something like that or very similar would be good. There are lots of people that would do more if it were not for the hassle of sec status. The Real Space Initiative - V5 (Forum Link)
Zaerlorth Maelkor	Posted - 2008.01.11 11:44:00 - [28] No! The long version: No! The really long version: #1 1% premium per month for a 100% payout? Are you insane? What insurance company would base a business on a approximate 50-1 loss ratio on every transaction? #2 huh? This just doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
Nur Vadenn Amarr	Posted - 2008.01.11 15:40:00 - [29] Why is it people want more people in low-sec space? I've been wandering low-sec for the past two months and all that is there are pockets of pirates in various states of blood thirsty and starvation. The NPC's are enough to scape a modest living from between bounties and salvage, but because everyone is looking to shoot you in the face you end up spending 80% of your time evading attempts on your life. Low-sec is what it is, but its that way because of players not CCP. If every third low-sec system didn't have a pack of trigger happy yahoos foaming at the mouth for a killmail it would be different. No amount of game mechanics changes will alter the situation in low-sec baring a nerf to combat PvP there. From what I am seeing in this thread people are advocating boosting of PvP in low-sec. Removing security status hits for pirates so there is no penalty at all for being a bandit and murderer? Were does that leave the risk vs. reward equation PvP types so fervently worship? Leave low-sec as it is. Combat PvP junkies made it the way it is today, let them wallow in it now.
Lil'Red Ridin'Hood Snake Assault	Posted - 2008.01.11 15:57:00 - [30] Originally by: Nur Vadenn Why is it people want more people in low-sec space? I've been wandering low-sec for the past two months and all that is there are pockets of pirates in various states of blood thirsty and starvation. The NPC's are enough to scape a modest living from between bounties and salvage, but because everyone is looking to shoot you in the face you end up spending 80% of your time evading attempts on your life. Low-sec is what it is, but its that way because of players not CCP. If every third low-sec system didn't have a pack of trigger happy yahoos foaming at the mouth for a killmail it would be different. No amount of game mechanics changes will alter the situation in low-sec baring a nerf to combat PvP there. From what I am seeing in this thread people are advocating boosting of PvP in low-sec. Removing security status hits for pirates so there is no penalty at all for being a bandit and murderer? Were does that leave the risk vs. reward equation PvP types so fervently worship? Leave low-sec as it is. Combat PvP junkies made it the way it is today, let them wallow in it now. Sounds like someone lost a few ships too many to dem ewil piwates... Want a hug? Either way, to anyone roaming low-sec it should be pretty obvious that low-sec's risk/reward ratio is out of whack. That's why it is scarcely populated in many parts. I won't complain, though. More faction rats with juicy loot for me. And if I feel the itch to blow something player-steered up (or get blown up in the process), I'll grab my PvP gear and head to the appropriate systems.
Nur Vadenn Amarr	Posted - 2008.01.11 16:32:00 - [31] Originally by: Lil'Red Ridin'Hood Sounds like someone lost a few ships too many to dem ewil piwates... Want a hug? How sweet! I'm good though thanks. No losses here anyway. Good hunters starving pirates do not make... Originally by: Lil'Red Ridin'Hood Either way, to anyone roaming low-sec it should be pretty obvious that low-sec's risk/reward ratio is out of whack. That's why it is scarcely populated in many parts. I won't complain, though. More faction rats with juicy loot for me. And if I feel the itch to blow something player-steered up (or get blown up in the process), I'll grab my PvP gear and head to the appropriate systems. The risk vs. reward ratio is out of balance because of player activity, not some broken game mechanic. In my travels the border/entry systems and those systems with full service stations are the hives of pirate activity. That activity then radiates out from these points. Because of the thirst for killmails pirates and murderers range far and wide to find targets. When a possible target is found you get people crawling out of the woodwork just to get a small piece. Are these people easy to elude? Sure given a certain set of circumstances and/or equipment. The key though is the interruption that cuts into profitability. Unless one could make millions of isk in 5 to 10 minutes no boost in low-sec profitability will ever compensate for the current level of risk. The current level of risk can only be lowered by nerfing in some way combat PvP in these areas, or a decision from the current low-sec player base to change the way they do business. Neither of these things is likely to happen anytime soon so low-sec will remain what it is today.
Lil'Red Ridin'Hood Snake Assault	Posted - 2008.01.11 17:35:00 - [32] Originally by: Nur Vadenn The risk vs. reward ratio is out of balance because of player activity, not some broken game mechanic. [claims about every player being a lame pirate and killmail *****] The current level of risk can only be lowered by nerfing in some way combat PvP in these areas, or a decision from the current low-sec player base to change the way they do business. So you want a game mechanic to force players to not do what they want and the current game mechanic allows them to do? If you try to argue in this line, you might want to make entire space carebear territory. Or, alternatively, you could go and play WoW. As long as game mechanics allow people to shoot each other, there will be players doing just that. For fun. Not necessarily profits. I've been living (more or less) safely in low-sec with a minimum of precautions. I can't understand how players continue to refuse to adapt to different surroundings once they leave high-sec. Making low-sec ridiculously safe will skew the risk/reward ratio towards its favour, sure, but it will also eradicate a complete facet of the game. You could then just as well introduce 0.0 as battlefieldsÖ
Thornat	Posted - 2008.01.11 17:48:00 - [33] Edited by: Thornat on 11/01/2008 17:49:40 This is a pointless debate because everyone on this forum seems to ignore one simple fact about MMO players. In every game, anywhere you go, throughout history of MMO's there has always been roughly a 20% to 80% ratio of PvPers compared to PvEers. The bottom line is that people live in high sec because THEY DON'T WANT TO PVP. In Eve we are lucky because the PvP to PvE ratio is far more balanced then in most games. The question is should people be forced to PvP? Well if you twist things around a bit, for those of you who are PvPers like myself, imagine if CCP started creating a mechanic that forced you to CAREBEAR when you actually want to PvP. Wouldn't that be pretty stupid? Ok then, why would in hell would you want to force people to PvP who don't want to? What is the point? There are plenty of area's, situations and PvP going on Eve, if your having trouble finding PvP in Eve its because you aren't looking for PvP but rather you are looking for people to kill. I know some of you believe this is the same thing, but its not, its just a justification. Most pirates don't want PvP, they don't want fair battles, hell they don't even want to fight people who mount guns.. They want to kill freighters, industrials, miners and stupid newbies in expensive toys who venture into places they have no business. All this *****ing about lack of PvP is coming from lame ass pirates who prey on newbies or at the very least significantly lesser opponents. Ask any member of a 0.0 alliance if they are having trouble finding PvP .
konjev Minmatar Enrave	Posted - 2008.01.11 18:02:00 - [34] Originally by: Hook1971 2. This one may be a little more radical. But when you lose an insured ship, your insurance agent will automatically scan the market for you and buy you a new ship from the lowest bidder in the region the agent is in. That way, after you ship goes pop. You get an email from your agent saying "Sorry about your ship, your new ship is in a hangar in (name of system) Then all you have to do is go get it. You will of course have to refit it which I think is a fair penalty in itself. I am sorry I couldn't locate the ship you have lost, beter luck next time, so here is a newby ship. and if its it might be in a pirate/hostile infested system. serriously if you want to go to lowsec/0.0 but don't want to pvp join a large alliance and log off everytime you see an hostile or neutral player in system. some ppl say that lowsec is more dangerous then 0.0 but thats because you know who will attack you in 0.0 and you don't know that in lowsec, even wen you check the whole local list
Cpt Branko The Bloody Red	Posted - 2008.01.11 18:23:00 - [35] Originally by: Lil'Red Ridin'Hood I've been living (more or less) safely in low-sec with a minimum of precautions. I can't understand how players continue to refuse to adapt to different surroundings once they leave high-sec. This, basically. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Nur Vadenn Amarr	Posted - 2008.01.11 18:29:00 - [36] Originally by: Lil'Red Ridin'Hood So you want a game mechanic to force players to not do what they want and the current game mechanic allows them to do? If you try to argue in this line, you might want to make entire space carebear territory. Or, alternatively, you could go and play WoW. On the contrary I don't advocate any change in game mechanics whatsoever. Things are fine as they are in my opinion. The only thing I am against are these attempts to lure people to low-sec. On their face they appear to be thinly veiled attempts to get more easy targets. I believe the only way low-sec can and should change it via player actions. If low-sec residents genuinely want more people in their neighborhoods then they need to deal with the more trigger happy among them. How they do that is up to them. How they manage to convince others that things in their part of the neighborhood are better is also up to them. I don't envy such a task though. Originally by: Lil'Red Ridin'Hood I've been living (more or less) safely in low-sec with a minimum of precautions. I can't understand how players continue to refuse to adapt to different surroundings once they leave high-sec. Making low-sec ridiculously safe will skew the risk/reward ratio towards its favour, sure, but it will also eradicate a complete facet of the game. You could then just as well introduce 0.0 as battlefieldsÖ I'm still not sure where you get that I am advocating a completely safe low-sec. I think low-sec should remain untouched by developer hands. I take low-sec for what it is, a bad neighborhood with lots of unsavory characters in it. It has a larger than average population of people willing to shoot first and not bother asking questions, and by and large the vast majority of people living there are combatants in one form or another. Is this an inaccurate assessment?
Lil'Red Ridin'Hood Snake Assault	Posted - 2008.01.11 18:38:00 - [37] Edited by: Lil''Red Ridin''Hood on 11/01/2008 18:38:30 Originally by: Nur Vadenn I'm still not sure where you get that I am advocating a completely safe low-sec. I think low-sec should remain untouched by developer hands. I take low-sec for what it is, a bad neighborhood with lots of unsavory characters in it. It has a larger than average population of people willing to shoot first and not bother asking questions, and by and large the vast majority of people living there are combatants in one form or another. Is this an inaccurate assessment? This made it sound like it: Originally by: Nur Vadenn The current level of risk can only be lowered by nerfing in some way combat PvP in these areas, or a decision from the current low-sec player base to change the way they do business. There's no way you can make all gung-ho guys change their attitude. You keep on insisting the low-sec people have to change when it is so much easier to before entering space that is known to be less forgiving, plan your route, hit F10, check if your route is more or less safe or not, and then equip yourself accordingly or abandon your plan to enter. Basically all it needs to survive most journeys out of high-sec is to put just a tiny bit of effort into plannig ahead. And that's no propaganda to lure in targets, it's what I do with a low SP character every day I play. You yourself can nerf your own level of risk exposure. But you're asking others, or alternatively, CCP to do that for you.
SiJira	Posted - 2008.01.11 18:46:00 - [38] Originally by: Hook1971 I know there have a lot of discussions on this but the real solution all comes down to the death penalty. How many people can honestly say "If the death penalty wasnt so bad, I would go to low sec or 0.0" I know I would. Now I'm not saying to change the penalty to that of WoW. That would be terrible. But just tweak it a little. 1. Make insurance payouts better. Or make insurance be a monthly bill. Say 1% a month of the price of the ship. And the payout would be 100% of the average price of the ship. The longer you go without making a claim, the lower the monthly bill will be. The more claims you make, the higher the monthly bill. 2. This one may be a little more radical. But when you lose an insured ship, your insurance agent will automatically scan the market for you and buy you a new ship from the lowest bidder in the region the agent is in. That way, after you ship goes pop. You get an email from your agent saying "Sorry about your ship, your new ship is in a hangar in (name of system) Then all you have to do is go get it. You will of course have to refit it which I think is a fair penalty in itself. Implimenting something like this would get me to venture out. Anyone else think this is a good idea or am I just being silly? most people either dont care for insurance or want to remove it and you want to increase it? Trashed sig, Shark was here
Nur Vadenn Amarr	Posted - 2008.01.11 19:18:00 - [39] Originally by: Lil'Red Ridin'Hood This made it sound like it: Originally by: Nur Vadenn The current level of risk can only be lowered by nerfing in some way combat PvP in these areas, or a decision from the current low-sec player base to change the way they do business. There's no way you can make all gung-ho guys change their attitude. You keep on insisting the low-sec people have to change when it is so much easier to before entering space that is known to be less forgiving, plan your route, hit F10, check if your route is more or less safe or not, and then equip yourself accordingly or abandon your plan to enter. Basically all it needs to survive most journeys out of high-sec is to put just a tiny bit of effort into plannig ahead. And that's no propaganda to lure in targets, it's what I do with a low SP character every day I play. You yourself can nerf your own level of risk exposure. But you're asking others, or alternatively, CCP to do that for you. Ah, I think I see the confusion here... The original poster believes that low-sec should be safer. He/she wants to nerf low-sec combat PvP to make said areas safer. I don't agree with any changes in game mechanics, not even these suggestions. I believe that this won't work because ôgungho guysö as you put it will still work the system as hard as possible to kill as much as they can. If in the beginning these changes get more people into low-sec pirates and murderers will get more targets. For low-sec to have lasting improved value people need to be able to live and work there with more safety than right now. This is obvious because industrialists are in short supply in low-sec. Personal precautions to avoid loss are definitely in each person's hands, but to stay safe while mining or missioning requires a person to cut deep into the efficiency of those activities. This disparity in efficiency is the reason why I've never run across a miner in low-sec and only rarely run into someone who might be running missions. Those two groups of people have found it is far more efficient to mine or mission uninterrupted in high-sec than to take the needed precautions and profitability hit to go to low-sec. Sounds to me like adaptation on their part. I am insisting if people who live and work in low-sec want more people there they would need to make low-sec safer through personal policing. If you're not a pirate and want more miners around advertise a system as your protectorate and defend miners when they work in your system. You get PvP, because I am sure pirates will beat a path to your door and maybe miners get the uninterrupted mining time needed to make the most of a low-sec belt. I do agree with you and Cpt Branko that the demonetization of low-sec is excessive. I don't think the sugar coating you both are doing is any better. You downplay the dangers and that is almost as bad as overstating them.
Val Vympel	Posted - 2008.01.11 19:24:00 - [40] Originally by: Leora Nomen Edited by: Leora Nomen on 11/01/2008 00:29:56 Eliminate the security status penalty. How many times have I heard from rookie pirates and other peeps who occasionally pvp "OMG! I'm going to be below -2.0 after all this roaming!!! Sorry peeps, I better go to empire spend the next few days grinding missions and not come out to low sec for more piracy." I really do not understand why the game punishes people for PVPing in PVP areas like low sec. Having negative sec status is a big pita. There are a few pirates who carry their -10 as an honor badge but they are a minority. If you want to make up your sec status, you're forced to grind belt or mission rats that pay 20-30 mil per hour. The same time you could have spent pvping. And if you can earn over 30 million ISK per hour otherwise, you'll also being punished financially, because you're losing out on ISK while spending your time on rats. All of this you get for engaging in PVP in low sec where theoretically you are supposed to engage in it. And for those few anti-pirates who would like to hunt pirate this also makes their anti-piracy difficult. The game punishes them equally with the pirates for engaging in pvp in low sec. Pretty soon they start looking like pirates themselves. So remove sec status loss for PVPing in low sec and keep it only for high sec for the suicide gankers. Introduce some kind of another meter that measures how many engagements you've been in so that pirates can wear it as an honor badge, but make it be irrelevant as to whether you can or cannot enter low sec space. This will increase amount of PVP happening in low sec. The carebear population is not interested in low sec because for the amount of losses it just doesn't pay. I've heard the following from mission runners who ran missions in low sec: - bounties on NPCs are same as in high sec - loot dropped is same as in high sec - LP and agent rewards increase slightly but do not make up for periodically losing of a battleship or battlecruiser to pirates - level 5 missions are totally not worth it For miners the value of ore present in low sec is also not worth the risk of mining there. Of the carebear empire population the only peeps who would have a good reason of venturing out to low sec would be traders and haulers, but they obviously don't stay for long. Nerfing high sec is generally an unpopular motion because majority of player base lives and makes ISK there. But here are a few subtle changes that could be done without nerfing the income of high sec dwellers significantly. - eliminate faction and officer spawns from ever spawning in high sec empire - make high sec rats drop no loot, just leave wrecks - move kernite and omber to low sec systems Increasing number of entry points into low sec and 0.0 would also be a good idea. Having very limited number of pipe systems encourages camping in big blobs and stops any traffic wanting to come trough. Edit: And make piracy more profitable. Since tech II items have fallen in prices it doesn't pay what it used to. Make rigs drop or something, that would be cool. This... 110% Thx...Leora for typing what I was thinking. IMO the entire sec status system needs to be reviewed and revamped. As it stands now the system is punitive and prohibitive.
JamnOne Amarr	Posted - 2008.01.11 19:26:00 - [41] Real easy solution - quit shooting them...duh Ok, seriously - people aren't going to go where they don't feel safe so the Corps and Alliances need recruiters in Hi-Sec and be able to provide these people access to their areas. Once they are in low sec then they will realize it is quite fun and will tell their friends to join them. ________________________ Originally by: CCP Prism X Hah! Vengeance is sweet!
Lysianna	Posted - 2008.01.11 21:01:00 - [42] Usually, if i'm going to lose some ships, it's going to be between 0.4 to 0.1... after that, it's pretty much easier to fly around. Use your map statistic a bit more and pinpoint where people are getting killed. Just being carefull will usually keep you alive as long as you don't afk next to a gate or in the middle of an asteroid belt. Oh and also, that silly uber corp rule to never talk in local is really not good.. you're better off talking to the people around then acting all silent. Not everyone is a **** :)
Jack Freely Caldari Trading Corp	Posted - 2008.01.11 21:36:00 - [43] I plan on hitting low sector soon, just finishing training up some covert skills. But I think an easy way to fix the problem is to put more gate guns in security .4 so that people can see the lower system first. As is the biggest gank I run into is .5 to .4 gate, if I make it past then I'm fine most of the time. Just put more gate guns on the .4 gates so that you can't just perma tank it.
LastTraitorStanding Amarr The Imperial Assassins Brotherhood Of Steel	Posted - 2008.01.11 21:46:00 - [44] I propose that we set up camp at all entrances to 0.0 and lowsec and hand out cupcakes. Everyone likes cupcakes. Especially laser cupcakes. -------------------------------- Semper ubi sub ubi
Marcus Tedric Gallente Tedric Enterprises Space Exploration and Logistic Services	Posted - 2008.01.12 11:03:00 - [45] hehe - I'll reply properly to the OP (I did start one of these threads!) It's simple really.....if we want more people in Low Sec then a certain amount of 'balencing' must be done: 1) There needs to be more encouragement to go there - more 'reward' 2) The people who then want to go there need to think, perception is everything, that it's actually possible for them to survive there - it needs to be made a little 'safer' At present there is almost nothing there to tempt more people and it's seen as more dangerous than 0.0. For me it would be simple - the belts, missions, etc need to be beefed up - and the sentry guns beefed up even more.

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.