EVE Search - Low-sec Action Group - Path to Regeneration

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Low-sec Action Group - Path to Regeneration

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Abyssal Angel Caldari Solar Wind STELLAR LEGION	Posted - 2008.01.16 19:41:00 - [31] Edited by: Abyssal Angel on 16/01/2008 19:43:54 Remove all lvl 4 agents from high sec. Bam. Nice amount of mission runners would then go to low sec and run them there. Some would stop running missions altogether and whine, but let them. Manufacturers would to a cetain degree migrate the market alongsid ethe missioners to keep seeling ammo and whatnots. This would make lowsec a viable alternative and a fitting stepping stone into real 0.0. Only those who enjoy missioning with a permatank and impunity in highsec would find this a sh itty solution. Please discuss if you are disagreeing with this, just remember to voice arguments if you want to get heard :) Alternatively, have mission rewards decay as pr how many times they are run, until they hit a low boundary. This would make people seek to find agents with little activity, some would be in lowsec, just make it easy to view remotely the REAL quality of the agents if implementing this. FixedYay! have a cookie - Deckard Originally by: CCP PrismX My name is Prism X and I support this message.
Wet Ferret	Posted - 2008.01.16 19:49:00 - [32] Originally by: Abyssal Angel Remove all lvl 4 agents from high sec. This would be a great way to get a lot of people to start doing level 3 missions.
Nur Vadenn Amarr	Posted - 2008.01.16 20:00:00 - [33] Originally by: Abyssal Angel Edited by: Abyssal Angel on 16/01/2008 19:43:54 Remove all lvl 4 agents from high sec. Bam. Nice amount of mission runners would then go to low sec and run them there. Some would stop running missions altogether and whine, but let them. Manufacturers would to a cetain degree migrate the market alongsid ethe missioners to keep seeling ammo and whatnots. This would make lowsec a viable alternative and a fitting stepping stone into real 0.0. Only those who enjoy missioning with a permatank and impunity in highsec would find this a sh itty solution. Please discuss if you are disagreeing with this, just remember to voice arguments if you want to get heard :) Alternatively, have mission rewards decay as pr how many times they are run, until they hit a low boundary. This would make people seek to find agents with little activity, some would be in lowsec, just make it easy to view remotely the REAL quality of the agents if implementing this. Nope. This option would likely get those level 4 mission runners to just chain more level 3 missions faster semi-AFK in their faction-fitted faction battleships. The only other thing this might do is move the high-sec mission and market hubs around a bit. Low-sec is fine. You really don't need anyone else there. The people who want to deal with low-sec and all its nuances are there. Those who aren't won't be there anytime soon no matter how hard you nerf high-sec. You're more likely to send them packing then sending them to low-sec. I doubt CCP wants that or they would have already nerfed high-sec in a number of ways.
Cailais Amarr VITOC	Posted - 2008.01.16 20:04:00 - [34] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Originally by: Thenoran Maybe instead make CONCORD response very slow in low-sec, and avoidable (it would not be considered an exploit to survive CONCORD in low-sec), that way a properly tanked/defend mining team can still do their thing relatively safe, but prevent macro miners and such from doing the same. I like this idea. It would be nice that unlawful aggression will spawn Concord randomly between 60s to 120s. Pirates can get away from Concord in low-secs and it is not an exploit. Heck, they can also tank or kill Concord if they want to because Concord is not invulnerable in low-secs. Bravo! Nice idea, keep it coming. Its a terrible, awful and frankly repulsive idea: STOP TRYING TO MAKE EVE THE SAME EVERYWHERE!!! An Angry C. PS stop trolling aswell. Improved Low Sec Idea!!
Alz Shado Ever Flow Knights Of the Southerncross	Posted - 2008.01.16 20:12:00 - [35] The problem with low sec is there's no compelling reason to stay there. Give large corps/small alliances the ability to arrange for sovereign rights over a system (I think it's called Viceroys) for some benefit ie, collecting docking fees, or being the only corp/alliance that can anchor a POS in that system.
Isan Danderoda Strix Armaments and Defence	Posted - 2008.01.16 20:14:00 - [36] I am shocked by how often this keeps coming up. First of all, moving L4 agents out to low-sec won't change a thing. Most mission runners will just switch to running L3's. Low-sec doesn't have that many targets simply because a vast population of players don't want to be involved in PvP with any regularity. In the end I think nerfing Empire to build up low-sec is only going to hurt the population in the game as carebears hit the wall sooner and decide to quit. All said, the best way to get more people in to low-sec is to get more people in to PvP. Honestly the only thing I could think of that would encourage more carebears out into the wilders would be to reduce the penalty for getting ganked and podded. Unfortunately doing that would probably cause all manner of havoc on the economy, so it probably isn't an option. What then? Recruit more people in to your low-sec corps so your opponents have more people to fight. That's about all you can do without unbalancing the entire game and quite possibly destroying the population.
Jenny Spitfire Caldari SIVAKASI	Posted - 2008.01.16 20:49:00 - [37] Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 16/01/2008 20:50:00 Calais, how could it be the same everywhere? 0.0 will have no Concord response. And Concord is the only quick fix for what is broken, low-sec. If there is no protection, nobody will go to low sec. Frankly all the moving agents arguments are no good unless you move level 3 and level 4 agents to low sec. It would make high sec a newb land. Every week you will still hear lag in high sec. Always remember why people migrate to a different place and the bottom line has always been opportunities and safety. Keep this up and people might migrate out of the game because of arguments that low sec is supposed to be hard-core or minus high sec and plus low sec. --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria! Recruitment -KB-
Cailais Amarr VITOC	Posted - 2008.01.16 21:18:00 - [38] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 16/01/2008 20:50:00 Calais, how could it be the same everywhere? 0.0 will have no Concord response. And Concord is the only quick fix for what is broken, low-sec. If there is no protection, nobody will go to low sec. Frankly all the moving agents arguments are no good unless you move level 3 and level 4 agents to low sec. It would make high sec a newb land. Every week you will still hear lag in high sec. Always remember why people migrate to a different place and the bottom line has always been opportunities and safety. Keep this up and people might migrate out of the game because of arguments that low sec is supposed to be hard-core or minus high sec and plus low sec. Your argument is so flawed Im struggling with where to start. First off your assumption that Low Sec is broken - well if you stand looking from the perspective of a High Sec player, that demands safety in all things Im sure you could point to Low Sec and say 'look at all that wasted space'. Now stand from the perspective of the pirate and the Low Sec dweller - they will point at High Sec and say - look how over crowded it is there, why dont people move out here and take some risks? Its not as bad as the doom sayers say. Look at Verones Corp VETO - massively succesful, reknowned even: Low Sec players. Look at E's and Whizz (pretty much the only corp I know of who are producing Combat Boosters); already planning their dominance of the Low Sec Synth market. AS I recall from someones Sig - CONCORD provides consequences - YOU provide safety. Your desire to destroy Low Sec and replace it with just High Sec and 0.0 is well known. 0.0 is the realm of the Alliance, the large 'super corporates' - destroy Low Sec and you'll remove the last vestiges of the game where a small corp can face a challenge just to survive - without having to mire itself in the quagmire of Alliance politics and POS wars. What next Jenny? Once you've suceeded in pilaging Low Sec and reinforcing its 'artificial security'. Will you then point at 0.0 and say: "Nobody lives there because its not safe - we need more CONCORD in 0.0"??? Do we really really want High Sec to be just a 'newb land'? I can almost here the questions on the forums now - Q: "What level do I need to be to go to Low Sec?" A: "Well you need to be at Level BS 5 at least" C. Improved Low Sec Idea!!
Jenny Spitfire Caldari SIVAKASI	Posted - 2008.01.16 21:41:00 - [39] So low sec is not broken and there is no need to fix it? --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria! Recruitment -KB-
Haradgrim The Wild Bunch INTERDICTION	Posted - 2008.01.16 21:44:00 - [40] No, though higher (slightly) rewards to draw people out would be acceptable Originally by: CCP Oveur ...every forum whine feels like a baby pony is getting killed

Cailais Amarr VITOC	Posted - 2008.01.16 21:59:00 - [41] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire So low sec is not broken and there is no need to fix it? Please see the link under my signature 'Improved Low Sec Idea' for a detailed response to that question. C. Improved Low Sec Idea!!
nether void Caldari Shrapnel Industries	Posted - 2008.01.16 22:16:00 - [42] Originally by: Haradgrim No, though higher (slightly) rewards to draw people out would be acceptable You contradicted yourself. Why would you change something that's not broken? By changing it you would then 'break' it. Leave low sec the way it is. People don't go there because they don't like non-consentual PvP, and that's the end of that. Nothing will ever get them to go there, which does not also nerf pirates. Since there will never be any room for change on the pirate ability of players in low sec, there will never be more non-pvpers in low sec than there is now. It is what it is. Just forget low sec already. --------------------------- nethervoid - since '97 [UO\|EQ\|SB\|SWG\|PS\|EVE\|HZ\|NWN\|VG\|WoW]
Haradgrim The Wild Bunch INTERDICTION	Posted - 2008.01.17 21:14:00 - [43] Originally by: nether void Originally by: Haradgrim No, though higher (slightly) rewards to draw people out would be acceptable You contradicted yourself. Why would you change something that's not broken? By changing it you would then 'break' it. Leave low sec the way it is. People don't go there because they don't like non-consentual PvP, and that's the end of that. Nothing will ever get them to go there, which does not also nerf pirates. Since there will never be any room for change on the pirate ability of players in low sec, there will never be more non-pvpers in low sec than there is now. It is what it is. Just forget low sec already. Actually what I am trying to say is that the general concept of Low Sec is fine and no major changes should be made to try and effect the population, however, if they were to slightly increase the rewards for missions and rat bounties it would slightly offset the cost (and increase the chance of profit) of loosing ships in low sec vs high sec. Right now there is no difference I am just saying it makes sense for their to be a slight advantage (as there is with mining with the higher quality 'roids being in lower sec space). This way there is more people with more loot for those who wish to pvp in low sec to hunt and it hurts the hunted less. Originally by: CCP Oveur ...every forum whine feels like a baby pony is getting killed
Chelone	Posted - 2008.01.17 23:37:00 - [44] Originally by: Marcus TheMartin Scouting is always a good idea all the time. Screw 2 accounts. It's sad so many parts of Eve are almost designed around it now.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Enuma Elish.	Posted - 2008.01.18 00:09:00 - [45] Originally by: Chelone Originally by: Marcus TheMartin Scouting is always a good idea all the time. Screw 2 accounts. It's sad so many parts of Eve are almost designed around it now. Agreed to both. I run 3, because the advantage that a hauler/cyno/covops/market/shipscanner/ewar alt brings is IMMENSE. Most of these I could live without,l but cyno (the array thingies don't work everywhere, and even if they did...) and scout. Jumping into a gate blind, is a really good way to die. Throwing an alt through first is a really good way to not die. Lowsec needs improving. THe suggestion of paying off pirates doesn't work in practice, simply because the number of pirates who'd accept are low, and even if there weren't, it'd immediately eat away the 'not much better' profit margin you'd be making in lowsec anyway. (Not to mention that all the _other_ pirates out there would still shoot you) Profit margin in lowsec is the problem. The ore is not worth the overhead of mining it, and the missions are not worth the additional effort of having to pay attention. Needs a fix. Not a major one, just a bit of an improvement in ore, mission pay, and rats. Of course, there's also bits of 0.0 where the same is true. It's EMBARASSING how much of 0.0 has omber and kernite as the most valuable 'roids in the belts, and actually you make more money L4ing (be it highsec or low) than you do ratting. -- Crane needs more grid 249km locking?
Zinras Caldari	Posted - 2008.01.18 00:50:00 - [46] Edited by: Zinras on 18/01/2008 00:55:05 Besides boosting some rewards a bit (especially ratting) in low sec, I think that maps like the ones made for 0.0 alliance control would help people move into low sec. I am personally exploring low sec a bit once in a while but it's not hard to do when you're flying in a stealth bomber. However, I don't think all the miners and producers in high sec that don't have any sort of PvP skills would like to spend weeks or months training to fly a stealth bomber, which is the only safe-ish way to explore lowsec I can think of, without using alts or make a corpmate spend a good few hours travelling with you to scout. Part of what scares people away, I think, is that there is a lack of knowledge of who roams where in lowsec, whereas in 0.0, you can just take a look at the maps, check who lives near your high sec area, and pay some protection money or join one of their corps/alliances and go to some semi-isolated part of the area and mine/produce/whatever. It's simply much, much easier for miners and the likes to continue staying in high sec, as the only way to determine which lowsec systems are generally empty ("safe") is to go there and lose a bunch of ships. If you knew who "own" different parts of lowsec (the more populated areas, anyway) it would be easier to contact said corp/alliance and make some arrangements. Just my view on it anyway
Quinella Caldari NQX Innovations	Posted - 2008.01.18 00:52:00 - [47] I don't really see much wrong with low sec, I always perceived it as the stepping stone (and waste land) of eve between safe high sec and the rich lands of 0.0 If there was to be any improvement it would be to give mission runners danger pay for being in low sec, LP is becoming worth less and less so straight isk may help offset the risks. Now I see low sec as the stepping stone because a lot of players don't think they have the experience to go to 0.0 so they play in high sec for a while, get interested in pvp and try low sec. After a while of being in low sec they may settle in, after a while their sec status will take a big hit, the logical way to fix that? Go to 0.0 of course and rat, this may turn into setting up in 0.0 or joining up with someone else to survive and have nice ratting areas. There are groups who like low sec for what it gives and without some of the hassles in 0.0 (bubbles, stations) and I don't have a problem with that. They do sacrifice being able to go to empire and safe high sec money grinding (alts do help though). Some low sec is very empty but if you want to shoot someone go to where itÆs more active, any pvp in eve is a waiting game and patience is required most of the time. Overall I feel low sec is doing its job fine (my interpretation) and a few buffs to the resources (mining/missions) wouldn't change it too much and may entice those that have an interest in pvp to low sec. I certainly don't think high sec needs to be changed (no level4's or other downgrades) at all and if it ever did people wouldn't flock to low sec they would quit.
Khudo	Posted - 2008.01.18 01:01:00 - [48] The following things are intended to take place in low sec and high sec, not 0.0 dynamic taxes On every isk flow, put taxes calculated from the number of players present in the system. Its a nerf to Jita and all L4 mission Hub, a good and cheap "need for speed" improvement and an isk sink. Exemple: buying an item in petaouchnok with 1 player = 1% taxes, buying an item in Jita = 200% taxes (maybe a bit less =). You can put taxes on every thing: activating a gate, docking, rewards ... Make low sec competitive high sec = - 20% less rewards, bounties, loyalty points and so on. low sec = + 20% more same as above Remove ALL roids in high sec: macrominers problem solved. Sneak attack to force players to go in low sec 1 Put ALL high sec agents (exeption for the rookies ones) NEAR in a high sec system that is near a low sec system. 2 Change the accept mission process in order to hide the location of the mission. 3 You have accepted a mission that lead in high sec? great! You have accepted a mission that lead in low sec? LOL! I bet you wont cancel accepted mission often. Hire a necromancer in CCP staff Yop we need some revive spells. About the bounty hunting system... It is broken beyond recognition. I have no solution. Maybe the ability to trade killrights from -5 gangsta to +5 bounty hunters on the escrow. What else?
iNFyza Gallente Overkill Frontier Technologies Combined Planetary Union	Posted - 2008.01.18 01:12:00 - [49] Perhaps Low sec NPC stations should have little or no Tax to encourage business.
Franga NQX Innovations	Posted - 2008.01.18 02:22:00 - [50] Since when was low-sec 'broken'? And BTW, 'broken' is probably the most overused term on the forums at the moment. A mechanic or area or ship isn't broken just because you don't like the way it works. And to the people that so badly want it changed: get out of your 2 and 5 (of which 1-3 are inactive) man corps that have never done anything but mine hi-sec belts and join a crew that goes there or lives there. It's not as dangerous as most seem to think. Or (and this is pretty radical) go and try 0.0, it's actually (for the most part) far safer then low-sec and empire. Just can be more of a pain logistically. Originally by: Rachel Vend ... with 100% reliability in most cases ... General Aesthetics Changes Thread

Na'amah	Posted - 2008.01.18 02:34:00 - [51] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Originally by: Thenoran Maybe instead make CONCORD response very slow in low-sec, and avoidable (it would not be considered an exploit to survive CONCORD in low-sec), that way a properly tanked/defend mining team can still do their thing relatively safe, but prevent macro miners and such from doing the same. I like this idea. It would be nice that unlawful aggression will spawn Concord randomly between 60s to 120s. Pirates can get away from Concord in low-secs and it is not an exploit. Heck, they can also tank or kill Concord if they want to because Concord is not invulnerable in low-secs. Bravo! Nice idea, keep it coming. Concord loot plz.
Noodle Pastaman	Posted - 2008.01.18 10:19:00 - [52] You could increase profits by 1000% and you wouldn't get me in low sec. I and the vast majority of people who play EVE want a PVE game with occasional consensual PVP and a method to chat to our friends while doing it. Maybe I will move to 0.0 where by attacking someone else space you are consenting to PVP but dealing with pirates while out numbered 10 to 1, using an alt to scout ahead get real. I really suspect some people here really do not understand human nature which is generally risk averse and constructive (ie building things rather than blowing them up)
Cpt Branko The Bloody Red	Posted - 2008.01.18 10:26:00 - [53] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 18/01/2008 10:26:31 Originally by: Jenny Spitfire So low sec is not broken and there is no need to fix it? Low-sec is not broken and there is no need to fix it. I see it is reasonably populated, since unlike you I happen to live in low-sec. You just want to destroy it, for what? So we can have some more differently-named high-sec? I mean, seriously. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Cpt Branko The Bloody Red	Posted - 2008.01.18 11:31:00 - [54] Originally by: Noodle Pastaman You could increase profits by 1000% and you wouldn't get me in low sec. I and the vast majority of people who play EVE want a PVE game with occasional consensual PVP and a method to chat to our friends while doing it. You are in a NPC corp then? Because high-sec corps get wardecced as well. PvP is unavoidable in EvE. Yes, you can shield from it mostly, but in the end, anyone can just go mad and suicide your ship if they don't like you enough. I mean, if I were to shell out a bil for you to die in your faction-fit L4 ship, I'd find someone to kill you easy if you're in a NPC corp even. It's how EvE works Originally by: Noodle Pastaman Maybe I will move to 0.0 where by attacking someone else space you are consenting to PVP but dealing with pirates while out numbered 10 to 1, using an alt to scout ahead get real. Misconception. First off, even if you're solo, it's rarely going to be 10:1 - it's a exaggeration at best. I cannot even remember the last time I have flown with more then six people in a group, and it's typically four or less. Very often you can get a solo fight, provided you're not flying something too big (I mean, if you go to low-sec in a CommandShip, you are very likely to end up bbq-ed by a five-man group, because, well, I can't take out one solo in a Cruiser/BC/frig which are the ships I fly mostly). Secondly, no need for a alt scout unless you want to solo a lot in bulky ships (like, battleships, battlecruisers, commadnships - use HACs or cruisers and you will in 90% of the cases be able to MWD back to the gate in low-sec). Originally by: Noodle Pastaman I really suspect some people here really do not understand human nature which is generally risk averse and constructive (ie building things rather than blowing them up) You're failing to understand that this is a game first and foremost, and that not all people are so risk-averse as you. What is kindof messed up in the game is that risk-averse people can make better ISK then people who take them all the time, though. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Sha4d13	Posted - 2008.01.18 12:03:00 - [55] The reality is that if no one was using low sec- there would be no pirates there. the fact that there are so many pirates suggests that this "problem" with people not going to low sec is something of a myth.
SoftRevolution	Posted - 2008.01.18 12:23:00 - [56] Quote: Maybe basing several NPC pirate factions out of low sec would be an in-game reason for increasing mission and rat rewards. This is actually interesting. Would people go mission in low sec for shiny pirate faction toys? I'm pretty sure NoodlePastaman has some sort of point. For all the "You consent to PVP the moment you undock" and "GET BACK TO WOW EVE IS HARDCORE YO " that really does not seem to be how a lot of people are playing it or how high sec operates. High sec is relatively predictable. You could get suicide ganked because someone is bored but this very rarely happens that I see. Low sec is full of people who can and will pop you for fun. That isn't a complaint. If you enjoy PVP and can't be fussed with all that 0.0 entails it is the place. You've got that to contend with as well as the pirates. Paying one group of pirates doesn't protect you from anyone else. There's also big ** off gatecamps which appear to just pop everything that passes through them. I don't live in low sec, I just go on excursions there. In low sec I wouldn't: Mine at belts; Rat at belts; do missions that required anything bigger than a nippy cruiser. Those are all essentially more or less dull activities you do to generate ISK. Doing them in low sec introduces too many elements of uncertainty to the proceedings. Yeah fair enough I do see groups of players doing these things as a corp apparently because they "control" a string a of low sec and I know the chant is "EVE SHOULDN'T BE A SOLO GAME" but that isn't really how the PVE content works. So. What can I say? EVE caters to . Get over it EVE RELATED CONTENT**
Cpt Branko The Bloody Red	Posted - 2008.01.18 12:33:00 - [57] Originally by: Sha4d13 The reality is that if no one was using low sec- there would be no pirates there. the fact that there are so many pirates suggests that this "problem" with people not going to low sec is something of a myth. Basically, /thread. Originally by: SoftRevolution Quote: Maybe basing several NPC pirate factions out of low sec would be an in-game reason for increasing mission and rat rewards. This is actually interesting. Would people go mission in low sec for shiny pirate faction toys? Incredibly awesome idea, honestly. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Cosmar Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2008.01.18 12:52:00 - [58] Maybe they should just remove all sentry guns in lowsec and make it all just 0.0 NPC space with the same type of rewards and minerals. That would make it more interesting to go into those zones then it currently is.
Woggy	Posted - 2008.01.18 12:53:00 - [59] PVP is 99.9% avoidable in EVE (not a 100%) and I given empire numbers that seems to be how the majority of play it. Low sec is fine, its a wasteland for people to gank each other, nothing wrong with that but the number of people who enjoy this is obviously very low.
SoftRevolution	Posted - 2008.01.18 13:01:00 - [60] Originally by: Cosmar Maybe they should just remove all sentry guns in lowsec and make it all just 0.0 NPC space with the same type of rewards and minerals. That would make it more interesting to go into those zones then it currently is. As has been pointed out often, this creates a real issue with fast-lockers in gate camps. EVE RELATED CONTENT



Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.