| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Brother Welcome
Amarr
Icarus' Wings
Brutally Clever Empire
   |
Posted - 2008.02.21 10:28:00 -
[91]
Low-spec space is like Iraq. The presence of a powerful external force at just the right level of refusal to either leave or accept responsibility and make it part of Empire leads to a churning mess of misery for the inhabitants.
Amidst that mess, the pirates have a lot of fun.
-vk
|
Celot
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 11:01:00 -
[92]
 Originally by: Brother Welcome
Low-spec space is like Iraq. The presence of a powerful external force at just the right level of refusal to either leave or accept responsibility and make it part of Empire leads to a churning mess of misery for the inhabitants.
Amidst that mess, the pirates have a lot of fun.
-vk
if low sec is iraq then I gues high sec is israel, it got the suicide bombers
|
Cpt Branko
Surge.
Night's Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 11:01:00 -
[93]
Low-sec population is fine and as it should be. There's not too much of low-sec to go around, and the population density of low-sec is preety much alright.
What high-sec people fail to understand is that low-sec cannot have a population density even close to what high-sec can. It is MEANT to not be densely populated. 20-30 people in the same system is classified as 'omg, crowded', while 20-30 people in a high-sec system is normal, even low.
200 people in low-sec system won't ever be possible (except in cases of a alliance vs alliance fight or something), while it's quite normal to see that in high-sec.
Any sort of major rehaul would be just silly. More low-sec, yes (to accomodate new people moving to low-sec) - along with maybe better stuff in low-sec belts. However, low-sec is quite fine as it is.
Low-sec population density (people/system) MUST be low.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Cpt Branko
Surge.
Night's Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 11:05:00 -
[94]
Originally by: Ceridan02
funny to see low sec ganker/pirates/player killer crying like babies... . Dont try to force players to play your game.
I don't see many pirates in this thread asking for moving all L4s to low-sec, sorry.
When I look at people complaining about how broken low-sec is, it's mostly carebears complaining for some reason (I don't get it, but look at who's whining).
And L70 rogue, which is probably another JoJo.
Originally by: Ceridan02
If you want to play pvp and not only gank mission runners come play in 0.0
So Morsus Mihi can drop another 15-capital fleet on you?  Sorry, couldn't resist.
Contoary to popular belief, half or a third of your targets in low-sec are, in fact, other pirates (or people who came in low-sec to pew-pew without the alliance BS).
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Cpt Branko
Surge.
Night's Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 11:15:00 -
[95]
Originally by: iblade darkstar
trouble with low sec is all the pirates live there. so no-one who wants to make isk goes there.
I made my first 400M low-sec ratting in a AF, actually. Also got my first 5-6 kills doing it, too.
It was infinitely more interesting then running level 3 missions, and, hey, the ISK wasn't that horrible.
Originally by: iblade darkstar
in fact i would say that low sec is the most dangrous area in the game.
LOL. Just LOL.
Originally by: iblade darkstar
if you go into 0.0 as a member of a corp/alliance then you get warnings about hostiles moving around as well as knowing WHO the hostiles are. and as you are in 0.0 your corp/alliance should have a PvP side as well. in low sec even as a part of a alliance how do you tell if anyone is hostile? answer is you cann't.
Everyone who is not blue is a hostile, same like in 0.0.
Originally by: iblade darkstar
this game is built around PvP and that is wot makes the game so playable BUT piracy is now becoming a big issuse. it is now more profitable to be a pirate than it is to be a miner or a mission runner or even a REAL PvPer.
Actually, given the playtime I have, I'd quite certainly have more ISK if I was running L4s in high-sec, but yeah, it's profitable if you're smart and careful. On the other hand, I know a fair number of people who tried piracy and now have to buy GTCs ;P
"REAL PvP"-ers are people who mission run to be able to afford expensive PvP ships and explode them, as a rule.
Originally by: iblade darkstar
why do you think we see more high sec suicide squads? because they make alot of money doing it and there are less targets in lec sec for all the people turning to piracy.
Because it's infinitely more profitable then piracy given the amount of stupid people with lots of ISK in high-sec?
Originally by: iblade darkstar
now piracy is apart of the game and needs to stay in the game BUT until there is a bit more balance for the people who are not pirates then you wont see many people in low sec.
LOW-SEC CANNOT SUPPORT MORE PEOPLE THEN <5 PER SYSTEM, SINCE YOU CANNOT DO ANYTHING PRODUCTIVE WITH MORE THEN THAT IN SYSTEM, UNLESS THEY'RE ALL BLUE.
Bolded and capitalised for you to read.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Myros Glimmbrand
Ganja Co
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 11:47:00 -
[96]
Just basic human nature. Given a choice most people will choose to live/work/play in an enviroment that is somewhat secure (ie laws, police, goverment etc) rather than one that has none.
eg Scotland vs Darfur
Yes this is a game but human nature is what it is, why anyone would be suprised by this or expect it to be otherwise is strange.
A rat saying things like 'move all the lvl 4 agents to low-sec' is like an extremist militia saying 'move all the grocery stores out into the wilds away from the protection of the city police' ... their motives would be abundantly clear.
Large corps can of course provide their own law/protection. Individuals and small groups can't, they just become suckers for the lawless. And most people are smart enough to figure that out. Due to the fact that this IS a game and their are mechanisms in place to make little forays into low-sec with low-risk (ie jump clones, small ships etc) people will do so for some fun but actualy expecting them to move there and put all their work at risk is nonsensical. Its just not going happen. Like I said, human nature is what it is.
Myros
CEO Ganja Co |
Celot
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 11:49:00 -
[97]
Edited by: Celot on 21/02/2008 11:52:54
Edited by: Celot on 21/02/2008 11:50:07
Originally by: Ceridan02
funny to see low sec ganker/pirates/player killer crying like babies... . Dont try to force players to play your game. Moving Lvl 4 Agents to low sec will just bring people to play for lvl 3 Agents in high sec.
If you want to play pvp and not only gank mission runners come play in 0.0
allah's warriors will destroy you, dying gloriously in the process
ALLAHU ACKBAR
also whoever said that lowsec is the most dangerous area of the game is totally correct
edit 2: oh uh ceridan is a blue but still allahu ackbar and so on
|
Nomakai Delateriel
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 11:50:00 -
[98]
It's hard to make anything profitable in low-sec.
Mining is crap.
Ratting is crap
Mission running is done from stations where you can't deny your opponent access. As such a single nano-pirate can make running level 4s even less profitable than running level 3s in high-sec and a gang of nano-pirates can make it completely inviable to do so.
Low-sec is LESS safe than a properly established 0.0 since enforcing security is a lot tougher and costs more (sec status).
The only real "population numbers" in low-sec happen when:
1. You can set up a nice political coalition with your neighbors increasing the number of blues.
2. There are a number of decent moons in the area to support research/moon-mining POSes.
3. There is a level 4 agent in the vicinity.
4. The political cohesion/numbers in your coalition isn't sufficient for you to go out and claim your own little corner of 0.0.
Then, and only then, can you actually get the numbers to defend the area against incursions, clean out the inevitable griefers and pirates that tend to migrate to such areas and have the strength in numbers to run your level 4s in a fairly efficient manner (fairly efficient since you have to be in the area anyway to manage/defend your POSes).
Even as such it's not all that fun to see your sec-status plummet and gradually have more and more of high-sec being cut off just because you're minding your own business.
One way of getting higher participation rates in low-sec would be to raise the standings improvements you get from running legal agents in low-sec, but the more I think about that "solution" the worse I think it is (-10 should have more impact than just "Oh, lets run a few lvl4s out here").
______________________________________________
-You can never earn my respect, only lose it. It's given freely, and only grudgingly retracted when necessary. |
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 12:48:00 -
[99]
Originally by: Cpt Branko
Low-sec population is fine and as it should be. There's not too much of low-sec to go around, and the population density of low-sec is preety much alright.
What high-sec people fail to understand is that low-sec cannot have a population density even close to what high-sec can. It is MEANT to not be densely populated. 20-30 people in the same system is classified as 'omg, crowded', while 20-30 people in a high-sec system is normal, even low.
....
Any sort of major rehaul would be just silly. More low-sec, yes (to accomodate new people moving to low-sec) - along with maybe better stuff in low-sec belts. However, low-sec is quite fine as it is.
Low-sec population density (people/system) MUST be low.
Seeing the values adjusted for the number of systems, I agree with you.
Adding systems to low sec will be the best (and probably only) system to really upgrade it.
Similarly plenty of 0.0 dwellers say that 0.0 is already at the limit of the sustainable population. (no comment on that)
But if all the above is true, nerfing hi sec isk production without expanding low sec to receive the supposed influx of characters keeping the current density of population in each system approximatly at the current level is a bad move.
The capacity of low sec to manage them will be exausted fast (the number of systems is pretty low) and gathering the resources to jump in 0.0 and claim a territory will be even less probable.
|
Lil'Red Ridin'Hood
Snake Assault
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 13:15:00 -
[100]
What the heck is it with all the 0.0ers and high-sec dwellers that they always feel the urge to bash low-sec?
So, the players preferring low-sec over the other two are a minority. So what? We like it as it is. Leave us alone.
My reasons to play in low-sec as opposed to high-sec:
- It's far more exciting. The possibility of both hunting and being hunted is just so much more fun to me than doing the same missions over and over and over again.
- It is profitable enough, contrary to what many people not living in low-sec want to make us believe. Rats are my main source of income and my wallet looks just fine.
- You can shoot anyone in the face if you feel the urge to do so, unlike high-sec where a formal wardec is needed and some luck that the target corp won't jump ship.
- It's not as pirate infested as some players want to make us believe. Sure, they do live there because that's the only place where you can be a pirate. But it's not as if every system has 20 of them just waiting to shoot you to shreds.
All those things may be valid to a certain degree for 0.0, too, but 0.0 has these drawbacks that keep me from moving there:
- Politics bs
- Blob fests
- Alliance duties
- Bubble camps
- You can't seem to play casually
So, for the love of EVE. Just let us have our fun in low-sec. No one's forcing you to live there. If you want to stare at the screen munching rocks or shoot a POS all day long, then by all means go ahead. Just don't expect us to find that entertaining, too.
|
Cipher7
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 13:36:00 -
[101]
Lowsec is free-for-all PvP, you can't secure it, you can't deny people docking rights, anybody can come and go as they please, so it is unsustainable for the purposes of material support.
Go try to mine in lowsec, have fun warping out every 5 minutes.
Ratting is do-able in lowsec, but only really practical in a t1 frigate, because chances are you're going to get jumped, and it defeats the purpose of going to lowsec to rat if you have to stop what you're doing and kill other players every few minutes.
Ultimately the problem is that PvE and PvP are very different activites, with different moods.
MOST people like seperation between the two activities. They want to do what they want to do when they want to do it, not when someone else wants to do it.
That's why many ppl have a highsec mission-runner acct to collect resources, and a PvP soldier account to go shoot people.
Or alternately they rat in station systems while watching local, and dock or ss+cloak when a non-blue comes in.
Ultimately it's how the population of Eve intuitively plays the game, and that's very different from how the game was designed.
In the long-run I believe that non-consentual PvP design of Eve is doomed to commercial failure, because the practical application of that PvP is often used to bother other players, who are focused on doing something else.
Put it this way, sometimes I like to mine. Not often, but it's relaxing like fishing.
You're sitting there relaxing, watching TV, mining, eating dinner or whatnot.
Then somebody wants to come along and shoot you.
So you're saying if someone wants to relax and mine they shouldn't be able to do so?
"PvP" in Eve means something very different from what it means in every other game on planet Earth.
Usually it means players fighting each other.
In Eve it also means to go bother someone for the purpose of getting your jollies.
Sitting 10 people at a gate and ganking haulers isn't PvP, neither is running around flipping cans, suiciding freighters, or baiting newbs in Pator.
That's why Eve only has 220,000 subscribers when it's clearly of high enough quality to have millions of subscribers, because of CCP's general inclination to cater to %10 of the population at the expense of the other %90.
Do you know what the term "Sandbox" means?
It means you get to do whatever the hell you want.
In Eve you can only do what you want when others ALLOW you to, hence the general inclination of MOST of the playerbase to have 2 accounts, to be able to do what they want WHEN they want.
CCP apparently thinks this is a good idea, after all 2 accounts per player is more money for them.
However this doctrine ultimately proves to be penny-wise and pound-stupid, when you consider how many potential subscribers Eve turns away.
I've personally introduced 20+ people to Eve, and NONE of them has stayed, and its always something stupid like someone flipping their can, or they lost their hauler in .4, or just something utterly stupid.
And its always the same comment "I'd love to play Eve if it weren't full of a-holes."
And you know being an a-hole myself I kinda understand that, because truly I have never met so many a-holes in my life as I have in Eve.
You know how WoW has a reputation for being full of children and jackasses?
Eve has the same reputation for being full of a-holes.
|
Lil'Red Ridin'Hood
Snake Assault
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 13:53:00 -
[102]
Edited by: Lil''Red Ridin''Hood on 21/02/2008 13:53:09
Wow Cipher7, this must be the highest rubbish/character ratio I've ever seen in a post on these forums.
|
Cipher7
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 14:17:00 -
[103]
Originally by: Lil'Red Ridin'Hood
Edited by: Lil''Red Ridin''Hood on 21/02/2008 13:53:09
Wow Cipher7, this must be the highest rubbish/character ratio I've ever seen in a post on these forums.
So why don't you quit the game about it
|
dreddish
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 14:21:00 -
[104]
0.0 is utter crap - spent 5 yrs there - and just came back to empire and i,m making much more isk doing lev4 missions.
i;ll never go back to 0.0 while i can make this much isk in 0.7
|
Nur Vadenn
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 14:23:00 -
[105]
Cipher7 speaks great truth in his post. I don't think I've read a better description of the situation in EVE in a long while.
|
Cipher7
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 14:32:00 -
[106]
Originally by: dreddish
0.0 is utter crap - spent 5 yrs there - and just came back to empire and i,m making much more isk doing lev4 missions.
i;ll never go back to 0.0 while i can make this much isk in 0.7
I haven't found a way yet to make 30 mil an hour doing missions, please please please teach me how you do that.
|
iblade darkstar
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 14:42:00 -
[107]
LOW-SEC CANNOT SUPPORT MORE PEOPLE THEN <5 PER SYSTEM, SINCE YOU CANNOT DO ANYTHING PRODUCTIVE WITH MORE THEN THAT IN SYSTEM, UNLESS THEY'RE ALL BLUE.
Bolded and capitalised for you to read.
thank you for agreeing with me that low sec is the most dangous place in the game. because from wot you said here thats exactly wot you are saying. 5 per system for low-sec and they all have to be blue to you how offten do you see this because in my 18 months in low-sec i NEVER saw it. and if you can keep a low sec system secure why are you there and not in 0.0? because you need a similar backing from PvPers to live in 0.0 as you say you need to live in lowsec so why go only half way?
risk/reward again is the answer. if you are really into PvP then you join a PvP corp/alliance most of which have 0.0 space. if you are not into pvp then you end up in empire as alot of PvP corps/alliances don't want anyone but PvPers. if you want to gank/pirate then you go to low sec. that is just the way the game is at the moment and as far as i can see there is nothing that can be done about it with out hurting the pirates which will just get them complaining. the fact that you can scan down a ship in about 30 sec means that if you are a miner in low sec you WILL get ganked (no shooting a ship that cann't fire back is not PvP).
|
Exlegion
New Light
Hydra Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 15:07:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Ben Derindar
Originally by: CCP in my dreams
Players who aggress other players in low-sec will no longer suffer a security status penalty for doing so if their target's security status is less than zero. They will still attract the ire of sentry guns, however.
/Ben
This I would love to see happen.
/signed
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Lil'Red Ridin'Hood
Snake Assault
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 15:08:00 -
[109]
All this risk reward talk is fairly useless for those who don't care about amassing ISK.
I don't primarily care about the size of my wallet, I care about the fun I've got. The thrill I get out of playing.
Several gazillion ISK won't buy me more fun than having enough ISK to replace ships in my hangar.
Doing the same missions over and over and over again or doing alliance duties for half of my playing time will decrease the fun I get out of the game.
So your risk reward speak won't convince me that there's anything wrong with low-sec. Stay in those areas that make your wallet fat, if that's why you're playing. If that's fun to you there's nothing wrong with that, either.
Just please stop trying to "fix" something that's just fine for the players that don't have the same goals.
|
Celot
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 15:18:00 -
[110]
Originally by: dreddish
0.0 is utter crap - spent 5 yrs there - and just came back to empire and i,m making much more isk doing lev4 missions.
i;ll never go back to 0.0 while i can make this much isk in 0.7
this
this is the most ******** thing I have seen on eve-o
|
Veng3ance
Multiversal Enterprise Inc.
Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 15:27:00 -
[111]
Move all level 4 agents above a certain quality to low-sec. Something that will seriously force people to make a decision on low-sec or high-sec. I suggest all agents who are level 4 and above 0 quality be moved to low-sec.
Also, rats..... there is NO point in ratting in low-sec. Bring the spawns up to BC + Cruiser with occasional battleships instead of the constant cruiser / frig crap seen today.
And Ore. Bring in those "condensed" ore forms and put them in low-sec and also some of the less profitable 0.0 regions. Do not put higher tier ore tho, that would only ruin deeper 0.0.
What we want and need is corps moving into low-sec and basing their operations in low-sec. Right now all we see if very very slim traffic (whatever people are FORCED to travel through) and a few scattered pirate corps. 
|
Exlegion
New Light
Hydra Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 15:28:00 -
[112]
Originally by: Cipher7
lengthy post
Cipher7,
Nice perpective and interesting read. In my humble opinion, lots of truth in there.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Nomakai Delateriel
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 15:29:00 -
[113]
Originally by: Veng3ance
What we want and need is corps moving into low-sec and basing their operations in low-sec. Right now all we see if very very slim traffic (whatever people are FORCED to travel through) and a few scattered pirate corps.
There are a bunch of Industrial corporations/alliances based in some of the less intense areas of low-sec. But they're there for for the moons and nothing else.
______________________________________________
-You can never earn my respect, only lose it. It's given freely, and only grudgingly retracted when necessary. |
Cipher7
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 15:30:00 -
[114]
Originally by: Lil'Red Ridin'Hood
All this risk reward talk is fairly useless for those who don't care about amassing ISK.
I don't primarily care about the size of my wallet, I care about the fun I've got. The thrill I get out of playing.
Several gazillion ISK won't buy me more fun than having enough ISK to replace ships in my hangar.
Doing the same missions over and over and over again or doing alliance duties for half of my playing time will decrease the fun I get out of the game.
So your risk reward speak won't convince me that there's anything wrong with low-sec. Stay in those areas that make your wallet fat, if that's why you're playing. If that's fun to you there's nothing wrong with that, either.
Just please stop trying to "fix" something that's just fine for the players that don't have the same goals.
So you do have a brain.
Me personally, I'm fine with leaving the game as it is now.
I mean really, everybody knows that lowsec is a pirate haven.
And thats cool is it not?
So? Let everybody play how they like.
Only thing that sucks is having to pay for multiple accounts, and even thats not so bad with GTC's.
I leave one char in highsec to run missions, not because its more money, I was making more in 0.0, but in highsec I get to relax without having to keep local open, I can chat with my friends and watch TV, it's low pressure.
I use a second acct for PvP. Lets face it, it's fun. But it's not low-pressure fun, it's high pressure fun, and some days I'm just not into it.
So I can do whatever I want whenever I feel like it.
And really, isn't that the definition of a sandbox?
|
Veng3ance
Multiversal Enterprise Inc.
Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 15:39:00 -
[115]
Originally by: Nomakai Delateriel
Originally by: Veng3ance
What we want and need is corps moving into low-sec and basing their operations in low-sec. Right now all we see if very very slim traffic (whatever people are FORCED to travel through) and a few scattered pirate corps.
There are a bunch of Industrial corporations/alliances based in some of the less intense areas of low-sec. But they're there for for the moons and nothing else.
Exactly, where there is a reward, there is a group controlling it. This is exactly what we want.
The problem is that moon mining and reacting is one of the only truly profitable low-sec operations
|
Ulstan
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 15:46:00 -
[116]
Edited by: Ulstan on 21/02/2008 15:49:28
Of course low sec is underpopulated: it's crawling with pirates and the rewards (ore and rats) are total crap.
As far as missioning goes, low sec already has the best agents, so moving more agents there obviously won't change anything. The reason no one much runs missions in low sec is because the risk vs reward is totally busted, and a gang of pirates can come jump, you risk free to them, and annhilate your expensive mission running ship. All the risk goes to you, all the reward goes to them.
People that care about risk vs reward usually just stay out of low sec: low sec's population right now are the people that enjoy being in low sec. Calls by pirates to try to force people in hi sec to move to low sec are extremely misguided, and motivated by some sort of bizarre shortsighted dream of them being turned loose on an 0.4 sec Motsu.
|
Cypher V
Minmatar
Silent-I.K.Y
The Polaris Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 15:59:00 -
[117]
Originally by: Brutoth Tain
Edited by: Brutoth Tain on 20/02/2008 17:53:25
Originally by: Yakia TovilToba
Lowsec is much more popular than 0.0.
The more in depth survey shows something different to your opinion.
Quote:
total of 1.35 million visits were made to zero-zero space systems
(19.6%), 743,000 visits were made to low-sec space (10.8%),
Its now a researched and documented fact that low sec is the least popular.
erm, dude, he was tlaking about density... NOT sheer numbers. read it again.
----------------------------------------------
Minmatar suck? Shoulda done my research -_-
|
Zanpt
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 16:02:00 -
[118]
Originally by: Pax Ratlin
Forcing people to go to low sec WILL NOT significantly increase low sec population all it WILL make people try and find away around being forced into low sec.
Quite so. My ppl will NOT be forced into low sec. If CCP does something like this, as with any forcible action by an entity of governance, there will be unintended consequences. If there are incentives we will evaluate them and act in our own best interest but if we are pushed, we will push back, find workarounds, change to other types of activity, reduce our participation, etc.
|
Gypsio III
Darkness Inc.
Blood Blind
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 16:02:00 -
[119]
I'd love to see dynamic agent qualities. They could update daily, or weekly, whatever, so less-used agents would gradually give better rewards.
This would help the Sailag triangle, annoy farmers and generally make things more interesting.
|
Mr Abbadon
Illuminati Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 16:14:00 -
[120]
forcing mission runners to lowsec is the most stupid thing ive heard this week. that will onlt make the grifer population happy and not the mission runners.
they will just camp the good Quality agents and kille very mission runner outside the stations .
so it a good solution yeah if your braindead.
_______________________________________________________________
Quote:
[22:28] <Druid> as far as I know the BPO's were gotten legitimately.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |