EVE Search - How would YOU improve low-sec rewards?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

How would YOU improve low-sec rewards?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Cereal Infection SpaceX	Posted - 2008.03.28 18:23:00 - [1] Bigger, Baddder, Better Bounty Rats in the belts. Full Ratt Gangs in the belts with ecm/scrams, the works.
Fractus Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.03.28 18:25:00 - [2] Some kind of new ore perhaps. Something exclusive to lowsec (and perhaps 0.0). Something with a lot more tritanium and pyerite than veldspar and scordite.
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2008.03.28 18:27:00 - [3] 1. Temporary anchorable belt structures that protect miners but require players to actively defend at the same time - gives miners incentive to mine in low-sec because they can survive more than 30 seconds if pirates show up to gank them. The structure requires players around it to actually defend it so it won't help them much without escort, creating roles for guards and targets for pirates to attack. ---------------- Tarminic - 34 Million SP in Forum Warfare Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.79.3 (Updated 3/24)
Marcus TheMartin Tuxedo.	Posted - 2008.03.28 18:27:00 - [4] isk faucets bad move all ice from highsec to lowsec and 0.0 THE ICE MUST FLOW! Same goes for all non veld macro's hop on the veld wagon trit prices dive
Ulstan Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2008.03.28 18:33:00 - [5] Make low sec have spawns similar to the 'crappy 0.0' regions. Make the 'crappy 0.0' regions more like the 'good 0.0 regions'. Give low sec (and heck, 0.0) some ores worth mining. The low price of high end ores is mostly due to the drone regions ofc but something needs to be done to make mining in low sec worth it. Missioning in low sec...meh it will always pretty much be terrible for isk/h unless CCP does something drastic to piracy which I'd rather they not do, so just leave it as it is and provide people with other reasons to go to low sec. The exception is level V missions which are meant to be done in groups: those might be ok in low sec with some tweaking to NPC aggro mechanics and a general buffage to level V missions in general.
Ankhesentapemkah Aliastra	Posted - 2008.03.28 18:55:00 - [6] Edited by: Ankhesentapemkah on 28/03/2008 18:57:57 Add dynamic complexes or similar places to have an exciting hunt. Interesting objectives in lowsec when faction war is implemented. Obvious ones: Improvements to ore. I did go to lowsec a while back to see if Jaspet was profitable, well, there wasn't much difference between Jadite and Scordite/Omber, and that situation still hasn't changed, according to the ore charts. Larger multiplier to mission rewards in lowsec and 0.0. Better rats in lowsec. --- Take Care is the CSM party for the free and independant players! Contact us and let us relay your ideas to CCP! Visit our Campaign Website
Haradgrim Tyrell Corp INTERDICTION	Posted - 2008.03.28 18:57:00 - [7] Edited by: Haradgrim on 28/03/2008 18:57:16 Proposed Differences: Empire: Missions: Low Metal level and tech 1 loot Very low chance of sucessful salvage Ore: Veld and Scord Only Rats: Low bounty frigs only Low meta level and tech 1 loot only Low-Sec: Missions: High-meta level loot Good chance of salvage (similar to now, maybe slightly better) Ores: All but 0.0 only ores (morphite, etc) Rats: 500k-900k w/ high meta level loot 0.0: Missions: High-meta level and faction loot Same salvage chance as low-sec Ore: Rare ores more abundant Rats: same as exists now I think that would help the population distribution Originally by: CCP Oveur ...every forum whine feels like a baby pony is getting killed
Dantes Revenge State War Academy	Posted - 2008.03.28 19:03:00 - [8] Hell, why not just remove lowsec altogether and make it all 0.0? In this game, you either want to PVP or you don't. Those who don't seem to be in the majority since they are all clusterd in the tiny highsec area. Since lowsec is really even more dangerous than 0.0 due to restrictions on what items you can use (warp bubbles for example), structures you can deploy (cynosural generators etc) and much more, it makes defending yourself and you corps in lowsec much harder than 0.0. You can't even build a titan in lowsec cos it requires sovereignty so what chance have you got attacking an alliance held 0.0 area to take it over, especially when they can build 10 titans or more? I agree with a post earlier that a titan should be restricted to 1 per alliance as it represents the absolute status symbol. There is a lot of this game that many are missing out on mainly because the mechanics allow big alliances so much power to hold an area bigger than they really need just by blockading a single gate. Having more entrances into 0.0 would force alliances to reduce the size of their claim, allowing more new alliances access to unused regions to move out there and set up home. More alliances, more wars, more PVP and more fun for everyone. Or are veterans becoming lazy and just enjoying making billions per week in 0.0 in complete safety? Of course they will object, it's going to hit THEIR income instead of the income of those "carebears" in highsec. Some of us are not carebears but are intelligent enough to know that we don't stand a chance trying to make it in 0.0 with the current game mechanics that allow established alliances to hold vast regions with one or two gate camps.
Alz Shado Ever Flow	Posted - 2008.03.28 19:13:00 - [9] Edited by: Alz Shado on 28/03/2008 19:14:31 1) Move all best-named loot drops to lowsec. 2) Gate guns with Sig-radius based DMG and ECM. 3) Viceroys - conquerable lowsec systems. 4) More Medical services in Lowsec NPC stations. 5) More mining belts in lowsec systems, at least 15-20 in each. Also, more efficient roids, and a mini-Rorq. 6) Mini-Freighter based on the blockade runner -- 120km3, agility of a Battleship (at least), +2(3?) WCS built in. 500m-750m. 7) Small BS Rats, with improved (but still rare) chance of cruiser-bc faction spawns. //// ---------=== []= ---------=== \\\\ Rifter(RedBad) "Kill a man one is a murderer; kill a million, a conqueror; kill them all, a God." -- Jean Rostand
Abrazzar Equilibrium Inc. FOUNDATI0N	Posted - 2008.03.28 19:15:00 - [10] I would reduce the volumes of certain ores: Jaspet 1.0 m3 (-1), Hemorphite 2.5 m3 (-0.5), Hedbergite 2.5 m3 (-0.5) and Gneiss 4.0 m3 (-1). This will make mining and hauling them more profitable and less of a drag. Increase the magnitude of rats by one security level. That means rats found currently in 0.3 will then be found in 0.4, etc. The lowes 0.0 rats will then venture into 0.1 systems. Nullsec itself will be uneffected by this change as well as highsec. This will make ratting in low sec more profitable. Not only does the reward of lowsec to be improved to make it more viable for people to go in there, but also the risk needs to be lowered some way. For this I'd add faction poliece to lowsec which will spawn with the same rules as CONCORD. Difference is that the faction police does not insta-kill offenders but merely attacks them with conventional weapons. Also the response time is greatly reduced, giving Pirates more time to pop the dude, grab the loot and make a run for it. This will give victims at least a fighting chance. The last proposal will cause the greatest controversion, I am sure, but low sec has to offer some kind of security compared to no sec, while it has to be less than in high sec. -------- Ideas for: Mining Clouds
Quelque Chose University of Caille	Posted - 2008.03.28 19:18:00 - [11] If I were to compare geographical risk/ reward/ effort in Eve to a casino it would be like this: Highsec = penny poker. Highsec is a free for all environment where most people break even. Nullsec = blackjack. It's a numbers game basically where a well- organized team that works hard can successfully game the house for a nice payout. Lowsec then should be like roulette. Lots of people should walk away from lowsec short however many chips they brought in, but every so often a few people should clean house and get to go on a month- long binge of rampant debauchery. There's no way to work that system but it's the small chance of a massive payout that keeps people coming to the table. How to do that to low sec? Rare random chance of a rat frigate that drops T2 BPOs? One- in- a- million random Mercoxit spawn? You got me, but I think if everybody has a good grasp of what they expect low sec to be then figuring out how to make it that will become a lot easier. Some people seem to like low sec just the way it is. ______________________________ "Eve Online is a massively multiplayer game about trolling in outer space."
Selene Lunaglaux Trit for the Trit Throne	Posted - 2008.03.28 19:19:00 - [12] Edited by: Selene Lunaglaux on 28/03/2008 19:19:18 Originally by: Fractus Some kind of new ore perhaps. Something exclusive to lowsec This. Assuming whatever it is is useful in the markets, the price will automatically rise to the point where it justifies the risk.
Quelque Chose University of Caille	Posted - 2008.03.28 19:19:00 - [13] Originally by: Abrazzar I would reduce the volumes of certain ores: Jaspet 1.0 m3 (-1), Hemorphite 2.5 m3 (-0.5), Hedbergite 2.5 m3 (-0.5) and Gneiss 4.0 m3 (-1). This will make mining and hauling them more profitable and less of a drag. I was also thinking that. ______________________________ "Eve Online is a massively multiplayer game about trolling in outer space."
Alita Tiphares Aztek Industries	Posted - 2008.03.28 19:21:00 - [14] Originally by: Selene Lunaglaux Edited by: Selene Lunaglaux on 28/03/2008 19:19:18 Originally by: Fractus Some kind of new ore perhaps. Something exclusive to lowsec This. Assuming whatever it is is useful in the markets, the price will automatically rise to the point where it justifies the risk. dont we already have this...?
Burnharder Tiny Industries	Posted - 2008.03.28 19:21:00 - [15] Guys, you are all well behind the curve on this. Exploration and a little, patience.
Selene Lunaglaux Trit for the Trit Throne	Posted - 2008.03.28 19:43:00 - [16] Originally by: Alita Tiphares dont we already have this...? No, because of alternative sources for minerals. It has to be exclusive to low sec for the price to purely reflect the risk involved in going to low sec.
Dranearian Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2008.03.28 19:47:00 - [17] Edited by: Dranearian on 28/03/2008 19:48:12 Move all level 4 agents over quality of 0 to lowsec. Problem solved. You want the isk from the good quality agents? Well looks like you are going to take some risk. (Of course this would require the agents be spread out completely thin to reduce congestion at mission hubs. Also a slight increase in the payout of these agents due to being located in lowsec.)
Derrys Caldari Independent Navy Reserve The Fourth District	Posted - 2008.03.28 19:54:00 - [18] Originally by: Dranearian Move all level 4 agents over quality of 0 to lowsec. Problem solved. Unfortunately not. If you move Level 4 agents to lowsec, the vast majority of mission carebears will switch to Level 3s. If you move Level 3s to lowsec too, a lot of them will just quit. I think you underestimate how much mission carebears really, really want to stay in highsec. One reason is that a lot of them are moneymaking alts of 0.0 characters and pirates, and dedicated moneymakers don't want to take risks even if the reward is somewhat higher. This move would cost CCP a lot of money, and for that reason alone it won't happen.
Dranearian Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2008.03.28 20:00:00 - [19] Who cares if they choose to stay in highsec? Their isk making will be significantly reduced, low-sec will get a boost to the possibilities of reward, and then 0.0 will remain the same. Lowsec should be a stepping stone to 0.0, still crappy in comparison but enough to appease those afraid to venture into 0.0, this creates that stepping stone. And if people wish to remain in highsec doing low quality 4's or high quality 3's, well this also reduces the isk entered into the economy, which therefore reduces inflation, which over the long-term will result in a benefit for the economy as a whole.
Kruel Beyond Divinity Inc	Posted - 2008.03.28 20:01:00 - [20] Switch it around a little... put the battleship rats in .4 and fewer/no rats in 0.0. It would be hillarious watching all the carebears fighting over the belts in .4 if they were filled with battleship sized rats. Also, make only veld available in hisec.
Derrys Caldari Independent Navy Reserve The Fourth District	Posted - 2008.03.28 20:35:00 - [21] Edited by: Derrys on 28/03/2008 20:35:52 Originally by: Dranearian Who cares if they choose to stay in highsec? Nobody cares if they stay in highsec, but CCP cares if they cancel their accounts, which many of them would. Quote: Their isk making will be significantly reduced, low-sec will get a boost to the possibilities of reward, and then 0.0 will remain the same. What you're suggesting won't have the effect that you want. What you'll get are a lot of little fiefdoms "owned" by alliances who camp the gates and farm the agents. Sort of a 0.0-lite situation. While I suppose that would qualify as "getting more people into lowsec," I don't think it's what people have in mind when they talk about that. Plus concentrating income generation in PvP zones would only make things even harder for small- to medium-sized corps, which have a hard enough time as it is. Unfortunately, the only way to get more of the general population into lowsec is to reduce the risk, which means making piracy harder. It's a shame, but it's the only thing that will work.
Kahega Amielden Legacy Syndicate space weaponry and trade	Posted - 2008.03.28 20:37:00 - [22] Edited by: Kahega Amielden on 28/03/2008 20:37:31 It is perfectly feasible for an independent player to live in lowsec. Piracy doesn't need a nerf, player intelligence needs a buff.
Xaen Caritas.	Posted - 2008.03.28 20:41:00 - [23] Get rid of the choke points into 0.0. They're always camped to death. Add capital rats for fun and profit. - Support fixing the UI\|Suggest Jita fixes\|Compact logs
Doddy Omega Fleet Enterprises Executive Outcomes	Posted - 2008.03.28 20:43:00 - [24] Cruiser sized officer spawns. Hell throw in frig sized officers in hi sec too. A bit of a shifting of Ore types too, even some bs rats (even crappy ones). The number one thing tho would be a major increase on the rewards of missions in low sec compared to hi sec. Fix level 5 missions and seed more agents, maybe giving them something key that isn't available elsewhere. (make them necessary for whatever ccp adds to game next, maybe tech 3?)
Miki Fin Independant Union of Rangers	Posted - 2008.03.28 20:45:00 - [25] Remove standing loss ala 0.0 but boost gate guns.
Kruel Beyond Divinity Inc	Posted - 2008.03.28 20:49:00 - [26] Originally by: Miki Fin Remove standing loss ala 0.0 but boost gate guns. Boost gate guns and you only boost the size of the camp.
ghost st The Scope	Posted - 2008.03.28 20:54:00 - [27] I think that lowsec needs dome fundamental mechanics to change for it to become profitable. To become profitable you need to be able to defend your operations. Currently defense in lowsec is moot, its alot easier to attack than it is to defend. The first thing that needs to go is hiding in stations, in order to be able to defend yourself you need to be able to remove your enemy's presence from an area. As it is now the hostiles can just dock up and hide, and its not profitable to have a 10man gang on hand to defend 3-4 mining barges Also something needs to happen with carrier hotdropping, every pod, noobship, and shuttle in lowsec these days has a cyno fitted. If somehow you are able to keep the enemy at bvay while your 'bears mine, all they will do is slip in a noobship and pop in several carriers. Lowsec will only br profitable once it ban be properly defended, and we dont have to worry about people hiding in stations, or mutliple carrier hotdrops.
Marcus TheMartin Tuxedo.	Posted - 2008.03.28 20:59:00 - [28] Originally by: ghost st I think that lowsec needs dome fundamental mechanics to change for it to become profitable. To become profitable you need to be able to defend your operations. Currently defense in lowsec is moot, its alot easier to attack than it is to defend. The first thing that needs to go is hiding in stations, in order to be able to defend yourself you need to be able to remove your enemy's presence from an area. As it is now the hostiles can just dock up and hide, and its not profitable to have a 10man gang on hand to defend 3-4 mining barges Also something needs to happen with carrier hotdropping, every pod, noobship, and shuttle in lowsec these days has a cyno fitted. If somehow you are able to keep the enemy at bvay while your 'bears mine, all they will do is slip in a noobship and pop in several carriers. Lowsec will only br profitable once it ban be properly defended, and we dont have to worry about people hiding in stations, or mutliple carrier hotdrops. wtb pods and shuttles with fitting slots
Lt Angus the united Sex Panthers	Posted - 2008.03.28 21:01:00 - [29] I wouldn't, im living it up down here and i dont need the lag Shhhh, Im hunting Badgers
Marcus TheMartin Tuxedo.	Posted - 2008.03.28 21:02:00 - [30] Originally by: Lt Angus I wouldn't, im living it up down here and i dont need the lag smartbombing in rancer can hardly be considered living

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: 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.