Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Corstaad
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.03.28 21:04:00 -
[31]
Honestly promote PvP/or the pvp enviroment and nerf the crap out of missions. I run missions to support my PvP stuff but lets be honest its just to easy of a source of isk. Your raven is the defacto miner,salvager,trader,and isk/hr machine. The tradehubs are controled by L4 missions(Jita). EvE needs to have its niche not become boarslayers of motsu.
|
Incip
Republic University
|
Posted - 2008.03.28 22:44:00 -
[32]
Having mission agents in lowsec would not increase piracy, IF you spread them out. Don't have more than 1 high quality agent within 5-6 jumps of each other. It would not be profitable for pirates to set up heavy camps of these places.
Also since bubbles are not allowed in lowsec, there is absolutely no reason to ever get caught off a station if you have an insta-undock and know how to use it. Not to mention the majority of stations don't even kick you out past docking range..
If someone is camping your spot.. well tough pod jump to another system or just deal with it. If you want rewards (high isk value missions) then there should be some risk assigned. As of now there is NO risk to a level 4 mission. NONE. If you lose a ship in a mission its due to stupidity, not because it is "hard".
And if people want to cry and complain about having risk in Eve, well then they are playing the wrong game and they will most likely have more fun elsewhere.
|
Corstaad
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.03.28 22:55:00 -
[33]
Since L3s and L4s are worth so much money people don't bother figuring out that Lowsec is actually pretty safe. I'd bet your average player would make more if he knew how safe lowsec was and just decided to run L3s fast as hell in .1. Instead of zombies rolling out off Jita we might see Nonni or Rancer the new tradehubs. As is missions are the worst part of this game but the worth the most isk. Guess what new players are going to doing?
|
Kaleff Orlop
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.28 23:28:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Corstaad Honestly promote PvP/or the pvp enviroment and nerf the crap out of missions. I run missions to support my PvP stuff but lets be honest its just to easy of a source of isk. Your raven is the defacto miner,salvager,trader,and isk/hr machine. The tradehubs are controled by L4 missions(Jita). EvE needs to have its niche not become boarslayers of motsu.
Im not sure nerfing the missions would do anything but kill off the causal gamers. The problem is the boarder regions (0.4 etc) isn't profitable solo for low skill miners and even high skill solo mission runners.
They could, of course , combine forces but rewards for boarder regions isn't that great for small corperations either. Add to that, mission runners don't need a corp. It cuts into your profits, opens you up to war dec's and doesn't provide any secruity because you corp mates are scattered across an entire region at their various agents.
What you need is not better pay for low sec work but a goal for mission runner corps. A way to profit as a group and specalized tools to cover the disadvatages empire based corps who want to remain empire based have in the boarder regions.
Im thinking something along the lines of a corp lp store where the corperation gains lp every time a member turns a mission in under a new option for the corp (similar to turning in for gang). The corp lp store could contain some unique skills benificial primaraly to mission runner heavy corps. Say a verion of the DED Connections skill for ceo's that provides bonus pay from concord in a similar manner directly to the corp wallet for rat kills. Modules for a sort of quick deploy pos lite that can serve as a temperary base of ops outside of empire (based on stuff like the habitat modules in missions). The pos lite could also give runners a place to swap mission fittings for more realistic pvp setups. Maybe even some sort of purchasable marshal law declaration that allows a mission runner corp to essencialy war dec a solar system (24 hour duration maybe) so they can attack anyone of say -5 or less without status loss.
Basicaly, give mission runners long term group goals on the same level as miners and manufactures have. You dont want them creating mini alliance teritories on the edge of empire space, just the ability to temporarlily represent the empires in the boarder regions.
|
Fractus
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 00:53:00 -
[35]
But honestly. The lowsec ores is not worth more than veldspar. The thing lowsec needs the most are miners (and mission runners, but they will never risk their ships). There are minerals that will always be in demand, these are trit, pyerite and mex. Just add new roids with these minerals in abundance, that would help.
Oh, and remove ice from highsec, its not supposed to be there anyway.
|
Neutrino Sunset
KDM Corp Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 01:55:00 -
[36]
I don't think the rewards of low sec need to be boosted, the missions, ore and exploration are already fairly good, it just needs to be made possible to get at the rewards that are already there. To achieve that you need to seriously deter the instagibbing gate camps that stop you getting into lowsec in anything other than an interceptor or a cloaker. Piracy needs to be forced away from the gates and stations and out to the belts, encounters, exploration sites and mission instances, while at the same time lowsec mining, lowsec mining escort and anti-piracy all need to be actually viable roles.
Introduction of hactors, tier 3 BS, hp boost and the fact that most pirate gangs now have capitals have all indirectly nerfed lowsec gate guns. Rebalance them by boosting the guns and adding POS style warp scrambling batteries and neuts to lowsec gates and stations.
Introduce an anchorable mining shield as described by Tarminic in post 3 that behaves like a low strength POS shield, or introduce it as a ship module similar to the hactor field generator. It can be destroyed by pirates so must be defended by mining escorts.
Put a Concord funded bounty equal or proportional to the price of their clone on all players with <0 sec status, and remove the sec hit for aggressing them.
More routes into 0.0 and less choke points probably wouldn't hurt either, it is true that huge swathes of 0.0 are basically deserted because powerful 0.0 Alliances camp the chokes points 23/7.
Bear in mind that there is a plan to replace static asteroid belts with scannable encounter style belts. This would actually be a nice boost to lowsec ratting since a ratter would have a fair chance of taking out some lowsec rats before he was located, unless of course the pirate has already scanned out the encounter before him. It does at any rate add a little bit of cat and mouse back into the equation.
Sure the pirates who currently enjoy practically risk free lowsec gate camping would probably whine like hell at first, but once the population of lowsec picks up even the pirate's miserable lives will be infinitely more interesting. Plus a pirate should feel hunted, after all danger is the spice of life and that's the life they have chosen.
I wouldn't see these changes as a nerf to piracy, but instead an attempt at making it a bit more intesting. I'd like to be a lowsec pirate myself for a while, but I can't stand gate camping it bores me senseless. But right now with the low population of lowsec that's all lowsec piracy seems to consist of.
|
Fractus
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 02:17:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Neutrino Sunset the missions, ore and exploration are already fairly good
Originally by: Neutrino Sunset ore are already fairly good
Originally by: Neutrino Sunset ore
No, its not
Originally by: Neutrino Sunset More routes into 0.0 and less choke points probably wouldn't hurt either, it is true that huge swathes of 0.0 are basically deserted because powerful 0.0 Alliances camp the chokes points 23/7.
Well, 0.0 isn't the main problem here. In 0.0 you can make more isk than in empire so thats fine. The problem is lowsec.
|
Neutrino Sunset
KDM Corp Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 02:34:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Corstaad Since L3s and L4s are worth so much money people don't bother figuring out that Lowsec is actually pretty safe. I'd bet your average player would make more if he knew how safe lowsec was and just decided to run L3s fast as hell in .1. Instead of zombies rolling out off Jita we might see Nonni or Rancer the new tradehubs. As is missions are the worst part of this game but the worth the most isk. Guess what new players are going to doing?
Seriously dude, missions are not the isk faucet that some people seem to think they are, certainly not level 3's. Sure the money's not bad, and it's true that it's fairly safe and reliable, but ratting, salvaging and mining in 0.0 makes just as much isk, and industry and market trading probably more, and they are all just as safe and reliable too.
Having said that the higher quality level 4 agents have already been moved to lowsec anyway, which I have no problem with at all, just as long as it's possible to actually get a mission ship in there.
One problem is that while the reward might be worth the risk of getting a lvl 3 mission ship into lowsec, regularly travelling around lowsec in a lvl 4 BS is essentially unfeasible, it will just get eaten by any lowsec camp you encounter. And scouts are not a solution to this because:
a) You do not know where your agent will send you until you ask for the mission. If you have to decline missions and lose standings because you can't get around camped choke points you've just lost whatever additional reward you might have gained by using a lowsec agent in the first place.
b) The pirate camps use scouts too, they just remain cloaked at the gate while your scout in a shuttle or whatever goes through and then uncloak ready to gank you when their scout tells them that you're jumping your BS in.
Having said all that I wouldn't be bleating if the mission rewards for lvl 4's were reduced or more of them were moved to lowsec, it's not how I make my isk. But I just don't think it's the real problem here.
|
Neutrino Sunset
KDM Corp Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 02:49:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Fractus
Originally by: Neutrino Sunset the missions, ore and exploration are already fairly good
Originally by: Neutrino Sunset ore are already fairly good
Originally by: Neutrino Sunset ore
No, its not
Maybe it's not as good as you would like it to be, and it almost certainly isn't good enough to justify the risk of trying to mine it under the current circumstances, but it's certainly not worthless.
Originally by: Fractus
Originally by: Neutrino Sunset More routes into 0.0 and less choke points probably wouldn't hurt either, it is true that huge swathes of 0.0 are basically deserted because powerful 0.0 Alliances camp the chokes points 23/7.
Well, 0.0 isn't the main problem here. In 0.0 you can make more isk than in empire so thats fine. The problem is lowsec.
I was thinking that less choke points into 0.0 might ease the problem of lowsec since 0.0 would then be more attractive to non-pirates and pirates alike. Right now there are large parts of 0.0 that even pirate gangs would find difficult to get into because of the 0.0 Alliance defenses. If this were somewhat less the case and some pirates who would have previously camped a lowsec system chose to go roaming or camping in 0.0 instead that might alleviate the somewhat amusing problem of some areas of lowsec consisting of nothing but pirates preying on each other. I admit it is perhaps a somewhat tenuous and indirect benefit to lowsec.
What did you think of the other ideas though?
|
Letouk Mernel
Blue Shell Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 02:49:00 -
[40]
Edited by: Letouk Mernel on 29/03/2008 02:49:33
Everything here proposes increasing PVE rewards (controlled by the computer AI) in a PVP zone. It's not going to work, as the "risk" is controlled by players, and currently AI can't keep up with what players do.
I'd propose a re-vamp of the PVE combat so that it requires the same tactics, fittings, and ships as PVP combat. Then just populate low-sec belts and low-sec missions with Nano-HACs, Ceptors, Recons, HIC's, and whatever else the FOTM is, and these ships should act in concert to warp jam, webify, focus fire, etc. us much like a roaming gang or gate camp does.
Then up the rewards accordingly (in terms of what modules drop, T2, etc, as well as if it takes 5 ships to win a mission, then reward all 5 ships properly).
Basically, improve what the carebears want: PVE, and they'll go there for it.
The other MMOG's out there have groups, loot rules, and 5-man, 10-man, 20-man content that is rewarded appropriately and has decent AI, don't see why EVE shouldn't as well. PVE obviously attracts the masses, CCP should put resources into it. They're no longer small, it's time to get off their asses and stop lazying about by "concentrating on PVP" (which means just adding a couple ships here and there and letting us create our own content). They can still add ships and improve the PVP and sovereignty and all that, but if they want the carebears to spread out, PVE-improvements are the way to do it.
|
|
SoftRevolution
Complicity.
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 02:57:00 -
[41]
Edited by: SoftRevolution on 29/03/2008 03:04:45 Edited by: SoftRevolution on 29/03/2008 03:03:15 What about finding some framework for rewarding PVP?
What if the empires were engaged in a very uneasy cold war and just like you get LP for running missions you got LP for ganking people with good standing to the other side?
Not just that but found some way to encourage people to go a-hunting in low sec?
How do you do that?
I realise I'm always preaching the "motivations" angle, but would PVP conflict less with some people's motivations if it wasn't just something you put the ISK into for fun?
Would you get more people to PVP because low sec is more accessible to the casual gamer than 0.0?
Is the issue as I suggest that some people just don't like shooting at other players or is it to do with it being a sort of "expensive hobby"? Do people really care about getting their imaginary stuff blown up?
Is this what faction warfare is supposed to be about?
Just thinking out loud here. I'm not the first one to suggest it. EVE RELATED CONTENT |
Sarakiel
VIRTUAL LIFE VANGUARD Carpe Universitas
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 03:02:00 -
[42]
Edited by: Sarakiel on 29/03/2008 03:02:21 low sec is fine as is. if you want money you go to 0.0 and fight for more well structured organisations. if you want small turf war pvp then you go to low sec and accept that the life of a raider/pillager is not a very lavish lifestyle (or in other words you do what they all do already, mission with alts). those in empire that want reason to go to low sec to make money should stop thinking small and join a 0.0 alliance or a renter corp, as its already been rehashed hundreds of times low sec is way less safe than 0.0.
|
Neutrino Sunset
KDM Corp Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 03:06:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Letouk Mernel
Stuff...
I mean no disrespect whan I say this but you're generalising a little bit.
Mine and Tarminic's suggestions do not increase PvE rewards, nor do the proposals by other people to move all level 4 missions to lowsec (not that I'm saying I agree with that). I recognise the posts you are referring to which propose boosting lowsec rewards, but I don't think many people consider those options to be a viable solution, at least not by themselves.
I do however agree with you that it would be much better if rats behaved like actual ships with regard to AI and especially EWAR. A lot of problems are caused by the fact that the current game mechanics encourage a completely different setup for PvE than for PvP, plus it's very unrealistic and immersion breaking.
However I believe your solution is too radical to be implemented in the short or medium term. Bear in mind that _all_ AI has to run server side to maintain game integrity, what works on small sharded servers used by other MMORPGs does not scale in a trivial fashion to something like Eve, which let's not forget is currently unique.
|
Neutrino Sunset
KDM Corp Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 03:15:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Sarakiel
Stuff...
There's a lot of truth in what you say. If it weren't for lowsec gate and station camps with remote sensor boosted insta-locking infinite point scramming hactors and captials I think I'd be largely in agreement with you.
|
Ulstan
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 03:17:00 -
[45]
Quote: Move all level 4 agents over quality of 0 to lowsec.
Problem solved.
Wouldn't change a thing, and any idiot should be able to see that.
All level 5 agents are in low sec and that hasn't changed much has it?
No, might as well give up making missioning in low sec a viable profession and concentrate on other ways to attract players there. Unless of course you're prepared to advocate some very stiff nerfs to piracy and the ease with which they can scan out and kill mission runners.
Honestly, at this point, anyone who thinks moving level 4 agents to low sec will 'fix' anything is terminally ******** or simply the kind of asswipe who wants to 'force carebears out of hi sec'.
Carebears won't leave hi sec no matter what. You aren't trying to get carebears in low sec you're trying to get people driven by profit in low sec.
|
Jack Jombardo
The Last Samurais
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 03:26:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Cereal Infection Bigger, Baddder, Better Bounty Rats in the belts. Full Ratt Gangs in the belts with ecm/scrams, the works.
Remove player Pirates, make ganging harder
|
Dragos Mrs
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 03:46:00 -
[47]
massages with guarenteed happy endings for 5000 isk.
lowsec would be soooooooo popular.
probably not alot of pvp going on, though.
|
Dotard
Eternal Guardians Corp. The Covenant Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 03:49:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Tarminic 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 wins this thread.
--------------- Nerf You! Buff Me!
|
William Darkk
Garoun Investment Bank
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 04:20:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Tarminic 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.
This. Actually defending something at small scale is pretty much impossible as it is. ------------------------------------------------- Mac Graphics Performance Guide <3 my Drones |
Letouk Mernel
Blue Shell Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 04:36:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Neutrino Sunset I do however agree with you that it would be much better if rats behaved like actual ships with regard to AI and especially EWAR. A lot of problems are caused by the fact that the current game mechanics encourage a completely different setup for PvE than for PvP, plus it's very unrealistic and immersion breaking.
However I believe your solution is too radical to be implemented in the short or medium term.
Apologies for the generalizations, you are right.
A good starting point would be to re-tune the missions to take PVP into consideration. It's funny how even the devs keep saying that this is a PVP game, yet a lot of missions are designed with the assumption that you're alone in there figthing the NPCs with no interruptions. Not just reward mechanics (and the fact that mission-critical loot drops in cans lootable by anyone), but they're so hard that if even a T1 frigate PVPer enters and interferes, you're dead.
I don't know...
|
|
William Darkk
Garoun Investment Bank
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 04:43:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Ulstan
Quote: Move all level 4 agents over quality of 0 to lowsec.
Problem solved.
Wouldn't change a thing, and any idiot should be able to see that.
All level 5 agents are in low sec and that hasn't changed much has it?
No, might as well give up making missioning in low sec a viable profession and concentrate on other ways to attract players there. Unless of course you're prepared to advocate some very stiff nerfs to piracy and the ease with which they can scan out and kill mission runners.
Honestly, at this point, anyone who thinks moving level 4 agents to low sec will 'fix' anything is terminally ******** or simply the kind of asswipe who wants to 'force carebears out of hi sec'.
Carebears won't leave hi sec no matter what. You aren't trying to get carebears in low sec you're trying to get people driven by profit in low sec.
Really extending the "deadspace scanner protection" to drones would be a great start on CCP's part. Or something, I know a lot more about being ganked than how the ganking actually works. ------------------------------------------------- Mac Graphics Performance Guide <3 my Drones |
Jesum
Warmongers
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 05:00:00 -
[52]
lvl2 missions with 0+ quality moved to low-sec lvl3 missions moved to the brim of low-sec lvl3 missions with 0+ quality moved to shallow 0.0 lvl4 missions moved to 0.0
Boost mission rewards in material, nerf in isk. Boost low-sec to deep 0.0 mining Move asteroid fields to dynamic places to nerf macroing Add npc invasions to high sec asteroid belts which are easy to escape but hard to tank.
___________ Jesum, CEO of Warmongers: Guns for hire.
|
El'Niaga
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 05:23:00 -
[53]
There is not much you can do to reinvigorate low sec without angering someone.
Adding better ore to the asteroid belts would help attract miners.
Adding better moon minerals to currently unoccupied moons would attract industrialist.
Adding better rats to the belts would attract ratters.
The problem is then the folks in 0.0 complain that you devalue their space.
It would require some massive changes to the game in order to fix the perceived problems, and a major change in the attitudes of players in order to ultimately fix the problems.
|
Neutrino Sunset
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 13:05:00 -
[54]
I've been following all the threads regarding improving lowsec and tbh I haven't seen many posts by 0.0 types complaining that any lowsec boost is an 0.0 nerf. Imo most 0.0 residents either couldn't care less about lowsec, or are at least intelligent enough to appreciate that any changes which help to boost the population there and get carebears out of empire are probably good for the game.
Especially considering that the changes with the most potential to improve the situation do not actually require sustantially boosting the isk generating potential of lowsec (although some minor tweaking of ore and moon quality might not be unreasonable), they instead make possible the utilization of the isk generating potential that all ready exists.
The most vehment opposition to lowsec boosts seem to come primarily from the piebear community in response to any suggestion which attempts to boost lowsec by adding risk/consequences to the currently highly seductive and relatively low risk occupation of camping lowsec gates/stations and ganking the living crap out of every single thing that comes through.
I've heard many piebears repeatedly claim that camping a gate and running away at the first sign of a real threat is taking just as much risk as the guy trying to complete a level 4 mission alone when his agent has just sent him to the arse end of nowhere, or that even though they are -4 sec status no one should be allowed to attack them or defend themselves until the piebears have already engaged and locked them down, or that the bounty system shouldn't be changed into something that actually makes having low sec status have real consequences. Imo these claims are disingenuous, shortsighted and self-indulgent, and the sooner the piebears realise that fixing these issues would actually make their own lives more interesting as well as leveling the playing field for everyone else the better.
|
Lars Lodar
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 13:54:00 -
[55]
Much better rats and low sec unique ores in belts would be a great start. Belt piracy is practically dead in a lot of regions and it's be nice to move some of the combat away from huge gate camps and promote roaming.
Also, have exploration more of an intermediate between 0.0 and high sec. Something challenging enough to use a BC and have fun instead of steamrolling everything.
Also, it'd great to more NPC stations with medicals bays that don't require high standings to set up jump clones.
Stations that can be found through exploration (possibly conquerable) to prevent large station camps.
NPC Pirates that act more dynamically by 'probing' you down if stationary long enough, as well as trying to warp scram and web you.
I know all if it is redundant, but I figured I should show what I support.
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=726733&sid=461337390Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.[/url] Join Blood Corsair's |
AngeFredinauQwertia
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 14:07:00 -
[56]
Want more people in the lowsec?- Make it highsec
You know, to do lvl4 mission solo you need either good skills and t2 equip or faction equip, and if some gang scan you = you are dead and podkilled, and this mean a huge isk\time loss to recover(it is very annoying to fit from the begining.. get all implants\hardwires, searching for cheap equip or go to laggy Jita ). So to solve this:
1. create some more chances to survive in mission-run equipment when ganked (maybe disable to use scrambls, warpdis probes and HD in lowsec, or make it impossible to scan someone in deadspace) or nerf npc, so people don't require rare hi-end stuff (pls dont tell about grouping with other players.. Actually sometimes you just dont have a mood to fly with someone else )
2. create more entrypoint to 0.0 or.. Remove gates at all and equip all ship with a jumpdrive (this is my dream ), so you can get any system that you want, without passing constant-laggy camped systems.
|
Kaleff Orlop
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 14:20:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Neutrino Sunset
I've heard many piebears repeatedly claim that camping a gate and running away at the first sign of a real threat is taking just as much risk as the guy trying to complete a level 4 mission alone when his agent has just sent him to the arse end of nowhere, or that even though they are -4 sec status no one should be allowed to attack them or defend themselves until the piebears have already engaged and locked them down, or that the bounty system shouldn't be changed into something that actually makes having low sec status have real consequences. Imo these claims are disingenuous, shortsighted and self-indulgent, and the sooner the piebears realise that fixing these issues would actually make their own lives more interesting as well as leveling the playing field for everyone else the better.
I completely agree here, pirates currently have all the advantages. The boarder regions aren't profitable enough to pull in the large alliances and cant be owned so pirates have them all to them selves.
However, if you do make them profitable in the same way as 0.0 the alliances will move down and take them and the pirate profesion will die. If you give mission runners and miners the tools to hold them permanantly the pirate profesion dies.
I think most of the posts here have taken this into account and have primaraly focused on rewarding the solo miner and mission runner. The problem still remains that low sec is not for the solo pilot. Sure, you can sneak through in some back sector and go it alone but thats only because the population is as low as it is.
All the changes to Eve so far that are intended to push empire players into low sec have only pushed them out of corp and into solo work (war dec'ing comes to mind). Add to that suicide ganking and you start pushing people out of the game.
Their not going to go to low sec unless they are in a group. Their not going in a group unless it a corp op and their not joining a corp unless their are larger goals to satisfy.
Miners already have this with manufacturing and invention. Mission runners, who would be the back bone of any empire corp force, have no reason to join. Unless a mission runner does manufacturing on the side he has no reason to participate in a corp and in fact is the ONLY one taxed.
In short, if you give mission runners long term group goals that need to be accomplished in boarder regions, not L5's but corperate goals, you will start to see them their. Once their there, you will start to see the miners go too.
|
CampyloBacter
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 14:39:00 -
[58]
Let Mission runners at least have a semi-PvP fitted ship for lo-sec L4 missions- Allow use of a MWD in deadspace.
Make drone-using Lo-sec mission runners less easy to probe-out. IMHO much of the carebears' fear of Lo-sec is as a result of the perception of danger rather than the reality. Increase their sense of security whilst maintaining an element of some risk, then it might not be necessary to vastly change the reward structure. This is why Tarminic's suggestion of an anchorable mining defence module is such a good idea.
|
Jacob Mei
Slacker Industries Limited
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 16:25:00 -
[59]
I think the issue with low sec isnt so much that the rewards arnt worth while but rather the gate camps dont make it worth while. In my opinion gate camping is essentially spawn killing, do it enough and no one is willing to go into that area unless in force. Sure this can be argued that thats the point but then when you look at the demographics of how the population in eve is dispursed you realize that the vast majority of the population stays in high sec and likely rarely if ever goes into low sec simply because of the gate camps.
I dont nessessarly have an answer to the problem however that doesnt essentially turn low sec into high sec (which would be bad) but maybe if they made the turrets around stargates more robust and harder to tank people would be more willing to take the risk of entering low sec if they knew that the moment their ship moved they wouldnt be leaving in a pod.
|
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 17:03:00 -
[60]
Increasing the value of low sec will do little till mechanics are in place to allow a decent go at them. You could put Arkonor in there in quantity and it still would not be worth mining (tally up payments to guards, constantly disrupted ops, lost ships, trying to somehow protect haulers zipping to-and-fro and it is a no go). L5 missions are already low sec only and they are not worth running.
- Deployable shield to protect mining ships (say they cannot warp out of shield while active and can only target roids so combat ships cannot usefully use them).
- NBSI flag for belts (perhaps make it a side effect of the shield). While active no sec hit is taken by anyone on the grid for initiating combat (so guards can be proactive).
- Get people off gate/station camps (how can a hauler support a mining op if the station is camped?). Make it so bubbles can be deployed along warp lanes that pull people out of warp for the pirates to jump. Smart pilots could scan and take alternate routes around the system to get to a destination. Lazy ones will get caught. -------------------------------------------------- "Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |