EVE Search - Let's start with removing hi sec ice to low sec!

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Let's start with removing hi sec ice to low sec!

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Shintai Gallente Balad Naran Orbital Shipyards	Posted - 2008.05.01 22:36:00 - [31] Pretty darn dumb and noobish idea. CLearly not thought trough at all. You would get 0 people moving from highsec. They choose highsec for a reason. Secondly ice products would 5-10x in price. That would be fun for all the jumping capital pilots and POSes. POSes again would increase T2 prices (Both ivention and materials) all around with endless whines. T2 ships would become too costly and you would run around PvPing in T1 ships only. All ice miners->ore miners. And highsec POSes would most likely just go away. Nothing won. Only T2/Capital fleet collapse. And you never fixed a single thing you wanted. Lowsec is for losers that aint brave enough to be in 0.0. Let me give you a counterproposal. Lets remove lowsec instead and divide it between highsec and 0.0. Then all the lowsec whines would go away and only a tiny fraction of the EvE population would be affected. Abstraction and Transcendence: Nature, Shintai, and Geometry
Tarminic Black Flame Industries	Posted - 2008.05.01 22:37:00 - [32] Edited by: Tarminic on 01/05/2008 22:37:46 Originally by: Marcus TheMartin I'm not seeing the point of quitting since a mackinaw requires exhumers II and the required ice refining skills would leave the "homeless" ice miners pretty well of for re specializing in other low skill req highsec ores (see hulk on veld action). Regardless I feel you pulled the 75% out of your ass I'm not saying that 75% of ice miners would quit if ice was moved to low-sec. I'm saying that carebears - of which empire ice miners are a subset - always gravitate activities that: 1. Offer the lowest risk (Most important by far) 2. Offer the highest reward If you remove ice from empire, 75% of those who mined ice in empire would switch to another low-risk, high-reward activity. 25%, at most, would move to low-sec, though I imagine most of them would rather move to 0.0 space instead since the risk is lower there. That 75% would only quit if there was no other low-risk activity. ---------------- Tarminic - 35 Million SP in Forum Warfare Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.81 (Updated 4/8)
Thirzarr	Posted - 2008.05.01 22:41:00 - [33] Originally by: Rachael Ray There would be no demand for new ships/modules if pirates didn't blow them up. Pirates make the game interesting and create a balance in the eve universe. I would even say Pirates are needed in this game to keep the Eve economy active. Actually I am in no way saying that low sec should be changed at all. The gates should be un-campable imho, but thats personal interest ;). Just what the heck makes anyone THINK low sec should be more interesting? As long as there is pvp in it those people who don't go there now wont ever go there because: They don't want to get blown up and do not care about your argument (wich is partially valid even though every small war is more destructive) of large scale economics. Actually the amount of Miners that have to get ruined by pirates to have the same impact as one capital battle... well you get my point. People who don't want to get destroyed by gankers (and no PvE setup in eve has a chance right now) wont show up. Offer them a CNR after every 10 Missions without getting ganked and they get the CNR and go back to highsec.
Zetjur Jilnou Rapid Deployment Industries	Posted - 2008.05.01 22:42:00 - [34] Simple solution really. Instead of removing it, see the difference between empire and 0.0 ice fields - 0.0 has higher yield ice. Simply do the same again - create a lower than normal yield ice and swap high sec to those, with low sec having it as it is now and 0.0 with the high yield.
Tarminic Black Flame Industries	Posted - 2008.05.01 22:44:00 - [35] Edited by: Tarminic on 01/05/2008 22:43:59 Originally by: Zetjur Jilnou Simple solution really. Instead of removing it, see the difference between empire and 0.0 ice fields - 0.0 has higher yield ice. Simply do the same again - create a lower than normal yield ice and swap high sec to those, with low sec having it as it is now and 0.0 with the high yield. See here as to why that won't work. The most important aspect of an empire ice miner/carebear in general is low risk. Unless the risk is lowered, regardless of the reward, nothing will change. ---------------- Tarminic - 35 Million SP in Forum Warfare Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.81 (Updated 4/8)
Enkidu Uruksen	Posted - 2008.05.01 22:46:00 - [36] CCP doesn't want more people working in low sec - over the last nine months the only changes to the situation have been to increase risk to the residents without increasing rewards. Examples: nerfing POS defense, increasing supply-line vulnerability, introducing POS-killing rewards. CCP's goals for low sec are the exact opposite of yours.
Shintai Gallente Balad Naran Orbital Shipyards	Posted - 2008.05.01 22:46:00 - [37] Originally by: Zetjur Jilnou Simple solution really. Instead of removing it, see the difference between empire and 0.0 ice fields - 0.0 has higher yield ice. Simply do the same again - create a lower than normal yield ice and swap high sec to those, with low sec having it as it is now and 0.0 with the high yield. One thing you dont want in EvE is highsec or 0.0 to be completely independent of one another. Abstraction and Transcendence: Nature, Shintai, and Geometry
Marcus TheMartin Gallente Tuxedo.	Posted - 2008.05.01 22:48:00 - [38] Originally by: Tarminic Edited by: Tarminic on 01/05/2008 22:37:46 Originally by: Marcus TheMartin I'm not seeing the point of quitting since a mackinaw requires exhumers II and the required ice refining skills would leave the "homeless" ice miners pretty well of for re specializing in other low skill req highsec ores (see hulk on veld action). Regardless I feel you pulled the 75% out of your ass I'm not saying that 75% of ice miners would quit if ice was moved to low-sec. I'm saying that carebears - of which empire ice miners are a subset - always gravitate activities that: 1. Offer the lowest risk (Most important by far) 2. Offer the highest reward If you remove ice from empire, 75% of those who mined ice in empire would switch to another low-risk, high-reward activity. 25%, at most, would move to low-sec, though I imagine most of them would rather move to 0.0 space instead since the risk is lower there. That 75% would only quit if there was no other low-risk activity. Numbers still being pulled out of your ass Highsec is full of other lowrisk activities your point?
Tarminic Black Flame Industries	Posted - 2008.05.01 22:53:00 - [39] Originally by: Marcus TheMartin Numbers still being pulled out of your ass I think they're relatively accurate. Would you agree to the fact that 75% of those in high-sec remain there due to the low risk more than the high reward? It's not a statistically accurate survey (which would be very difficult to obtain), but it's based on my experience in empire space and low-sec space, of which I have a lot. Quote: Highsec is full of other lowrisk activities your point? Exactly. 75% of those mining ice would move on to other low-risk activities in high-sec. My original statement is regarding what would happen if you removed high-sec space entirely, not high-sec ice. I wasn't suggesting that the removal of high-sec ice would result in 75% of high-sec ice miners quitting. ---------------- Tarminic - 35 Million SP in Forum Warfare Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.81 (Updated 4/8)
David Flavius Gallente	Posted - 2008.05.01 22:53:00 - [40] ok pardon the new guy but why is it safer in 0.0 space then low sec?
Nicholai Stropkov Article 58	Posted - 2008.05.01 22:56:00 - [41] Originally by: David Flavius ok pardon the new guy but why is it safer in 0.0 space then low sec? 0.0 alliances are like mafia. they protect their members and their territory
Diek Ran Amarr Autonums	Posted - 2008.05.01 22:56:00 - [42] Originally by: Tarminic The most important aspect of an empire ice miner/carebear in general is low risk. Unless the risk is lowered, regardless of the reward, nothing will change. People can lower thier mining risk by working together effectively. But as soon as they're able to do so they're moving to 0.0. And there's also not much that could make lowsec attractive to 0.0 habitants. So lowsec stays empty. Would be different if there was one resource that can be exclusively found in low sec. But I'd like to see the exclusiveness of raw materials more bound to a particular area rather than to a particular system security level, because the latter is kind of a "meta-game-creation-stategy".
Marcus TheMartin Gallente Tuxedo.	Posted - 2008.05.01 22:56:00 - [43] Originally by: Gridwalker Originally by: callisthenes excelsior This thread explores the idea that to improve low sec, low sec needs better rewards as well as players need to move from hi sec to populate low sec. The problem is, what is your definition of "improving" low sec? And why do players have to move from hi sec in order to do it? Quote: 1) remove ALL hi sec ice Ah, I see what your definition of "improve" is. Easy mackinaw kills to pad your kill mails. Quote: 2) seed more good 0.0 ice in low sec--remember some low sec ALREADY has dark glitter 3) debate--what would the effects be and would it be a step in the right direction or solution The effects would be, macros would stop mining ice and mine more hi sec ore. For the macros, it is a business. They're not playing for fun, so they have no emotional attachment to their equipment. It is merely an issue of cost analysis for them. For the non-macros, they will simply switch to mining hi sec ore. Honestly, even if mercoxit were in low sec, no one would move there from hi sec just to mine it. The pirates will know where it is, will know where the miners are, and their largely defenseless mining ships will get insta-popped. Heck, we wouldn't even be able to warp into those systems. And there lies the problem. There is nothing that will get people to go from hi-sec into low-sec... NOTHING... short of vastly reducing the risk for entering low-sec. As a pirate, that certainly isn't what you want. If you want more targets, why don't you go into 0.0 space and look for them there? -Grid In order to improve lowsec you must take something from another place. Highsec has those things by removing it ice from highsec the value increases (along with all effected ice using products). With it being in lowsec it becomes impossible for bots to mine (effectively) but possible for corps to run. "Ah, I see what your definition of "improve" is. Easy mackinaw kills to pad your kill mails." callisthenes excelsior has a 3.1 sec status and his corp doesn't have a public killboard also see Strawman how do you know what will make people leave highsec for the badlands are you the voice of the people? The collective unconscious of the highsec playerbase? please inform me of your scources
Wendat Huron Stellar Solutions	Posted - 2008.05.01 23:01:00 - [44] OP needs to be war declared by a 10 times larger outfit. These forums are FUBAR, upgrade this decade!
Marcus TheMartin Gallente Tuxedo.	Posted - 2008.05.01 23:03:00 - [45] Edited by: Marcus TheMartin on 01/05/2008 23:03:42 Originally by: Tarminic Originally by: Marcus TheMartin Numbers still being pulled out of your ass I think they're relatively accurate. Would you agree to the fact that 75% of those in high-sec remain there due to the low risk more than the high reward? It's not a statistically accurate survey (which would be very difficult to obtain), but it's based on my experience in empire space and low-sec space, of which I have a lot. Quote: Highsec is full of other lowrisk activities your point? Exactly. 75% of those mining ice would move on to other low-risk activities in high-sec. My original statement is regarding what would happen if you removed high-sec space entirely, not high-sec ice. I wasn't suggesting that the removal of high-sec ice would result in 75% of high-sec ice miners quitting. Is accuracy based on a guess still accuracy? Removing ice from highsec will move miners to veld but will make the asset all the more valuable since it is now only available in non concord protected zones Originally by: Wendat Huron OP needs to be war declared by a 10 times larger outfit. Whats to stop them from dropping corp and reforming over and over?
Thirzarr	Posted - 2008.05.01 23:05:00 - [46] How hard is it to grasp that quite a lot of people just dont want to pvp? The alternative to having nothing to achieve in high-sec is NOT moving to low, its quitting the game. And no possible "reward" will make anyone volunteer for the victim-role.
Tarminic Black Flame Industries	Posted - 2008.05.01 23:06:00 - [47] Edited by: Tarminic on 01/05/2008 23:14:36 Originally by: Marcus TheMartin "Ah, I see what your definition of "improve" is. Easy mackinaw kills to pad your kill mails." callisthenes excelsior has a 3.1 sec status and his corp doesn't have a public killboard also see Strawman I don't think that's a strawman, just a poor assumption. Pirates aren't hiding the fact that the reason they want low-sec improved is so more people will go there, giving them more opportunities to engage in combat. I also think a number of pirates are less interested in combat in the traditional sense and more interested in earning ISK/prestige through easy kills. Originally by: Marcus TheMartin Is accuracy based on a guess still accuracy? Removing ice from highsec will move miners to veld but will make the asset all the more valuable since it is now only available in non concord protected zones Firstly: I've spent a lot of time in a high-sec corp, and I assume that the behavior I witnessed is relatively normal for a high-sec industrial corp, which matches the carebear definition I've been using. Their primary motivation for playing was setting goals for themselves and the corporation and accomplishing them. Most of those goals involved accumulating wealth and industrial power, and those goals would be hindered by the high-risk of low-sec. Also: CCP has increased the rewards for non-combat low-sec activities specifically designed to appeal to the industry-minded players (carebears). These improvements have had little success in drawing carebears to low-security space. Therefore I believe that low risk and not high reward is the most important factor for carebears. Therefore the reward for low-sec is irrelevant to high-sec players. If it became valuable enough to make up for the risks (which would be very high), players from 0.0 would utilize them first because they are less risk-adverse. ---------------- Tarminic - 35 Million SP in Forum Warfare Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.81 (Updated 4/8)
Marcus TheMartin Gallente Tuxedo.	Posted - 2008.05.01 23:06:00 - [48] Edited by: Marcus TheMartin on 01/05/2008 23:08:44 Edited by: Marcus TheMartin on 01/05/2008 23:08:34 Originally by: Nicholai Stropkov Originally by: Marcus TheMartin 5 and 7 how do you know? because i can see further than the end of my nose No what you are doing is guessing Originally by: Thirzarr How hard is it to grasp that quite a lot of people just dont want to pvp? The alternative to having nothing to achieve in high-sec is NOT moving to low, its quitting the game. And no possible "reward" will make anyone volunteer for the victim-role. Who says they are victims who says they aren't a corp that actually thought things out instead of let me just wander around by myself and run into the others who have become team players how do you know what reward want attract who?
Victor Forge Amarr	Posted - 2008.05.01 23:16:00 - [49] Originally by: Marcus TheMartin how do you know what will make people leave highsec for the badlands are you the voice of the people? The collective unconscious of the highsec playerbase? please inform me of your scources If lvl 5 complexes and lvl 4 quality 20 missions are not doing the trick, why do you think Ice will get people to leave High-sec? The problem is that the risk is close to 0.0 sec but the rewards are much worse. Are you saying that lower risks will get people to stay in High-sec even more than they are today? Please inform me of the sources saying that!
Jack Jombardo Amarr	Posted - 2008.05.01 23:22:00 - [50] Originally by: callisthenes excelsior This thread explores the idea that to improve low sec, low sec needs better rewards as well as players need to move from hi sec to populate low sec. 1) remove ALL hi sec ice 2) seed more good 0.0 ice in low sec--remember some low sec ALREADY has dark glitter 3) debate--what would the effects be and would it be a step in the right direction or solution 1) ignore this **** 2) remove 99% of all wannabe lowsec Pirates 3) problem solved
Marcus TheMartin Gallente Tuxedo.	Posted - 2008.05.01 23:24:00 - [51] Originally by: Jack Jombardo Originally by: callisthenes excelsior This thread explores the idea that to improve low sec, low sec needs better rewards as well as players need to move from hi sec to populate low sec. 1) remove ALL hi sec ice 2) seed more good 0.0 ice in low sec--remember some low sec ALREADY has dark glitter 3) debate--what would the effects be and would it be a step in the right direction or solution 1) ignore this **** 2) remove 99% of all wannabe lowsec Pirates 3) problem solved What are the criteria of a real pirate the crime and punishment forums need to know.
Enkidu Uruksen Wakizashi Renaissance	Posted - 2008.05.01 23:28:00 - [52] Originally by: Enkidu Uruksen CCP doesn't want more people working in low sec - over the last nine months the only changes to the situation have been to increase risk to the residents without increasing rewards. Examples: nerfing POS defense, increasing supply-line vulnerability, introducing POS-killing rewards. CCP's goals for low sec are the exact opposite of yours. Forgot to mention another bit of evidence: CCP made it easier to scan down mission runners... that dramatically reduced the population in Aeschee, which has a fat handful of 4/20 agents. More increased risk with no offsetting increase in reward.
Samira Melina	Posted - 2008.05.01 23:28:00 - [53] Originally by: callisthenes excelsior players need to move from hi sec to populate low sec. Sounds like your need, not theirs.
Jack Jombardo Amarr	Posted - 2008.05.01 23:32:00 - [54] Edited by: Jack Jombardo on 01/05/2008 23:32:57 Originally by: Tarminic Pirates aren't hiding the fact that the reason they want low-sec improved is so more people will go there, giving them more opportunities to engage in combat. I also think a number of pirates are less interested in combat in the traditional sense and more interested in earning ISK/prestige through easy kills. But they ignore, that there victims have SERO fun beeing ganged all the time. Becouse of this little fact CCP could place pure-ISK-belts to lowsec and there wouldn't be more miners/missionrunners there. Btw. More non-priates => more wannabe pirates => non-pirates leave again => more whining wannabe Pirates It's 100% sensles to add more "reward" if the security isn't tuched in any way. - Better defens for miner/hauler - same modul need for PvM as for PvP (ECM etc) - beeing allowed to kill ANY negativ secure or player with bounty without beeing concordonged - remove insurence if concordonged! - let me scan cloackers!!! (cloacked BS? LOL!!!) Hell, they call them selve "Pirates" ... why aren't we allowed to assist the concord as headhunters? We should gain hugh standings with concord by killing these bastards!
Marcus TheMartin Gallente Tuxedo.	Posted - 2008.05.01 23:39:00 - [55] Originally by: Enkidu Uruksen Originally by: Enkidu Uruksen CCP doesn't want more people working in low sec - over the last nine months the only changes to the situation have been to increase risk to the residents without increasing rewards. Examples: nerfing POS defense, increasing supply-line vulnerability, introducing POS-killing rewards. CCP's goals for low sec are the exact opposite of yours. Forgot to mention another bit of evidence: CCP made it easier to scan down mission runners... that dramatically reduced the population in Aeschee, which has a fat handful of 4/20 agents. More increased risk with no offsetting increase in reward. Some times you'll find things by reading inbetween the lines in this case you found a bunch of line breaks that you are filling in with your brilliant theory. Your first example: POS changes = We don't want you in lowsec because your pos can now die? POS's were always killable I'm not seeing what you are getting at. Your Second example: The Scanner changes whilst making things incredibly easy was needed due to the fact that probes scanned 2 dimensionally leaving unprobable zones due to the positioning of dead space pockets on the z axis. The change affected all ships not just mission runners
Marcus TheMartin Gallente Tuxedo.	Posted - 2008.05.01 23:42:00 - [56] Originally by: Jack Jombardo But they ignore, that there victims have SERO fun beeing ganged all the time. Becouse of this little fact CCP could place pure-ISK-belts to lowsec and there wouldn't be more miners/missionrunners there. Btw. More non-priates => more wannabe pirates => non-pirates leave again => more whining wannabe Pirates It's 100% sensles to add more "reward" if the security isn't tuched in any way. - Better defens for miner/hauler - same modul need for PvM as for PvP (ECM etc) - beeing allowed to kill ANY negativ secure or player with bounty without beeing concordonged - remove insurence if concordonged! - let me scan cloackers!!! (cloacked BS? LOL!!!) Hell, they call them selve "Pirates" ... why aren't we allowed to assist the concord as headhunters? We should gain hugh standings with concord by killing these bastards! 1.Prove it 2.What is a real pirate? 3.The addition of reward is the reason for the lower security increased security would mean lower rewards.
Tarminic Black Flame Industries	Posted - 2008.05.01 23:44:00 - [57] Edited by: Tarminic on 01/05/2008 23:47:58 Quit ignoring me marcus. ---------------- (Forgot to pay my sub, back in a few days! ) Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.81 (Updated 4/8)
Enkidu Uruksen Wakizashi Renaissance	Posted - 2008.05.01 23:56:00 - [58] Originally by: Marcus TheMartin Originally by: Enkidu Uruksen CCP doesn't want more people working in low sec - ... increase risk to the residents without increasing rewards. Examples: nerfing POS defense, increasing supply-line vulnerability, introducing POS-killing rewards. ... Forgot to mention another bit of evidence: CCP made it easier to scan down mission runners... that dramatically reduced the population in Aeschee, which has a fat handful of 4/20 agents. More increased risk with no offsetting increase in reward. Some times you'll find things by reading inbetween the lines in this case you found a bunch of line breaks that you are filling in with your brilliant theory. Your first example: POS changes = We don't want you in lowsec because your pos can now die? POS's were always killable I'm not seeing what you are getting at. Your Second example: The Scanner changes whilst making things incredibly easy was needed due to the fact that probes scanned 2 dimensionally leaving unprobable zones due to the positioning of dead space pockets on the z axis. The change affected all ships not just mission runners My first point: Yes, POS were killable before. CCP made changes in the last 9 months to make it easy (moving guns outside the shield, nerfing automatic defense); fast (halving the strontium clathrate time); and profitable (POS-killers can now unanchor and scoop modules). In addition, the introduction of HICs significantly changed the risk of supplying a low-sec POS and transporting its products. That's all on one side of the equation. On scanning: yes, the changes make it easier to scan all ships, not just mission runners. It does make it easier to scan mission runners, making low-sec mission-running less appealing. What's your point? Are you saying that I shouldn't assume CCP knew what the result of these changes would be? Do you think they don't have the risk/reward discussion when they introduce new features?
Marcus TheMartin Gallente Tuxedo.	Posted - 2008.05.02 00:02:00 - [59] Originally by: Tarminic Edited by: Tarminic on 01/05/2008 23:14:36 Originally by: Marcus TheMartin "Ah, I see what your definition of "improve" is. Easy mackinaw kills to pad your kill mails." callisthenes excelsior has a 3.1 sec status and his corp doesn't have a public killboard also see Strawman I don't think that's a strawman, just a poor assumption. Pirates aren't hiding the fact that the reason they want low-sec improved is so more people will go there, giving them more opportunities to engage in combat. I also think a number of pirates are less interested in combat in the traditional sense and more interested in earning ISK/prestige through easy kills. Originally by: Marcus TheMartin Is accuracy based on a guess still accuracy? Removing ice from highsec will move miners to veld but will make the asset all the more valuable since it is now only available in non concord protected zones Firstly: I've spent a lot of time in a high-sec corp, and I assume that the behavior I witnessed is relatively normal for a high-sec industrial corp, which matches the carebear definition I've been using. Their primary motivation for playing was setting goals for themselves and the corporation and accomplishing them. Most of those goals involved accumulating wealth and industrial power, and those goals would be hindered by the high-risk of low-sec. Also: CCP has increased the rewards for non-combat low-sec activities specifically designed to appeal to the industry-minded players (carebears). These improvements have had little success in drawing carebears to low-security space. Therefore I believe that low risk and not high reward is the most important factor for carebears. Therefore the reward for low-sec is irrelevant to high-sec players. If it became valuable enough to make up for the risks (which would be very high), players from 0.0 would utilize them first because they are less risk-adverse. by industrial themed additions to lowsec do you mean exploration?
Tarminic Black Flame Industries	Posted - 2008.05.02 00:06:00 - [60] Edited by: Tarminic on 02/05/2008 00:06:05 Originally by: Marcus TheMartin by industrial themed additions to lowsec do you mean exploration? I should have said industrial/carebear. Additions to low-sec include, but are not limited to: 1. Exploration content much better than available in high-sec 2. Synthetic booster production 3. Level 5 missions 4. Higher-quality level 4 mission agents 2 and 3 are completely exclusive to low-sec with no noticeable effects. And when people complain about why they suck, the argument is always that they're not rewarding enough for the risk. If you improve the reward to greater than what is in 0.0, all that would happen is that pilots from 0.0 would take them over, not high-sec players. ---------------- (Forgot to pay my sub, back in a few days! ) Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.81 (Updated 4/8)

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 :: 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.