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)
Marcus TheMartin Gallente Tuxedo.	Posted - 2008.05.02 09:05:00 - [91] Originally by: Galen Brustar Originally by: Rachael Ray Originally by: Yuki Santara This sounds to me like thugs arguing there should be more incentive for businessmen to travel the lawless parts of town, so there is more prey to be robbed. But if there was more money to be made in the lawless parts of town the businessmen would flock there. You can't really draw a comparison with Eve and real life with this argument. Except that there is even more money to be made moving "business" to the third world(0 sec), where there are no regulations and they can get away with anything they want. You forget that any places worth setting up an operation in 0.0 will get you curb stomped by the resident alliances if you feel the need to do your own thing
Marcus TheMartin Gallente Tuxedo.	Posted - 2008.05.02 09:12:00 - [92] Originally by: Rachael Ray Quote: Except that there is even more money to be made moving "business" to the third world(0 sec), where there are no regulations and they can get away with anything they want. True 0.0 offers many opportunities to make money, but you're creating an anology between 0.0 and third world countries is pure asinine. Would you move to Vietnam because of the numerous opportunities to make money there or stay in High-sec USA? USA USA USA!
Fifth Horseman	Posted - 2008.05.02 09:19:00 - [93] Can't CCP just introduce some "rats", that look like player accounts, jump them into the gate camps in t1 fitted drakes. Very low AI required for a drake. Fires all missiles, dies. Then swears in local just before it gets pod killed. The Counterstrike camper gets his adrenaline "rush", something more than the shuttles and empty haulers he has to pop all night long, and we just get less of this whiney "I killed lowsec, YOU fix it" crap.
Marcus TheMartin Gallente Tuxedo.	Posted - 2008.05.02 09:35:00 - [94] Originally by: Fifth Horseman Can't CCP just introduce some "rats", that look like player accounts, jump them into the gate camps in t1 fitted drakes. Very low AI required for a drake. Fires all missiles, dies. Then swears in local just before it gets pod killed. The Counterstrike camper gets his adrenaline "rush", something more than the shuttles and empty haulers he has to pop all night long, and we just get less of this whiney "I killed lowsec, YOU fix it" crap. You are a constructive poster and quite possibly the most badass person on the internet naming one of your characters after something dangerous and exciting my hats off to you.
Fifth Horseman	Posted - 2008.05.02 09:49:00 - [95] Originally by: Marcus TheMartin You are a constructive poster and quite possibly the most badass person on the internet naming one of your characters after something dangerous and exciting my hats off to you. It's not about making a name for myself, it's to get a solution that benefits everybody.
Marcus TheMartin Gallente Tuxedo.	Posted - 2008.05.02 09:57:00 - [96] Originally by: Fifth Horseman Originally by: Marcus TheMartin You are a constructive poster and quite possibly the most badass person on the internet naming one of your characters after something dangerous and exciting my hats off to you. It's not about making a name for myself, it's to get a solution that benefits everybody. Your solution is giving PvE to the PvP crowd and has nothing to do with reasons saying why ice should or shouldn't be in highesc
Fifth Horseman	Posted - 2008.05.02 10:07:00 - [97] Edited by: Fifth Horseman on 02/05/2008 10:08:37 Originally by: Marcus TheMartin Your solution is giving PvE to the PvP crowd and has nothing to do with reasons saying why ice should or shouldn't be in highesc Firstly, they wouldn't necessarily know it was actually PvE thus keeping their Tears Ratio/Ego/E-peen/whatever up. And secondly, calling for ice to be removed from hisec has NOTHING to do with removing ice from hi sec. It's just another "waaaah I over fished lowsec into a desolate wasteland" whining all over again. So, it still stands. PS, you forgot the eyeroll.
El'Niaga Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2008.05.02 10:21:00 - [98] 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. Bad idea. This will not cause them to move to low sec. Nerfing areas seldom works. Removing gameplay elements only angers people and causes them to leave games. 2. This actually is a good idea and might attract some into low sec. By providing a higher value item you attract them there. The problem of 0.0/low/hi populations is far more dynamic than you think. Removing or nerfing hi sec will not ever move more people to low sec or 0.0, at best it'll have no result at worst folks will leave EVE. Low sec needs the ore/ice available made more valuable while not taking anything from hi sec. At the same time missions in low sec need to have a danger pay compponent where they pay more money than the same mission in Hi Sec. (For example Gone Berserk is normally around 350k pay and 350k bonus. Leave it that for high sec and boost by 50% for low sec). 0.0 requires more than just coding changes it requires a change in the attitudes of players. If you want more people there you have to stop shooting them as they try to get there. 0.0's greatest problem is the lack of infrastructure to support even a moderate sized population while at the same time the predominately NBSI policy of almost every 0.0 alliance (there are a couple of exceptions but not many).
Drizit Amarr	Posted - 2008.05.02 10:22:00 - [99] Originally by: Tarminic If you want people to move to low-sec that means lowering the RISK. As much as you pirates might not like it, this leaves us with limited options: 1. Make it easier for carebears to avoid being ganked 2. Make it harder for pirates to gank carebears 3. Make it easier for anti-pirates to protect carebears from ganking Nothing else will have a significant impact on low-sec population. I have to agree with you. Lowsec is supposed to be a halfway move between highsec and 0.0 and the rewards are not nearly as good as 0.0 to reflect this. However, the risks are far greater in lowsec than in most 0.0 areas which means the risk/reward ratio is way out of balance. This is one of the primary reasons for the lack of enthusiasm for lowsec. To the OP: Moving highsec ice to lowsec will not cause players to move there, it just means less resources in highsec and more empty roid belts. Eventually, newer players will quit due to lack of isk to buy skillbooks and ships etc for their characters. If they are forced into lowsec and find that the rewards do not cover the loss of ships and stuff, they will quit even faster. Some may prefer less players but since this is CCP's income, the patches, new shinies and server upgrades rely on this income to allow us to play a better game. Instead of trying to find ways to FORCE people into lowsec, why not try to find ways of limiting the risk to entice them to go there willingly? Make it possible to actually earn an income in lowsec rather than losing isk faster than you can make it and it becomes a viable place to live. It's time CCP understood that, although this is a MMO, there are still solo players. Those who prefer not to rely on others to keep them safe as there are more cowards in this game than there are real players. It wouldn't be the first time I have teamed up only to find my team mates bailed when it got too hot, leaving me to face a lowsec gate camp alone. I lost a ship and pod as well on one occasion but in highsec, I can't even pop and pod my teammates to say thankyou to them for it. Although I am in a corp and alliance, I will often go it alone because my trust in others has been severely crushed.
Jack Jombardo Amarr	Posted - 2008.05.02 12:38:00 - [100] Originally by: Gridwalker Originally by: Tarminic The problem is that there are too many people in high-sec and not enough people in low-sec. Can someone just explain WHY this is an actual "problem"? I have yet to hear a compelling reason why people who play in hi-sec need to play in lo-sec. -Grid There isn't any problem except all these wannabe Pirates have no sheeps they can farm ... erm, Victims they can gang ... erm, get no good fights .... args, sorry, they don't like good fights, just sheeps
caladron prime Caldari	Posted - 2008.05.02 13:13:00 - [101] I am relatively new to non-empire life, having made the move to 0.0 for many of my efforts. The only time I spend in low-sec, is the time it takes to jump from there to 0.0 when flying in or cyno-ing, and none when clone jumping. This thread is a rant for more fodder for low-sec grammar school bullies. The reason why 0.0 is safer is because it is player-policed. Alliances and corps, regardless of affiliation, protect and govern their space effectively and ruthlessly. In low-sec, pirates have the best of both worlds-choke points for a target rich environment, and freedom from fear of reprisal. You could put a 99% off Gold plated Titan sale in low sec, and I am not going. Moving ice to low sec just sets another bear trap for the pirates. I always thought that piracy was activity with disregard for the rules and laws. Why, then, do pirates constantly want to have the rules changed to endorse and buff piracy? Pirate-life us SUPPOSED to be a tough, high risk, unpredictable reward activity, and the 'good' pirates that I have run into are in it for the thrill and the lifestyle, not for the reward. This type of suggestion would ony serve to help out the gank-rates, and I would hope that true pirates would reject this kind of idea as an insult to their way of life.
Silvana Kor'ah Minmatar	Posted - 2008.05.02 13:14:00 - [102] The problem i see with ICE fields are the macro miners. Just look at the caldari high sec ice fields. 20 to 40 Hulks and Makinaws in a single belt. All in NPC corp and with soundfull names like "mike2508", "river6", "gala54" and so on. No haulers, just a going and coming every few minutes ... Something has to be done, but i doubt that low sec is the ultimate solution.
Kazuo Ishiguro House of Marbles Zzz	Posted - 2008.05.02 13:30:00 - [103] I think that in a modified form, the idea in the OP might be interesting. What if the composition of starbase fuel were changed to include at least 1 type of NPC goods available only in low sec? Expanding on this idea, what if there was a medium-value low sec-only equivalent of Morphite that was vital for the production of popular items? Also, I'd suggest allowing trade in contraband in low sec.
Anaalys Fluuterby Caldari	Posted - 2008.05.02 13:37:00 - [104] I think someone missed the repeated comments from the Devs that they were not going to "force" anyone into LowSec.... I also think that a few players really don't understand the economic impact of heavily restricting POS fuel supplies Moving Ice to LowSec means it won't be mined in near enough supply; as "proof" I will just point that ice prices have DOUBLED since the Jihadswarm started. Just think what happens when all the ice in the universe is available only in a dozen systems in LowSec. I doubt the good Dr. and his spreadsheets is going to think its a good idea As for the "What about all the POSs I already see there" crowd, well there isn't a lot of production coming out of them as can be evidenced by the moon material market.
Shintai Gallente Balad Naran Orbital Shipyards	Posted - 2008.05.02 13:43:00 - [105] Originally by: Kazuo Ishiguro I think that in a modified form, the idea in the OP might be interesting. What if the composition of starbase fuel were changed to include at least 1 type of NPC goods available only in low sec? Expanding on this idea, what if there was a medium-value low sec-only equivalent of Morphite that was vital for the production of popular items? Also, I'd suggest allowing trade in contraband in low sec. The NPC goods or even if made outside would just be flown in via huge convoys like moon materials.
New Hampshire Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2008.05.02 14:19:00 - [106] The entire reason many players stick to high sec is because there's so many ways to die in low sec that it's to a degree a matter of luck. Never mind the bubbles in 0.0, the heavy interdictors in low sec is what I'm talking about. You want to get from point A to point B as a solo player? If you run into a pirate gang with one of those things, there's little if anything you can do. That's a tough thing to take, and in my view a MAJOR balance issue. I don't care what you put in low sec, as long as getting ganked there is assured from nothing more than being in the wrong place at the wrong time, then peope will stay away from it. Start taking stuff out of high sec, and you WONT'T have the carebears running into low sec - you'll have them leaving the game.
Malcanis R.E.C.O.N. Insurgency	Posted - 2008.05.02 14:30:00 - [107] Edited by: Malcanis on 02/05/2008 14:30:26 Originally by: Anaalys Fluuterby I think someone missed the repeated comments from the Devs that they were not going to "force" anyone into LowSec.... I also think that a few players really don't understand the economic impact of heavily restricting POS fuel supplies Moving Ice to LowSec means it won't be mined in near enough supply; as "proof" I will just point that ice prices have DOUBLED since the Jihadswarm started. Just think what happens when all the ice in the universe is available only in a dozen systems in LowSec. I doubt the good Dr. and his spreadsheets is going to think its a good idea As for the "What about all the POSs I already see there" crowd, well there isn't a lot of production coming out of them as can be evidenced by the moon material market. Ice prices have doubled, you say?! GOD BLESS YOU GOONS!
Anaalys Fluuterby Caldari	Posted - 2008.05.02 14:32:00 - [108] Originally by: Malcanis Ice prices have doubled, you say?! GOD BLESS YOU GOONS! Yep, which just makes it more profitable for macros to mine ice...... God bless the Goons for contributing to the problem
Malcanis R.E.C.O.N. Insurgency	Posted - 2008.05.02 14:34:00 - [109] Edited by: Malcanis on 02/05/2008 14:35:49 Originally by: New Hampshire The entire reason many players stick to high sec is because there's so many ways to die in low sec that it's to a degree a matter of luck. Never mind the bubbles in 0.0, the heavy interdictors in low sec is what I'm talking about. You want to get from point A to point B as a solo player? If you run into a pirate gang with one of those things, there's little if anything you can do. That's a tough thing to take, and in my view a MAJOR balance issue. I don't care what you put in low sec, as long as getting ganked there is assured from nothing more than being in the wrong place at the wrong time, then peope will stay away from it. Start taking stuff out of high sec, and you WONT'T have the carebears running into low sec - you'll have them leaving the game. There are also plenty of ways to live. I found lo-sec a relaxing place compared to, say, a 0.0 region that alliances are actively fighting over. Fly as a corp, not solo, set up intel channels with other corps, learn the difference between 0.0 fits and tactics and lo-sec fits and tactics. If you can fly a covops (and really, who can't?), then travelling is a breeze. The main disincentive to living there is that the rewards are low (terrible ore, puny rats) or inappropriate (missions exactly like those in hi-sec, mandating a non-PvP fit). If ice prices doubled or trebled, and ice was only available in lo-sec, then I think that many corps would certainly consider setting up in lo-sec. You can make reasonably good ISK ice-mining at the moment; triple that figure and the ISK will be too good to ignore - in fact it would probably be the most lucrative profession of all.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2008.05.02 14:36:00 - [110] Originally by: Rachael Ray Originally by: Thirzarr If you want to have Mission-Runners, Haulers and Miners in Low-Sec there is ONE... and only that ONE SOLUTION: Remove the Pirates, Gankers and Campers Thats it. No more. No less. 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. To cite good Marcus : Prove that. How much ships are destroyed by pirates, how much by 0.0 combat, how much by errors in missions and how much by suicide gankers? I suspect that you will find that pirates are at the 3 position from most ship destroyed to least, not at the first position.
Malcanis R.E.C.O.N. Insurgency	Posted - 2008.05.02 14:42:00 - [111] Originally by: Venkul Mul Originally by: Rachael Ray Originally by: Thirzarr If you want to have Mission-Runners, Haulers and Miners in Low-Sec there is ONE... and only that ONE SOLUTION: Remove the Pirates, Gankers and Campers Thats it. No more. No less. 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. To cite good Marcus : Prove that. How much ships are destroyed by pirates, how much by 0.0 combat, how much by errors in missions and how much by suicide gankers? I suspect that you will find that pirates are at the 3 position from most ship destroyed to least, not at the first position. A lot of 0.0 combat would be called piracy if it occurred outside of 0.0. In 0.0 of course, if we gank a hauler full of zydrine or T2, we're "disrupting the enemy's economy" or perhaps "interdicting their supply lines" - and we have the security status to prove it!
Gridwalker Amarr	Posted - 2008.05.02 14:48:00 - [112] Originally by: Marcus TheMartin Originally by: Dragons Talon Originally by: Gridwalker Originally by: Tarminic The problem is that there are too many people in high-sec and not enough people in low-sec. Can someone just explain WHY this is an actual "problem"? I have yet to hear a compelling reason why people who play in hi-sec need to play in lo-sec. -Grid There are none, unless you (A) like getting podded, or (B) like pretending to be a pirate. There is no reason because you have everything you need to survive in highsec You're not answering my question. All you're doing is repeating WHY I _CAN_ stay in hi sec. Tell me why YOU _WANT_ ME in lo sec? Give me just one compelling reason why you feel that I should be compelled or required to spend time in lo sec? -Grid
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2008.05.02 14:58:00 - [113] Originally by: Marcus TheMartin several posts Marcus, you know exactly how untankable is a mining barge or even an exumer against a player driven ship. A pirate can warp in a belt at 100 km, kill the target and warp away before the defenders can engage him effectively (i.e. scrambling and webbing him) and before the barge warp away, especially if the target is ice mining, where stopping the cycle mean losing all the work and the specialized ship is paper thin. In low sec a competent and large defending force can get revenge but can't defend a miner. In 0.0 a competent force will be guarding the gates and can protect the ice miner. So ice mining in low sec is rarely done, and only in those few system that can be secured like 0.0 systems. Removing ice belts from high sec would not move the ice miners in low sec, those interested in getting isk ice mining will enter 0.0 alliances were they can be protected and do their trade there. The others will change activity.
Lt Angus Caldari Wicked Crew	Posted - 2008.05.02 15:20:00 - [114] Edited by: Lt Angus on 02/05/2008 15:20:51 I love the idea, game needs more powerhouse industry corps controlling needed resources, maybe should reduce the amount of ice fields by a bit too, In high sec the industry corps have no need to join forces with combat pilots but this could lead to some great co-op operations with hopfully big payouts.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2008.05.02 15:30:00 - [115] Originally by: Shadow Joy Originally by: Tarminic ... 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. I disagree with this assessment. I think the problem is that perceived risk versus the perceived reward is too small. As an example, say that you have a cruiser that costs 6 million. You know there is an opportunity for a quick 3 million ISK profit in low sec. Would you take that gamble if you thought you would be blown up 60% of the time you tried for the prize? Now if that potential profit was 12 million, I believe most people would at least be willing to take an occasional shot. Most people take an occasional shot to low sec, what the OP, most pirates and other assorted people want is that they become permanent residents and that is what most high sec dwellers don't want. More that the "risk" it is the need to be constantly on alert. I game to relax and that include going to low sec if I am of the right humor and want to risk some combat or explore for better rewards, ecc., what I am not interested in is to have to look behind my back every 30 seconds, check the bio of every player entering system, scanning for probes, ecc. when I am not of the right humor to do that. So I take a occasional shot to low sec but will not live there. And for sure will not mine ice there.
Roy Batty68 Caldari Immortal Dead	Posted - 2008.05.02 15:33:00 - [116] Edited by: Roy Batty68 on 02/05/2008 15:34:31 Originally by: Gridwalker Give me just one compelling reason why you feel that I should be compelled or required to spend time in lo sec? -Grid I know you were addressing someone else, but... You should feel compelled to go to lowsec by the allure of better isk making opportunities. Same goes for 0.0. There should be an obvious scale of "where to go to get rich" as a theme that is proportional to the amount of risk you face. I think that's broke at the moment. What broke it were: - drone regions - scan probing made insanely easier - hp buff w/o commensurately harder missions + salvage addition to mission payout - changes to POS's for 0.0 people kind of screwing small timers in lowsec - a few other things which made isk making trivial versus the lowering of "cost of living" thanks to invention This doesn't have anything to do with the OP as I don't really support his view. But you asked why you should feel compelled. The lines have blurred over time and there's no longer the obvious draws imo. I think there is a dynamic mechanism that is somehow missing from the game. As if there should be a cost of living index that is constantly computed and this would drive such things as mission rewards, ice and ore spawn rates, exploration site types, datacore costs, etc. That mechanism isn't there and, as a concept, has been overtaken over time by changes to the game that have had adverse effects to the balance of risk/reward when compared to the system security scale. I think the differences in reward are still there. I think they just aren't as pronounced as they used to be. Hence why Average Joe doesn't really feel compelled to brave it. /shrug And this is coming from a guy who doesn't really want you in lowsec. I like the empty systems. Stay the hell out imo.
Una D Ex Coelis	Posted - 2008.05.02 15:34:00 - [117] Originally by: Silvana Kor'ah The problem i see with ICE fields are the macro miners. Just look at the caldari high sec ice fields. 20 to 40 Hulks and Makinaws in a single belt. All in NPC corp and with soundfull names like "mike2508", "river6", "gala54" and so on. No haulers, just a going and coming every few minutes ... Something has to be done, but i doubt that low sec is the ultimate solution. That is easy. Force players out of the NPC corps. Just make it so they can't do anything useful in them (no using barges, no criminal acts, no missions above L2, no going to 0.0). That will force the farmers in to player created corps. Than you just make the timer to jump corporation 48+ hours and war decc them. Players get PvP, police the macros and everybody is happy (except for the fact that prices would go up quite a bit).
Thornorn	Posted - 2008.05.02 15:39:00 - [118] All I read out of this post is force force force players to low sec. what wrong..you running out of targets out there ???
Anaalys Fluuterby Caldari	Posted - 2008.05.02 15:41:00 - [119] Originally by: Roy Batty68 Originally by: Gridwalker Give me just one compelling reason why you feel that I should be compelled or required to spend time in lo sec? -Grid I know you were addressing someone else, but... You should feel compelled to go to lowsec by the allure of better isk making opportunities. Same goes for 0.0. There should be an obvious scale of "where to go to get rich" as a theme that is proportional to the amount of risk you face. See, here is one of the reasons these arguements always go wrong. MANY of us don't really care about making more ISK; just because we can make 30% more doing the same activities somewhere else is NOT inventive to move. We play for what we perceive is fun, not to amass great wealth; ISK for the sake of ISK doesn't interest me or I would be a lot more aggressive running my missions What ISN'T fun is trying to do your daily activities while constantly watching over your shoulder and scanning everyone that comes through local. Its fun occasionally, but no way I would ever consider mining and doing that. So again, what incentive do I have to even consider LowSec for a home? If I had to go there to get Ice to fuel the POS I would just shut it down instead as it really isn't worth the effort and the return isn't worth the risk....
Anaalys Fluuterby Caldari	Posted - 2008.05.02 15:42:00 - [120] Originally by: Una D That is easy. Force players out of the NPC corps. Just make it so they can't do anything useful in them (no using barges, no criminal acts, no missions above L2, no going to 0.0). That will force the farmers in to player created corps. Than you just make the timer to jump corporation 48+ hours and war decc them. Players get PvP, police the macros and everybody is happy (except for the fact that prices would go up quite a bit). And you just alienated 37% of your experienced and ACTIVE players. If even 1/2 of those quit CCP's wallet would be hit considerably.

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.