open All Channels
seplocked Missions & Complexes
blankseplocked Low Sec Opinions & Perceptions: What Are Yours?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (13)

Author Topic

Mynxee
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2010.05.18 13:20:00 - [1]
 

Throughout the current CSM5 campaign period, there's been a lot of discussion about how to make low sec better. Many ideas have been tossed around in the Crime & Punishment forum and elsewhere. One popular topic is how to get more people to migrate from high sec to low sec to do missions and complexes there.

Most of the solutions tend to come from a pirate perspective, since they make up so much of the low sec population. Obviously pirates want more people there because that would result in more profit opportunities for them. However, operating in low sec comes with increased risk for mission/plex runners...which leads to many claiming that the rewards aren't sufficient for the risk involved. So, they just avoid low sec.

I find myself with a lot of questions about how folks who operate primarily in high sec perceive low sec and why they don't bother with it. Where better to ask them, than in this forum? I'd really appreciate some thoughtful responses that will help inform my ideas about boosting low sec in ways that reflect its outlaw nature but that all players can enjoy and profit from. With that in mind:

How long have you been playing?

Have you ever been in low sec?

Do you run missions or complexes in low sec?

If so, what is the appeal for you?

If not, why not?

Are rewards in low sec in line with the risk?

Is the risk in low sec over-stated?

Would education from savvy players about how to mitigate risk in low sec encourage folks who didn't just want to AFK L4's to operate there?

What is the number one change to low sec that would cause you to considering doing missions and complexes there? (Be realistic! "Kick the pirates out!" is humorous but not realistic. Smile)

Do you believe it is possible to make low sec changes that would allow both pirates and carebears to co-exist profitably without crippling either's play style to extinction? Why or why not?

All discussion and ideas on this topic are welcome. Having been a low sec pirate for so long, I see low sec in a very different, far less threatening light than high sec folks. I am therefore unable to view it from their perspective; the point of this thread is to understand that better. I believe such understanding is critical--particularly if I get elected to CSM5--to being able to assess low sec proposals in Assembly Hall in the context of the overall game and champion those which would help push low sec in the direction I envision.

Thanks in advance for your responses.


Rutilus
Posted - 2010.05.18 13:38:00 - [2]
 

Howdy Mynxee -

I've been playing for 2 years. One of my alts is militia, and my corp spent about 6 months in zero (Fountain.)

My main toons are carebears, and I generally do avoid mission-running in low-sec due to the risk. I don't want to take the chance of losing my mission-fit Ishtar, Kronos, whatever, for the relatively low-reward missions. I do low-sec roams in PVP-fit ships and am not averse to pirating, et cetera... but PvE in low for me is too risky.

One idea that would help would be not allowing pilots not in fleet/corp to use the jump gates leading to missions. That way, pirates can still have the opportunity to gank the mission-runners coming into and out of the system, but wouldn't be able to pounce on them when they're taking massive mission aggro. I can see why pirates wouldn't like this idea, but it may result in more overall low-sec traffic.

Another idea is to make the reward worth the risk. While I don't expect to get a 100M bonus or anything, extra LP or high-value items would make me more inclined to get into low-sec for missioning.

At any rate, thanks for the discussion, looking forward to seeing other ideas.

Serotta Ortot
No.Mercy
Merciless.
Posted - 2010.05.18 13:40:00 - [3]
 

As a player with just over 54mill SP I've played for a few years... Moved to 0.0 when I was 4 months in the game and never bothered with low sec. Only low sec experience was attempting to run some missions for the best Rep Fleet agents in 'Hedal' in Molden Heath and that didn't turn out well. Pirate groups always probed out the mission runners so soon the system was a ghost town.

0.0 plexes and mining are better, high-sec is relatively risk free...(if you keep your wits about you). Why go to low sec? Unfortunately I can't think of a single thing that would make me 'live' in low sec vs. 0.0 (even NPC 0.0, not sov).

my 2isk Neutral

Angeli Domini
Amarr
Posted - 2010.05.18 13:43:00 - [4]
 

Edited by: Angeli Domini on 18/05/2010 13:45:18
# How long have you been playing?
Years.

# Have you ever been in low sec?
I have seen some.

# Do you run missions or complexes in low sec?
No.

# If so, what is the appeal for you?
-

# If not, why not?
I do not PVP in PVE fitted ships and vice versa.

# Are rewards in low sec in line with the risk?
Doesn't matter.

# Is the risk in low sec over-stated?
I don't get the question.

# Would education from savvy players about how to mitigate risk in low sec encourage folks who didn't just want to AFK L4's to operate there?
Hardly.

# What is the number one change to low sec that would cause you to considering doing missions and complexes there? (Be realistic! "Kick the pirates out!" is humorous but not realistic. )
None. Missions don't belong to low sec. If you want more targets, ask for more people in PVP ships. If you want a slaughterhouse, well, then **** off. (not pointing directly to anybody, it's just a general statement)

EDIT: Missed the last question.

# Do you believe it is possible to make low sec changes that would allow both pirates and carebears to co-exist profitably without crippling either's play style to extinction? Why or why not?
Stopped reading at the word "carebears".

Dacil Arandur
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2010.05.18 13:44:00 - [5]
 

Hello!

I have been playing for just over a year, since last April. I primarily spent my time in high security space, until very recently playing around in faction warfare. Prior to this, my only times in low sec were to attempt a shortcut from high sec to high sec. I had really had no reason to go into low sec. People talk about the "rewards of lowsec," but unless you are a PVPer, I don't really see any. Understand that I'm not saying there aren't any - but the fact is that I, and I'm sure many other high sec inhabitants, simply don't see them. Why run missions in low sec where I can be easily ransomed or killed when I can just run them in high sec without worrying? Why mine ores in low sec when I can mine more (since I don't have to fit my ships to protect myself) in high sec - and since it sells for a similar price anyway?

I think the reason high sec dwellers don't go into low sec is that there is absolutely no draw. If a player doesn't feel confident in their ability to defend themselves, they aren't going to risk it. People learn very quickly what happens when you take a short cut through low sec and they don't do it again.

To the question of risk vs reward: We all know the risk, but no one has any idea what the reward could possibly be. We start in high sec, learn how to play in high sec, and the only thing we learn on our own about low sec is that you die there - usually quickly.

About complexes: The idea of complexes themselves aren't very well communicated in EVE. They are (usually) pretty worthless in high sec for any established player, and we don't know what the rewards are in low sec. I honestly have never even tried one in low sec. Are they significantly better? Would you make enough ISK there to pay for the possible loss of your ship? I honestly don't know.

I hope this perspective from a high sec player helps.

Also, I'm a fan of your blog (which was for a long time my only exposure to low sec at all) and I gladly voted for you for CSM.

Thanks,
Arandur

DTson Gauur
Caldari
Blend.
Nulli Tertius
Posted - 2010.05.18 13:51:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Mynxee

How long have you been playing?


About 3.5 years
Quote:

Have you ever been in low sec?


Yup, numerous times
Quote:

Do you run missions or complexes in low sec?


Occasionally
Quote:

If so, what is the appeal for you?


No specific appeal, it's just a change of pace
Quote:

If not, why not?


See above
Quote:

Are rewards in low sec in line with the risk?


Not really, considering what you can get in high sec or null sec
Quote:

Is the risk in low sec over-stated?


Somewhat, mostly it is a barren wasteland with hardly anyone there and then there are places where you have to use a spoon to wedge yourself in (and get killed)
Quote:

Would education from savvy players about how to mitigate risk in low sec encourage folks who didn't just want to AFK L4's to operate there?


Not really, risk mitigation isn't all that's to it. Those who might WANT to visit more often / live in low sec also consider other factors like their profit. If you can show them a dramatic increase in profits (after losses, which WILL occur), they might make the move.
Quote:

What is the number one change to low sec that would cause you to considering doing missions and complexes there? (Be realistic! "Kick the pirates out!" is humorous but not realistic. Smile)


I don't think that there is one thing that could cause this, simply because of what low sec is. But if I have to make pick one then it would be making the missions more secure against random intrusions by pirates. Sure camp me at gates or stations, atleast there they have to make an effort to do it (sentries), can't just use one small ship to hold me there while the rest of their gang comes to nuke the 'bear.
Quote:

Do you believe it is possible to make low sec changes that would allow both pirates and carebears to co-exist profitably without crippling either's play style to extinction? Why or why not?


I don't think so, unless low sec space is completely revamped from ground up. The current version favors the Pirate 100% Your average 'bear doesn't stand a chance. There is nothing within current game mechanics that would help the 'bear, it's all stacked against him, where as the Pirate has all the mechanics on their side.
Quote:

I believe such understanding is critical--particularly if I get elected to CSM5--to being able to assess low sec proposals in Assembly Hall in the context of the overall game and champion those which would help push low sec in the direction I envision.


As above, there's nothing to assess. Currently low sec is a wasteland inhabited by pirates who pretty much do as they please and in few regions by the faction warfare pilots, introduce a 'bear to that environment and sooner than you can say doomsday, he's a rapidly expanding cloud of atoms.

Shirrath
Posted - 2010.05.18 13:53:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Mynxee
How long have you been playing?

Around two years.

Originally by: Mynxee
Have you ever been in low sec?

Yes, I've made my first billion there.

Originally by: Mynxee
Do you run missions or complexes in low sec?

I used to run courier missions.

Originally by: Mynxee
If so, what is the appeal for you?

Implants, LP and standings.

Originally by: Mynxee
If not, why not?

Mining and combat missions are not worth the trouble of bringing a sluggish ship there.

Originally by: Mynxee
Are rewards in low sec in line with the risk?

With low-sec risk, yes. Not when compared to highsec or nullsec/wh space.

Originally by: Mynxee
Is the risk in low sec over-stated?

Yes.

Originally by: Mynxee
Would education from savvy players about how to mitigate risk in low sec encourage folks who didn't just want to AFK L4's to operate there?

Momentarily, but they'd move on after they realize the potential for much lower risk and/or much higher rewards elsewhere.

Originally by: Mynxee
What is the number one change to low sec that would cause you to considering doing missions and complexes there? (Be realistic! "Kick the pirates out!" is humorous but not realistic. Smile)

New contract type that offered safety in exchange of ISK: Pirates get x ISK per day, but contract ends and the reward is returned from escrow if the renter was attacked/aggressed by a member of the pirate corp during that time. Unfortunately, these contracts would be easily undermined by alts or other informally affiliated allies.

Originally by: Mynxee
Do you believe it is possible to make low sec changes that would allow both pirates and carebears to co-exist profitably without crippling either's play style to extinction? Why or why not?

No, because peaceful (read:profitable) coexistence is based on a one-sided prisoner's dilemma: The short-term benefits always entice the pirates to betray, no matter whether the coexistence is based on informal ransoms or formal contracts.

Mynxee
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2010.05.18 13:58:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Angeli Domini
None. Missions don't belong to low sec. If you want more targets, ask for more people in PVP ships. If you want a slaughterhouse, well, then **** off. (not pointing directly to anybody, it's just a general statement)


The question is really intended to get at whether low sec can evolve into a place that--while still dangerous and deliciously outlaw in flavor--can support and encourage a wider variety of play styles and better balance in their relative numbers. I don't care for ideas that simply look for ways to get more easy carebear ganks. Speaking from my own pirate experience, the kills, ransoms, and loot obtained through effort were much more satisfying to me than easy, cheap ganks any day. I realize that not every pirate feels this way but more do than you might think.

AkJon Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
Posted - 2010.05.18 14:11:00 - [9]
 

Been playing a year and change. But if I'm awake, I'm usually in-game.

I go to low-sec occasionally. Got my first km there on a FNA fleet op that ran into an Aduro Protocol gang. I've also been podded there with a head full of +5's. It was a good lesson (when death is certain I focus on getting the pod out now, which is generally pretty easy in low-sec.)

I don't favor a complete revamp of low-sec. If CCP were to make low-sec uber-profitable, large alliances would just move in and crush all the small/medium pirate corps.

Low-sec ores are a joke. Raising the amount of low-sec ores required by storyline missions and/or jiggering with the mineral composition might make low-sec mining a reasonably appealing proposition.

CCP's decision to grief noobs and/or people who don't play EVE to be some random anonymous internet nerd's e-slave by taxing only npc corps showed horrendous judgment on their part and is prolly a significant reason why player numbers are flat/down. Instead of taxing npc corps, if they had taxed hi-sec missions/rats (CONCORD doesn't just protect npc corps,) low-sec would obviously receive a significant indirect boost.

An idea: Mid-sec. Maybe no carriers/caps in 0.4 and gate guns firing on outlaws in 0.4 would create a 'gateway drug' for new players to not be totally wtfpwned and discouraged from returning to low-sec.

Durzel
The Xenodus Initiative.
Posted - 2010.05.18 14:14:00 - [10]
 

Personally I'd like to see it become a LOT harder to gatecamp. I know that's unlikely to be a popular attitude but right now it seems most carebears assume (wrongly) that they will blow up the moment they jump into any lowsec system.

The problem imo is that if there is someone gatecamping (and it need only be one ship, plenty of them can be fit to tank gateguns in perpetuity) then your average bloaty PVE fit battleship is toast. That only has to happen to someone once for them to avoid going to lowsec in future entirely.

The other factor of course is that the rewards in lowsec - random plexs aside - are not significant enough to offset the risk of losing ones ships. If you compare it to wormhole space where you have an element of safety through semi-random entry points, no local (which works both ways - they don't know you're there without using dscan/probes, which you can spot yourself) or even 0.0 - the rewards there are commensurate with the risk. Parts of 0.0, certainly deep alliance space, are safer in reality than lowsec and reward far in excess of lowsec just from ratting alone.

You can run missions in highsec in almost total safety (save from gankers) whereas in lowsec - even very quiet lowsec - all it takes is one person to probe you out once in a barely-more-LP-than-normal lowsec mission to wipe out months of ISK-making.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2010.05.18 14:14:00 - [11]
 

Edited by: Tippia on 18/05/2010 14:34:19
Q: How long have you been playing?
A: 2½ years.

Q: Have you ever been in low sec?
A: Yes.

Q: Do you run missions or complexes in low sec?
A: Used to.

Q: If so, what is the appeal for you?
A: Glorious LP, better plexes.

If not, why not?

Q: Are rewards in low sec in line with the risk?
A: Out of the gate, no. If you can secure the area and reduce the risk, yes.

Q: Is the risk in low sec over-stated?
A: Hoooboy…

<rant>
Mu. The risk is almost exactly what everyone says it is: it's completely safe, but you will die. The problem is that the kinds of ships that you need for high-end mission running are not suited for the kind of tactics you need to lead a good life in low-sec (barring, of course, that you don't just cut out a piece of space for yourself and your friends and defend it viciously). The two simply don't mix. It is (almost) completely safe in lowsec, but sitting in one spot in a hu-u-uge battleship that is set up for long-term/slow-DPS/single-damage-type enemies violates every rule that creates that safety.

In my view, the problem is that missions have fallen into the "bigger is better" trap: you need bigger ships to do the better missions. The new speedboat missions breaks this tradition, and that makes them a vast improvement over what has come before, but they're still not quite there. This is mainly due to the simplistic way in which missions are designed: difficulty is scaled up solely through the means of adding more DPS (up to L4s, this is done by adding more and larger ships, in L5s it's also done by reducing your tank).
</rant>

Q: Would education from savvy players about how to mitigate risk in low sec encourage folks who didn't just want to AFK L4's to operate there?
A: No, because the missions are still designed in a way that makes all those tactics impractical and/or costly. Well, unless you run a probe-proof Tengu, but shhh! Razz
…and either way, that's too narrow a solution.

Q: What is the number one change to low sec that would cause you to considering doing missions and complexes there?
Q: Do you believe it is possible to make low sec changes that would allow both pirates and carebears to co-exist profitably without crippling either's play style to extinction? Why or why not?

A to both: Ditch the current L5 mission design because it builds on a flawed concept of difficulty progression.

Instead, add missions that needs small, fast, nimble ships (that can evade the player pirates, and which the pirates will have a fun time hunting), that reduce the exposure to open space and/or the need to stay in the same spot for a long period of time. This includes separating mission/complex rooms with (much) larger distances than can fit in the standard probing tetrahedron scaled for finding ships.

This has the added benefit that actually losing a ship to pirates (which you will do, sooner or later, or the whole thing has only managed to create highsec all over again and the whole point of the exercise is lost) is cheap. It does not wipe out a week's worth of income in hull and fittings.

Spruillo
Gallente
Spruillo Corp
Posted - 2010.05.18 14:17:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Angeli Domini
Edited by: Angeli Domini on 18/05/2010 13:45:18
# How long have you been playing?
Years.

# Have you ever been in low sec?
I have seen some.

# Do you run missions or complexes in low sec?
No.

# If so, what is the appeal for you?
-

# If not, why not?
I do not PVP in PVE fitted ships and vice versa.

# Are rewards in low sec in line with the risk?
Doesn't matter.

# Is the risk in low sec over-stated?
I don't get the question.

# Would education from savvy players about how to mitigate risk in low sec encourage folks who didn't just want to AFK L4's to operate there?
Hardly.

# What is the number one change to low sec that would cause you to considering doing missions and complexes there? (Be realistic! "Kick the pirates out!" is humorous but not realistic. )
None. Missions don't belong to low sec. If you want more targets, ask for more people in PVP ships. If you want a slaughterhouse, well, then **** off. (not pointing directly to anybody, it's just a general statement)

EDIT: Missed the last question.

# Do you believe it is possible to make low sec changes that would allow both pirates and carebears to co-exist profitably without crippling either's play style to extinction? Why or why not?
Stopped reading at the word "carebears".



+1 Internets and today's clear thinker award.

Cartheron Crust
Matari Exodus
Posted - 2010.05.18 14:31:00 - [13]
 

Edited by: Cartheron Crust on 18/05/2010 17:32:53
Edited by: Cartheron Crust on 18/05/2010 14:32:37
How long have you been playing?
Two years

Have you ever been in low sec?
Mostly lived in low sec Heimatar, Derelik and Placid for over a year.

Do you run missions or complexes in low sec?
Yes.

If so, what is the appeal for you?
You can get lucky with RNG with some complexes and get quite a few hundred million. You can also find nice loot on other players ships in these complexes that are worth far more than what the complex drops. The missions pay quite a bit more in LP and rewards making some of them very profitable especially blitzable ones.

If not, why not?
N/A

Are rewards in low sec in line with the risk?
They could do with maybe a smallish increase say 10-20%. I would still do them regardless anyways.

Is the risk in low sec over-stated?
Yes. I have never lost a PVE ship to players in low security space. Despite people trying to scan me down in a mission or exploration site.

Would education from savvy players about how to mitigate risk in low sec encourage folks who didn't just want to AFK L4's to operate there?
It would encourage the people who were maybe thinking about it already. But people who want to minimse all risk will not go to low security to PVE no matter what the incentives.

What is the number one change to low sec that would cause you to considering doing missions and complexes there? (Be realistic! "Kick the pirates out!" is humorous but not realistic. Smile)
N/A Already there doing them. Actually wait, perhaps make it so agents in high security only give out missions against Mercs/Drones/Amarr/Gallente/Caldari/Minmatar. Restrict the pirate faction missions to low security agents as well as the rest. This way high security missions have consequences and it makes some sense in a fluff RP way.

Do you believe it is possible to make low sec changes that would allow both pirates and carebears to co-exist profitably without crippling either's play style to extinction? Why or why not?
Yes. But most of the changes need to come from the players not the Dev department.

One idea I am throwing out there is maybe a change to sentry's on gates. In addition to the current ones maybe add neut/web/warp scrambler towers. Perhaps grade it on security level. 0.4 has a web tower, warp scrambler and neut tower, 0.3 has a web tower and warp scrambler tower, 0.2 has a web tower and 0.1 are unchanged. Or one tower that does all the effects depending on security level. Make them destroyable like the concord billboards with a smiliar respawn time but more hp. This is probably too extreme, but something could be changed from the sentry's that are in place atm.

Boltorano
Fourth Circle
Total Comfort
Posted - 2010.05.18 14:42:00 - [14]
 

Edited by: Boltorano on 18/05/2010 20:37:14
How long have you been playing?

Almost six years. (September 04)

Have you ever been in low sec?

Almost every day.

Do you run missions or complexes in low sec?

Used to run missions, continue to run exploration/combat sites.

If so, what is the appeal for you?

Mostly juicy deadspace modules from 4-6/10 and escalations.

If not, why not?

N/A

Are rewards in low sec in line with the risk?

Combat exploration sites would be, but they are so few and far between that you have to travel two regions to find something worthwhile. (Often the harder sites that require speciality neut-proof fits, etc. are much easier to find.)

Is the risk in low sec over-stated?

Very much so, especially away from border systems and mission hubs.

Would education from savvy players about how to mitigate risk in low sec encourage folks who didn't just want to AFK L4's to operate there?

I try to educate people all the time, but only the people who already have interest in going there want to listen.

What is the number one change to low sec that would cause you to considering doing missions and complexes there? (Be realistic! "Kick the pirates out!" is humorous but not realistic. Smile)

Something to mitigate undocking into a camp you have no chance of surviving/re-docking from. Insta-warp bookmarks are useless when a triple sensor boosted ship can still lock you in 0.5s.

Do you believe it is possible to make low sec changes that would allow both pirates and carebears to co-exist profitably without crippling either's play style to extinction? Why or why not?

Certainly. I'm just not imaginative enough to come up with ways to do it.

poppasmurf311
Posted - 2010.05.18 15:08:00 - [15]
 

Edited by: poppasmurf311 on 18/05/2010 15:08:20
Ok....well, this thread aches for some noob carebear input. =)

How long have you been playing?


About a year...give or take.

Have you ever been in low sec?

Three times. I was autopiloting around before I knew how to set it up. The moment I jumped in, each time, to a less than .5 system, I got instantly killed, once I didnt even see it coming, the second time, I saw the amar battlecruiser that blasted me in my face. The third time, I accidentally bought the lowest priced ship and it was in a .4 system. Doh....I picked the most useless lowest priced frigate from my stable, unloaded all my modules and prepared it for death and headed out to go pick up my megathron....jumped into the system and was shocked to see 2 high security rating players and a cyno field. I got my ship and GTFO.

Do you run missions or complexes in low sec?

For the above reason.....going into lowsec is synonymous with losing my ship. I might as well undock and self destruct and save myself half an hour.

If so, what is the appeal for you?

I dont see any at all.

If not, why not?

The missions dont pay much more, the systems are mostly camped. Compared to afk'ing level 4's effortlessly, I dont see any appeal.

Are rewards in low sec in line with the risk?

Nope...just another system with maybe 10-20% higher payoffs. Not worth it. I mission in .5 space to reap the higher rewards but stay risk free.

Is the risk in low sec over-stated?


Nope....its a cluster-^&*( of gankers and pirates and undesirables



My humble opinion is....lowsec is utterly pointless. Not going there....the very idea of lowsec. The people who take the security hits to PVP you dont care about security hits. The people who gank there all can tank the half-*ss damage from the sentry guns anyway. The "security" of low security is what makes it pointless.

There should just be "security" and 0.0

The only thing that would make it worthwhile is the web scramble towers mentioned above COMBINED with random wandering concord ships. Not everywhere....but in some places. And they can warp in and out randomly. Then it makes it an even playing field and actually provides some thrills for both parties involved.


Taffeta
Posted - 2010.05.18 15:24:00 - [16]
 

I am a high sec player for a while now - Mining, Manufacturing, Trading, and PVE.

I have lived in low sec to rat and pvp, but never to mine or mission.

I like pvp in rvb and militia, but I am against piracy and ganks!

Ok, so we can’t kick pirates out, but we could easily create no fly zones for certain ships (as you have in some missions now).

The gates are configured for certain types of ships, so why not only allow transport ships and industrials into certain areas to create trade hubs.

Maybe areas for solo (npc corps only) players as well for added security.

I am sure low sec can be made to appeal to many more miners, manufacturers, and traders and this in turn would help those who want to pvp in the surrounding areas.

Low sec is really wasted in terms of all the industrial and trade activity you can do in eve and it’s only going to more waste with the upcoming expansion for those that wish to build on the planets.

Ka choop
Posted - 2010.05.18 15:37:00 - [17]
 

The problem lo-sec pirates have is that there are no lo-sec pirates.

Lo-sec psychopaths there are many.
People shoot you for no good reason and you can not reason with them.

That's the problem.

Otto TheRed
Gallente
Scions of Ithaca
Valor Empire
Posted - 2010.05.18 15:46:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Mynxee
How long have you been playing?


4 months

Quote:
Have you ever been in low sec?


I moved to CVA lowsec after 2 months and now I live in deep lowsec. (note: CVA lowsec is "safe" lowsec. Real lowsec is different)

Quote:
Do you run missions or complexes in low sec?


Exploration and ratting.

Quote:
If so, what is the appeal for you?


After 6 years of WoW (sorry!), I love the everpresent danger of lowsec and the need for constant vigilance.

Quote:
Are rewards in low sec in line with the risk?


I wouldn't mind seeing exploration rewards beefed up a bit. Mag sites are terrible, radar sites pretty OK, combat sites are still tough for my skill level.

Quote:
Is the risk in low sec over-stated?


Yes. Get away from border systems, take the time to set up a system of safes, monitor local, familiarize yourself with who else lives there and especially who to avoid! And don't be afraid to chat in local, especially if you see someone else in system. Not everyone in deep lowsec is a pirate. You'll do just fine (not saying you won't lose ships though!).

Quote:
Would education from savvy players about how to mitigate risk in low sec encourage folks who didn't just want to AFK L4's to operate there?


Don't really have an opinion. I like the challenge of figuring things out for myself, but I can't deny I ask questions from members of my hisec corp. Goggle the Guide to Low Sec Survival, it's very helpful.

Quote:
What is the number one change to low sec that would cause you to considering doing missions and complexes there? (Be realistic! "Kick the pirates out!" is humorous but not realistic. Smile)


To be honest I like it the way it is. Remote and difficult.


Quote:
Do you believe it is possible to make low sec changes that would allow both pirates and carebears to co-exist profitably without crippling either's play style to extinction? Why or why not?


Perhaps make station and gate guns more powerful to discourage camping?

To be totally honest, I have a RP streak, which is part of the reason I like lowsec. If I thought I could solo in 0.0 I would probably head there.


Von Kapiche
Minmatar
Posted - 2010.05.18 15:51:00 - [19]
 

Edited by: Von Kapiche on 18/05/2010 15:55:59
How long have you been playing?

Couple of years

Have you ever been in low sec?

Yes, less frequently now.

Do you run missions or complexes in low sec?

Not since the scanning changes. I might start plexing again, once I get what I feel is a suitable skillset, but then again w-space is more appealing.

If so, what is the appeal for you?

Plex loot is obvious, LP for missions.

If not, why not?

Too easy to scan down a PvE ship, and why would I want to pvp in it?

Are rewards in low sec in line with the risk?

Not right now, or I'd be there.

Is the risk in low sec over-stated?

Depends who's stating it :) you're not going to explode the minute you jump through a gate ( or indeed the next 20 gates ) like so many people seem to think, but most recent escalations ended with pirate attention, rather than the escalation ending, to the point that it's not worth it. I can also run a much more effective mission ship in highsec; the rewards for continual risk of a pimped boat in lowsec are nowhere near sufficient to make economic sense.

Would education from savvy players about how to mitigate risk in low sec encourage folks who didn't just want to AFK L4's to operate there?

No, not really. Not for any length of time, anyway.

What is the number one change to low sec that would cause you to considering doing missions and complexes there? (Be realistic! "Kick the pirates out!" is humorous but not realistic. )

Either it needs to be harder to scan down mission plexes, or they need to be changed so the runner is vastly more mobile ( or both ).

Do you believe it is possible to make low sec changes that would allow both pirates and carebears to co-exist profitably without crippling either's play style to extinction? Why or why not?

Until PvP ships are efficient to PvE in, neither is going to co-exist sensibly.

---

I guess I should point out that's from the point of view of the solo runner; I'm aware that there's supposedly "safe" areas of lowsec with player police etc, but that's more of a lifestyle than an economic feed to your other activities. I guess the point then becomes whether missions should be a something thats done to feed your other activities at all.

Hanneshannes
Posted - 2010.05.18 15:57:00 - [20]
 

1. How long have you been playing?

Close to 3 years now.

2. Have you ever been in low sec?

Yeah, been -10 myself but went back to where I started mainly because this char is now an alt.

3. Do you run missions or complexes in low sec?

Sometimes on my main.

4. If so, what is the appeal for you?

Complexes tend to be more valuable in lowsec than in highsec. I only do this in really quiet areas though.

5. If not, why not?

I don't run missions in lowsec because a missioning BS is easy prey for anyone who knows what they are doing. They are easy to find, slow and usually not very well tanked from a PvP point of view.

6. Are rewards in low sec in line with the risk?

Not at all.

7. Is the risk in low sec over-stated?

-

8. Would education from savvy players about how to mitigate risk in low sec encourage folks who didn't just want to AFK L4's to operate there?

Nope, because most pirates I know are just out to kill you anyways because they don't look for an advantage for themselves but only do this to get kills.

9. What is the number one change to low sec that would cause you to considering doing missions and complexes there? (Be realistic! "Kick the pirates out!" is humorous but not realistic. Smile)

Make lowsec lvl4 missions like the Pirate arc missions.

10. Do you believe it is possible to make low sec changes that would allow both pirates and carebears to co-exist profitably without crippling either's play style to extinction? Why or why not?

See 8.

Angeli Domini
Amarr
Posted - 2010.05.18 16:21:00 - [21]
 

Edited by: Angeli Domini on 18/05/2010 16:25:30
Originally by: Mynxee
Originally by: Angeli Domini
None. Missions don't belong to low sec. If you want more targets, ask for more people in PVP ships. If you want a slaughterhouse, well, then **** off. (not pointing directly to anybody, it's just a general statement)


The question is really intended to get at whether low sec can evolve into a place that--while still dangerous and deliciously outlaw in flavor--can support and encourage a wider variety of play styles and better balance in their relative numbers. I don't care for ideas that simply look for ways to get more easy carebear ganks. Speaking from my own pirate experience, the kills, ransoms, and loot obtained through effort were much more satisfying to me than easy, cheap ganks any day. I realize that not every pirate feels this way but more do than you might think.



Well then, let me elaborate a little.

Why would you play "a mission", killing hordes of boring identical computer controlled "rats" in a "Massive Multiplayer Online Game"?

Two reasons:



a) Obviously, grinding. You want rewards/loot/money, because you want to buy something shiny. When you grind, at that moment, the last thing in "Massive Multiplayer Game" equation is the "Multiplayer" part, maybe if you think about your friends only, to help you grind the shinies.



b) You are "testing" the game. You're looking for faster, harder, more awesome ways to beat this minigame called "missions" in your PVE pimpmobile. you don't care about some muppet warping in "ololololol I blew ur up cuz u had no chance ololololol :D:D:D pwneeedd". Why? What's the point in that for you?



So. While you might be able to convince a very minor part of the group "a" to go grind some god-forsaken lowsec at the edge of nothingness, the moment those people notice anyone else entering local, they dock/log out (see: 0.0 ratting); but you won't ever convince a single person of the group "b" to do anything mission related in lowsec. Not with the current game mechanics, not in their PVE pimp ships.

You always hear the wannabe-piwate-pvpers screaming about "fights". What kind of fight is going to give you some poor bastard running mission in his PVE Raven, already 5x scrammed by rats, while being pounded by 10 mission battleships? What are his other options? To bring five other friends with him to guard his accel gate? And why would they do that?

You need to understand that:

Nobody (tm) will run missions in space where everyone wants to kill you, while you can do **** about it.
Nobody (tm) will mine belts in space where everyone wants to kill you, while you can do **** about it.


Could you convince some occasional fool to actually try it? Sure, you get those today. You gank them once or twice, until they move back to high sec for all eternity.

If you want more people in low sec, introduce something for those so called "missioners" to do there in a PVP ship. They love fights, they fight for hours every single day. In a week, they've already seen more fighting than your average "piwates" in their whole miserable lives. Want to see those people in lowsec?


THEN, FINALLY, STOP ASKING THEM TO COME WITH THEIR PVE SHIPS INTO YOUR PVP GATE CAMPS.


Thank you, I'll be here all day.

Jagga Spikes
Minmatar
Spikes Chop Shop
Posted - 2010.05.18 16:22:00 - [22]
 

Edited by: Jagga Spikes on 18/05/2010 19:51:19
1. playing? after 2 short terms since 2006, playing continously for almost 2 years.
2. been in low-sec? yes
3. running missions in low-sec? i ran few regular missions in low sec. i did a quite lot of FW missions
4. why yes? FW missions are simple and fast, make mission runner much harder target (less time in mission; able to use fast ships), while keeping profitable edge.
5. why not? classic mission running generally means solo battleship in L4. that's a death wish in low-sec. solo means no scout, BS is slow, and running L4s efficiently requires fit that isn't much of help is PVP.
6. rewards for risk? no. if low-sec prevents you from running mission 50% of the time, rewards should be over 100% more than in low sec. somehow i don't see it coming. issue is more about unpredictability of pvp than proper reward.
7. over-stated risk in low-sec? no. low-sec is much more different from high-sec, and more similar to null-sec. buffer zone is non-existent. that being said, it's not a death trap. one can learn to live and profit in low-sec.
8. encouragement? that entirely depends on what folks look for.
9. change? faster missions. less NPCs. blitzable missions. windows/observatory in station. allow mwd in missions. all missions gated. mission-giver NPCs protecting gate entry for anyone not in missioneer group, or at least notifying mission runner of incoming threat. slower scanning. condensed, put effort on ganker side, and there will be more gank targets.
10. coexistence possible? yes

personally, i'm jack of all trades. i had my share of stupid losses, and probably going to get more. i usually mission for NPC standing and most of my profit comes from trading.

problem i see with low-sec is: unpredictability. most people are usually interested in narrow range of activities. if one can't get that kind of activities, he will either stop doing it, or go where he can do it. high-sec is predictable. you log in, do stuff, log out. unless one is wardecced, it's kindergarden most of the time. deep null is usually same way. but low-sec, there is no telling who can come on top of you within minutes, or if you can move next sysytem, or even exit station. for most people that come from high-sec that is a game-breaker.

so, make it easier to get out of station, make it easier to get in mission, make it easier to complete mission. all of this will bring more people in. mission runners MUST be profitable to run. it's the only way to make them play sheep. effort MUST be on ganker side. it's way too easy to lockdown profitability.

making it easier will blunt down low-sec risk, but it will bring in more targets. carebears get profit. gankers get targets. it's win-win.

as for miners, problem is two-fold. first is risk from being ganked, which could be mediated by eary warning. other is mining itself. it's dedicated, repetitive and time-comsuming. all of this makes you easy prey. miners profit is counted in millions per hours. that's HOURS that one must spend in SINGLE easily-reachable in-plain-sight location, doing attention-dampening sleep-inducing activity in paper-thin corpse-slow ship. if one could mine in hard to find-locations a high-yield ore for short amounts of time, it would probably be worth it.

as it is, mining is same as putting "shoot the stupid" sign on your own ship.

edit: minor nitpick

Backho
Posted - 2010.05.18 16:29:00 - [23]
 

I have a suggestion to make low sec more safe for carebeats.

1) Put concord which responds in 1 minute.

2) Make station push out players in a random direction away from the stations

3) Make lv 4 missions yield 3 times more LP and 3 times more ISK

4) Reprogram Rat AI.
If someone NOT from the same fleet as the first person flies in, ALL RATS will go into "siege mode", they will all have a 20x damage bonus, does Omni damage, and will focus fire on the pirate. So you need a fleet dreadnaughts to tank if you want to attempt to kill lv 4 low sec mission runners.

Then they will return to normal after the pirate is killed and podded, for the missioner.

Hope my idea's are good

Angeli Domini
Amarr
Posted - 2010.05.18 16:40:00 - [24]
 

Originally by: Backho
I have a suggestion to make low sec more safe for carebeats.

1) Put concord which responds in 1 minute.



Pointless. That will only encourage "alpha" blobbage the same way as suicide ganking already works in high sec.

Would it be able to save few luckers from a badly equipped solo pirate? Probably.

Outcome? Those pirates will stop flying solo and always bring enough alpha to finish you before Concord arrives. Rules of PVP in lowsec would change to an iron rule of "bring enough friends to pop target in less than 60 seconds, otherwise don't even bother undocking".

poppasmurf311
Posted - 2010.05.18 16:57:00 - [25]
 

Well, I find it odd that its "low security" but the only security present is a couple robotic turrets.

In high security, a concord response is guaranteed. So make low sec a non guaranteed response but one nonetheless. Have a single concord ship show up. Or have the usual concord fleet show up but act as regular ships instead of instagankers with reinforcements trickling in every 30 seconds. Then you can pvp but it will cost you eventually. Or have a 30% chance of a response.

But basically the lowsec is the wild west ...but we already have that....its called 0.0

There needs to be more security in "low security"

Zar Arstop
Posted - 2010.05.18 17:06:00 - [26]
 

The issue at its base is that PVE + PVP don't mix well.

PVE ships, and certainly the BS's set up for lvl 4 missions are horrible at PVP. Faction, Dead Space, Officer fittings are not uncommon on PVE ships and can push the ship value into the billions.

In high sec, a multi billion isk fit CNR for example can run lvl4s with next to no risk. In low sec that same ship is slow, easy to scan down, its active shield tank destroyed by a neut, while its cruise missiles are far from effective vs. small/fast/close range PVP ship worth a fraction of the isk.

End result is that in general, even a huge bump in the rewards to missions in low sec I don't think will see a large jump in people running missions there unless the mission are changed in such a way that allows (even encourages) them to be run in PVP hulls/fits or the two are more balanced

Risk vs. reward is one thing, another is feeling that you at least have a chance to fight back and in general most PVE vs. PVP fit fights are decided before the first shot is fired. Most pirating is simply ganking carebears with no real chance of fighting back.

Going forward I'd love to see a rebalancing by addressing PVE vs. PVP fits + NPC AI in missions etc. but it is a huge undertaking. Shipping up for PVP or PVE should just be "setting up for combat" not the 2 very different things they are now.

Short term there are some smaller fixes that I think would make things more balanced/interesting however:

-Change the overview to only read hull type. As an example: Is it a Scorp, Navy Scorp, Rattlesnake, Widow ... get close enough to see what color the paint on the hull is to find out. They are 4 very different ships. This simple dumbing down of the UI offers an element of surprise/unknown to combat that I think would make picking only fights you can win much harder and in general make PVP more fun across the board.
-Add Q ships. "Yes, it looks like a Badger, but I removed the cargo hold and replaced it with a huge drone bay, surprise!". With the above overview change all sorts of interesting things become possible.

Over all however, breathing life into low sec and giving it an outlaw flavor will need some means of giving carebears teeth. Just bumping rewards on missions there will not draw people in. No one wants to be prey no matter what the rewards. It will need a means of balance that offers a chance to both sides. A pirate appearing beside a PVE fit BS tanking a room full of NPCs will pretty much send the carebear back to high sec. unless he feels he has at least a reasonable chance to fight back.

Backho
Posted - 2010.05.18 17:12:00 - [27]
 

Well that was why i suggested this

4) Reprogram Rat AI.
If someone NOT from the same fleet as the first person flies in, ALL RATS will go into "siege mode", they will all have a 20x damage bonus, does Omni damage, and will focus fire on the pirate. So you need a fleet dreadnaughts to tank if you want to attempt to kill lv 4 low sec mission runners.

Means if theywanna gank you with rats around, they will enter siege mode and start slaughtering them. They will need large sale operations and not soloboats.

This will make lv 4 mission running more possible.

Ka choop
Posted - 2010.05.18 17:18:00 - [28]
 

You don't need to change game mechanics to improve lo-sec, it's pirates that need to improve lo-sec.

Mission in Lo-sec already give more isk then the ones in hi-sec.

If you're a pirate and want more people in lo-sec you need to protect them. Sell the space you're patrolling in with your buddies and keep them miners and missionrunners who pay your price safe. Hey, even give them replacement ships if they get shot while under your protection.

Not only will it lure more pve-ers to your zone if you don't overcharge but also it will draw more pvp-ers to your zone because of juicy targets giving you more fights.

That's what you want right?

Lonestar Antares
Caldari
Science and Trade Institute
Posted - 2010.05.18 17:23:00 - [29]
 

Originally by: Ka choop
You don't need to change game mechanics to improve lo-sec, it's pirates that need to improve lo-sec.

Mission in Lo-sec already give more isk then the ones in hi-sec.

If you're a pirate and want more people in lo-sec you need to protect them. Sell the space you're patrolling in with your buddies and keep them miners and missionrunners who pay your price safe. Hey, even give them replacement ships if they get shot while under your protection.

Not only will it lure more pve-ers to your zone if you don't overcharge but also it will draw more pvp-ers to your zone because of juicy targets giving you more fights.

That's what you want right?


ironically....this is one if the best ideas I've seen so far and is the most practical. The pirates make money and get to feel cool for charging "protection money", still get to blast players who dont pay and the CB's can pay the bill and mine and mission all they want.

Ana Vyr
Caldari
Posted - 2010.05.18 17:34:00 - [30]
 

How long have you been playing? - almost 2 years

Have you ever been in low sec? - many times

Do you run missions or complexes in low sec? - nope

If so, what is the appeal for you? - mineral buy orders I can fill

Are rewards in low sec in line with the risk? -not for PvE, no

Is the risk in low sec over-stated? -hell no

Would education from savvy players about how to mitigate risk in low sec encourage folks who didn't just want to AFK L4's to operate there?

- probably not because PvE requires a PvE fit...which are horrible for PvP (and vice versa)

What is the number one change to low sec that would cause you to considering doing missions and complexes there? (Be realistic! "Kick the pirates out!" is humorous but not realistic. )

- unless you make missioning/plexing safe from PvP intrusions, there are no "realistic" changes you can make to reduce the risk of losing your PvE ship

Do you believe it is possible to make low sec changes that would allow both pirates and carebears to co-exist profitably without crippling either's play style to extinction? Why or why not?

- Not without introducing an entirely new mechanic like deputized concord agents, with corresponding immunity to security status hits for PvP or something like that. PvE in lowsec is just not worth it the way things are because PvE ships are just fodder for PvP ships.



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (13)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only