open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked One way to buff lowsec and to get more people there...
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Kale Kold
Mindless Griefing
Posted - 2010.05.20 15:23:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Kale Kold on 20/05/2010 15:37:53

More actions should be linked to sec loss, therfore more people in lowsec. Wink

For example:

  • If you default on a loan, your sec is lowered. Only people with good sec can get loans.

  • If concord kills you, your sec is lowered.

  • Tiered sec drops linked to amount of bounty placed on you.

  • buying an item at below 30% market value should drop sec. Wanna scam?, pay in sec

  • Leaving an alliance during war, lowers sec.

  • You get the idea



Of course this would have to be balanced to avoid griefing but more stuff in-game should affect sec, dagnamit!

Sec should be lowered for all negative actions.

Sec should be a direct indication of your standing in society. If it's low, through the above actions, get out of the civilised systems! YARRRR!!

Cat o'Ninetails
Caldari
Rancer Defence League
Posted - 2010.05.20 15:31:00 - [2]
 

Originally by: Kale Kold
Edited by: Kale Kold on 20/05/2010 15:24:30

More actions should be linked to sec loss, therfore more people in lowsec. Wink

For example:

  • If you default on a loan, your sec is lowered. Only people with good sec can get loans.

  • If concord kills you, your sec is lowered.

  • Tiered sec drops linked to amount of bounty placed on you.

  • buying an item at below 30% market value should drop sec. Wanna scam?, pay in sec



Of course this would have to be balanced to avoid griefing but more stuff in-game should affect sec, dagnamit!

Sec should be a direct indication of your standing in society. If it's low, through the above actions, get out of the civilised systems! YARRRR!!



hi cat here

1) well having an alt that never undocks do your trade for you doesnt matter what there sec is
2) concord killing you does lower your sec if i am not mistaken lol
3) see 1

there is a difference in rl crime status between a bank robber and a bank manager but the net effect is roughly the same lol

x

Balsak
Minmatar
Friends of Bigfoot
Posted - 2010.05.20 15:33:00 - [3]
 

Edited by: Balsak on 20/05/2010 15:33:48
Do we really need another thread about lowsec on the main page here ?

Edit: Concord killing you does not lower sec status. They shoot you because you just did something that lowered your sec status.

Kale Kold
Mindless Griefing
Posted - 2010.05.20 15:37:00 - [4]
 

Originally by: Cat o'Ninetails
1) well having an alt that never undocks do your trade for you doesnt matter what there sec is
2) concord killing you does lower your sec if i am not mistaken lol
3) see 1


Most people in hisec don't have trade/mule alts, why would they when they can trade with their main. +concord doesn't lower your sec.

Angeli Domini
Amarr
Posted - 2010.05.20 15:37:00 - [5]
 

Edited by: Angeli Domini on 20/05/2010 15:37:46
Originally by: Balsak
Do we really need another thread about lowsec on the main page here ?


Why not? Give it a few more years and it will eventually annoy mods so much that they will ask devs "to do something with that low sec crap or whatever it is so that people will stop posting about it every single day".

I mean... This is how things usually work, amirite?

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2010.05.20 15:38:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 20/05/2010 15:41:27
Quote:
More actions should be linked to sec loss, therfore more people in lowsec.

Yeah, it doesn't work like that.
More actions linked to sec = more carebearing it up to recover lost sec.
People that want to keep out of lowsec already keep out of lowsec, all you do is increase the "cost" in time.
You're not really pushing more people into lowsec.

Quote:
buying an item at below 30% market value should drop sec. Wanna scam?, pay in sec

*blink* you've never *really* traded for profit, have you ?
That's pretty common for low-volume items, actually... or in remote areas... or in hubs for "local drops"... and so on.
"Below 10%" or even just "below 1%", now that, that could be considered reasonable.
Still... see comments immediately below.

Originally by: Kale Kold
If you default on a loan, your sec is lowered. Only people with good sec can get loans.
Leaving an alliance during war, lowers sec.

Add to that leaving a corp during a war lowering sec too, maybe even stealing stuff from loot cans, and it doesn't sound too bad (but not very good either). It would really depend on the severity of the drop.
But, as mentioned above, it wouldn't help with your chosen "target" anyway... it's just a way to "punish" some activities.
And for that, I'd say, it's overall a BAD idea anyway, even if mildly attractive at first sight.

Quote:
If concord kills you, your sec is lowered

That's kind of already the case... if CONCORD shows up, you already had a drop in secstatus, and CONCORD is always supposed to kill your ship when it shows up, so what's the point ?
You might as well just say "make secstatus drop worse for criminal acts".


Long story short, the THING THAT CAN REALLY WORK in making more people go to lowsec is to make it more financially rewarding to live in.
Your proposal doesn't do that.

Balsak
Minmatar
Friends of Bigfoot
Posted - 2010.05.20 15:41:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Angeli Domini
Edited by: Angeli Domini on 20/05/2010 15:37:46
Originally by: Balsak
Do we really need another thread about lowsec on the main page here ?


Why not? Give it a few more years and it will eventually annoy mods so much that they will ask devs "to do something with that low sec crap or whatever it is so that people will stop posting about it every single day".

I mean... This is how things usually work, amirite?



Not around here it doesn't.

Lashnar
Caldari
LEGEND OF THE SHADOW GUARD
Posted - 2010.05.20 15:59:00 - [8]
 

Your idea is more of FORCING people to go to low-sec. Not making it fun and people want to go there. You are as bad as companies like EA. You dress something up as fun but in reality you force people around.


In short, your idea sucks. Give me 50 million ISK and try again.

Swiftgaze
Elysium Trading Company
Posted - 2010.05.20 16:00:00 - [9]
 

Edited by: Swiftgaze on 20/05/2010 16:00:44
Originally by: Kale Kold

More actions should be linked to sec loss, therfore more people in lowsec. Wink

For example:

  • If you default on a loan, your sec is lowered. Only people with good sec can get loans.

  • If concord kills you, your sec is lowered.

  • Tiered sec drops linked to amount of bounty placed on you.

  • buying an item at below 30% market value should drop sec. Wanna scam?, pay in sec

  • Leaving an alliance during war, lowers sec.

  • You get the idea





Laughing Ahahahahahahaha. Get lost.

Carl Shaftoe
Posted - 2010.05.20 16:11:00 - [10]
 

It should be much harder to get killed in low sec space!

This genius idea might be too much for many of you, but rejoice, I shall explain it:

Once poeple know its hard to die in low sec they will not be afraid to go there anymore, so many people go there, so now low sec is crowded with a lot of potential targets feeling safe instead of being 99% empty, making it in fact much easier to kill someone in low sec than it is now, despite the fact that it's actually harder to kill someone in low sec than it is now!

Oh, and the reason they will go there at all is because belts spawn quafe roids of course.

Lady Ayeipsia
Posted - 2010.05.20 16:22:00 - [11]
 

Why is buying at 30% below market value considered scamming by the OP?

Heck, couldn't people just grief this simply by placing a few items with ridiculous prices like say a billion per ammo round, forcing the regional average up? Then anyone buying at the normal price whould lose sec simply because someone through up a griefing market order.

Sorry, price paid for an item, be it high or low should have no impact on sec status in any way.

Owen Drakkar
Bad...Karma
Posted - 2010.05.20 16:27:00 - [12]
 

Nope. Please tell me your trollin.

Deus Ex'Machina
Amarr
modro
R.A.G.E
Posted - 2010.05.20 16:39:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Kale Kold
One way to buff lowsec and to get more people there...


Make station turrets insta pop pirates ?

Yeah , that would work.

digitalwanderer
Gallente
DF0 incorporated
Posted - 2010.05.20 16:52:00 - [14]
 

Here's at least one suggestion:

1:Allow the use of carriers in lvl 5 missions for those willing to handle them solo,by allowing not only acceleration gates leading into the mission areas to accept said ships(which they dont't),but also allow carriers to pass thru jump gates themselves,so that a cyno pilot isn't needed,but only for low sec systems of course.


I was there with my carrier about 2 years ago,and was seriously limited in the missions i could do,and i accepted the fact that a gang could come along at any time to blow me up,yet 2 months into it,no one tried....Granted,the carrier was equipped with a cloak,but still....I was hitting the limits of CCP's sandbox principle,which has limitations,so why call it a sandbox in the first place,beats me.



CCP Navigator


C C P
C C P Alliance
Posted - 2010.05.20 16:58:00 - [15]
 

Moved from General Discussion to Features & Ideas.

Deus Ex'Machina
Amarr
modro
R.A.G.E
Posted - 2010.05.20 17:04:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: digitalwanderer
so that a cyno pilot isn't needed


Thing is, that's what makes the EVE subscription balloon grow.

My guess is that in a year or so we'll get t2 cap ships that need upwards of 3 cyno pilots to move. Or some other form of forced subscription inflation. And that's where the balloon will pop.

Or maybe it won't, because in the EVE universe cause does not precede effect if the devs don't want to.

*tells the spaceship slavers to row faster*

Kale Kold
Mindless Griefing
Posted - 2010.05.20 17:14:00 - [17]
 

lol, woe be tide those who play with other people! this is single player online! lol!

digitalwanderer
Gallente
DF0 incorporated
Posted - 2010.05.20 17:32:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Deus Ex'Machina
Originally by: digitalwanderer
so that a cyno pilot isn't needed


Thing is, that's what makes the EVE subscription balloon grow.

My guess is that in a year or so we'll get t2 cap ships that need upwards of 3 cyno pilots to move. Or some other form of forced subscription inflation. And that's where the balloon will pop.

Or maybe it won't, because in the EVE universe cause does not precede effect if the devs don't want to.

*tells the spaceship slavers to row faster*



Honestly,given that CCP in past poll(this was a few years ago),stated that the average player plays eve for about 9 months,i get the impression that as long as new subscriptions happen at a faster rate than veterans actually leaving the game,so that the subscriber base actually grows,which means more money for CCP,they don't really care what veterans want to see happening,as we're a small proportion of the total paying customer base anyhow.


Hence all this continuing focus on the new player experience and all.

Torothanax
Posted - 2010.05.21 04:54:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: Carl Shaftoe
It should be much harder to get killed in low sec space!

This genius idea might be too much for many of you, but rejoice, I shall explain it:

Once poeple know its hard to die in low sec they will not be afraid to go there anymore, so many people go there, so now low sec is crowded with a lot of potential targets feeling safe instead of being 99% empty, making it in fact much easier to kill someone in low sec than it is now, despite the fact that it's actually harder to kill someone in low sec than it is now!

Oh, and the reason they will go there at all is because belts spawn quafe roids of course.

---^ this for the most part. If it was harder for people to kill you in low sec, more people would go, which would mean more targets. "Pirates" and pvpers shoot themselves in the foot by ganking everything in sight, on sight.

The OP is kind of correct. His examples are terrible, but if sec status actually reflected they way you interact with other players, It'd be easier to identify real threats from "joe blow touring low sec". A big part of this I think would be removing the sec status gains in Null. No sec loss is fine, it's ungoverned space. It's supposed to be FFA. But then how does concord track action on thier behalf in null, when they can't track crime there? Why do they reward you when they don't punish you for any actions? Right now a high sec status means either you live in null or you carebear it up all day. While a -4.9 to 0.0 sec status says you pvp outside of null. It doesn't indicate what side of the law you are on.

I also think that people with high sec status should be able to apply for some sort of bounty hunting license and be able to shoot at low sec pilots to some degree. I'm all for anything that puts players in charge of enforcement rather then NPCs. Right now the only sec status that really means anything is -5.0 and below.Then anti pirate types wouldn't have to lose sec status to get a fight most of the time. They wouldn't look as much like the people they are hunting. Yeah yeah, I know, being able to tell the "good" guys from the "bad" guys in a novel idea.

Sealiah
Minmatar
Coffee Lovers Brewing Club
Care Factor
Posted - 2010.05.22 11:42:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Kale Kold
Tiered sec drops linked to amount of bounty placed on you.


I can imagine THAT making richer people paying to lower other peoples SS. First the bounty system should be fixed, later we can think of that working somehow. But I doubt it can be done at all. Rich alliances would wait till enemy alliance leaders would get a small ss drop to allow lowering their SS to -10 for huge ammounts of isk. Or sometimes more extravagant billionares would just lower SS status of random people for the lulz. If you implement this - implement a system that also work the other way around. I see the biggest isk sink eve has ever seen here.


Originally by: Kale Kold
buying an item at below 30% market value should drop sec. Wanna scam?, pay in sec


Why? Give me one reason why when someone wants to sell something cheap and someone wants to buy something cheap you should lose SS? That makes absolutely no sense to me.

Originally by: Kale Kold
Leaving an alliance during war, lowers sec.


There are some alliances that haven't seen peace in months or years... You think that a player tired of a period with war without a break for lets say 6 months should be penalised for leaving?

Originally by: Kale Kold
Sec should be lowered for all negative actions.


Excuse me? Some actions negative for one group will be positive for another... Even scamming is POSITIVE in a way, makes people more aware. EVE is a cruel game. So scamming should grant you SS! Besides, most scamming is done via contracts, how will you manage that? Faction modules sometimes can drop 50% in value od rise 50% in value from day to day. Would you penalise someone for buying all the market supply of item XXX and then selling it for 400%? Why? That's normal market speculation and that's legit.

Originally by: Kale Kold
Sec should be a direct indication of your standing in society. If it's low, through the above actions, get out of the civilised systems! YARRRR!!



Well, you can't go safely into high sec if you've got a very low SS... So that is already an adressed issue. That's what hauler alts have been made for.

Abbot Laarkin
Order Of Mystical Mountain Monks
Posted - 2010.05.22 15:08:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Carl Shaftoe
It should be much harder to get killed in low sec space!

This genius idea might be too much for many of you, but rejoice, I shall explain it:

Once poeple know its hard to die in low sec they will not be afraid to go there anymore, so many people go there, so now low sec is crowded with a lot of potential targets feeling safe instead of being 99% empty, making it in fact much easier to kill someone in low sec than it is now, despite the fact that it's actually harder to kill someone in low sec than it is now!

Oh, and the reason they will go there at all is because belts spawn quafe roids of course.


Uncertain as to whether quoted text is an attempt at humour, so I will take it at face value.

FYI it is incredibly hard to get killed in low sec. Just the other day I was travelling around low sec with the full intention of not getting killed, and guess what? I didn't.

The problem with low sec is not that it is easy to die, it is the impression that it is easy to die.

This impression exists due to two main factors...
1) Eve is a large and complex game, it is not easy to learn and before you can get the answers you need you first have to find the right questions.

2) Finding the right questions usually happens at about the time you wake up in a station.

Non-consensual PvP is a bit of a misnomer. Eve is in fact a game of misinformed PvP. Practically every instance of PvP in Eve comes down to either all parties involved wanting a fight, or one of the parties not having the correct knowledge to avoid it.

Anyone with sufficient knowledge, patience, determination and skill can avoid PvP regardless of how strenuously someone may wish to force it on them.
It would be fair to say that the balance of effort in many cases is biased in favour of the aggressor. This is fine imo. If it were not the case then Eve could not be considered (or marketed) as a "cold and harsh" Pvp-centric game.

As far as low sec is concerned this bias towards an attacker (that assumes a certain lack of discipline in the defender) is perfect. Low sec is intended as a dangerous place to go without taking the proper precautions. Making it safer would be counter to the basic principal of low sec. And not something I'd like to see.

Making it (slightly) more profitable however would not be a bad idea.Smile



Peace.


 

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