open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [Proposal] Time to Remove Inter-Empire Highsec Highways
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7

Author Topic

Mini Tee
Posted - 2010.07.13 09:37:00 - [31]
 

The lowsec borders sound like an awesome idea!

Currencies not so much, too complicated, as stated above multiple times.

Guilliman R
Gallente
Northstar Cabal
Important Internet Spaceship League
Posted - 2010.07.13 11:26:00 - [32]
 

I would support this on one condition. Cyno works in highsec for jump freighters only.

That way those that invest and are more then two accounts can haul large quantities of goods without having to take a freighter trough lowsec.

That or give freighters low slots for warp stabs.

A huge downside of the lowsec borders between empires would be that eventually people will migrate to a single faction, and do everything there (mission/mine) and those are most of the players, resulting in super busy caldari space and near empty amarr, galente and minmatar space. Segregation isn't the best idea.

I don't see how this would benefit anyone but lowsec pirates. BUT I do think the idea in itself is cool. If this were to happen, a few other changes would need to be done to balance it a bit in the freighter department.

Aurum Bellator
Posted - 2010.07.13 11:34:00 - [33]
 

Edited by: Aurum Bellator on 13/07/2010 11:35:38
Originally by: Syath
sounds like a good idea, but if your just wishing for a way to get more pirate kills probably not gonna happen. People will use jump freighters instead and not have to risk their precious cargo.


If someone takes the time and money to invest in a jump freighter, they deserve to profit from its use. As to your original point, I am not a pirate so I wouldn't be out to get more 'pirate kills.' I am, however, training for transport ships Smile.

Ultimately, the point I'm trying to make is that Eve is big enough now to support four mostly independent population focal points (in empire space) instead of having everyone crowded around a string of centralized systems and a few scattered mission hubs. The incentive to travel through lowsec to connect trade routes will stimulate population out there, too, which would only exponentially increase with the planned public missions that they spoke about.

@Varo: Well I just plain disagree with your viewpoint. As far as the multiple racial currencies piece, that was not the focal point of my suggestion and was more of a throw-away off the cuff suggestion.

As far as your comment about 'buffing' the most lucrative career in Eve; if you are talking about 'trade' you are painting with too broad of a brush. You've got to separate 'station trader' from 'interregional trader' or 'interracial trader' and certainly the latter two are not even close to as lucrative as the former, or to other career fields such as mission running, ratting, etc.

I agree that station trading is the most bang for the buck, but my suggestion wouldn't really change station trading, would it?

AUB

Fumitsugu Sylwia
Posted - 2010.07.13 11:42:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: Guilliman R
I would support this on one condition. Cyno works in highsec for jump freighters only.




Hmmm no. What you're saying is "I want to ignore this cool new lowsec barrier in complete safety, while everyone poorer slogs through in hulltanked Badgers"

Originally by: Guilliman R
A huge downside of the lowsec borders between empires would be that eventually people will migrate to a single faction, and do everything there (mission/mine) and those are most of the players, resulting in super busy caldari space and near empty amarr, galente and minmatar space. Segregation isn't the best idea.


Space would become homogenised, as it is at present, because the lure of empty, say, Amarr space, and sky-high prices for corresponding faction items due to a lack of supply, would pull in a lot of people. Industry and the market would follow this influx accordingly.

Nin Kimrov
Minmatar
Kenzi Arms and Munitions
Posted - 2010.07.13 11:55:00 - [35]
 

It could be also a new role for the faction warfare : protect the borders and secure trade highways.
There lots of thing that could be made with that.

ThisIsNotMyAlt
Posted - 2010.07.13 12:33:00 - [36]
 

it makes no sense for the empires not to secure their interconnecting routes. they would loose profits and it would also be unwise diplomaticly.

PJ Johnes
Caldari
Capitalism inc
Posted - 2010.07.13 13:09:00 - [37]
 

I must say i like the idea of separated regions/empires, i do not however support the idea of different currencies in the empires

Pasadenasman
Born In Jungle
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2010.07.13 13:36:00 - [38]
 

fully support this thread. It could be the boost needed for the low-sec.

Pirats were to sit in sea and wait for other boats travelling by their area to make money by market use. This happened when the sea doesn't have "secure" area and travelling was quiet dangerous. By now you have the opportunity to make the same with planes and have more security for cargo. Safe road is the empire connection between trade hub. If these roads will be cut, this will bring back piracy in line with other carriers and give lowsec better activity, for market, pvp, exploration, etc.

PLZ CCP JUST DO IT ! YARRRR!!

Caleb Ayrania
Gallente
TarNec
Posted - 2010.07.13 13:47:00 - [39]
 

Edited by: Caleb Ayrania on 13/07/2010 14:50:21
@OP.. If you recall and argue using history, you might need to consider such things as the market order nerf, and SCC boost. Also the huge number of new traded items that makes Jita the living beast it is.. Check EVE metrics for details.. The volumes and moving graphs speak clearly of the issue of order saturation.

Creating a barrier between empires might sound nice, but I would like to point to MDD reply and expand on it.. Better than the OP suggestion would be to have a more dynamic respond system to aggression. Thus basing it on system security status and imho also the local SOV holder. Responses should be not just by CONCORD but also by local SOV holder. Thus you shoot down a gal pilot in gal space you would get whooped. Add to this that security should be based dynamic in nature to, so that it would change depending on Kills (or rather insurance claims value in a system) Thus you go and manage to kill a **** load of expensive ships with high sec rating and high local SOV standing, then you would be able to shift the systems security down a big deal..

tl:dr Get CCP to make the systems of security and aggression dynamic and flow with player interaction.. Would improve gameplay for all types of players and not be biased..

NB: Examples of a rather interesting PvP dynamic is in "Pirates of the burning seas" where a zone of aggression moves around. The above would potentially make all eve an ebbe and flow of pvp areas. OFC some might need to be fixed.


MailDeadDrop
Rage and Terror
Posted - 2010.07.13 13:55:00 - [40]
 

Originally by: Caleb Ayrania
Creating a barrier between empires might sound nice, but I would like to point to Tornsouls reply and expand on it.. Better than the OP suggestion would be to have a more dynamic respond system to aggression.


Ahem.

MDD

Caleb Ayrania
Gallente
TarNec
Posted - 2010.07.13 14:52:00 - [41]
 

Originally by: MailDeadDrop
Originally by: Caleb Ayrania
Creating a barrier between empires might sound nice, but I would like to point to Tornsouls reply and expand on it.. Better than the OP suggestion would be to have a more dynamic respond system to aggression.


Ahem.

MDD


Soz.. Reading the thread you and Torn were the posts that made sense :) Corrected it^^

Hel O'Ween
Men On A Mission
EVE Trade Consortium
Posted - 2010.07.13 15:06:00 - [42]
 

Let me start by stating: I HATE low sec. Very Happy

Having said that, I find this idea very interesting.

Let me comment on some statements.

Quote:

Huh? This makes absolutely no sense. Four empires supposedly at peace with each other would make damned sure routes were clear and safe.



Let me remind you of The Empyrian Age. Which brings me to ...

Quote:

This is the least RP conscious game I've yet to see, and traders are the least interested in RP. Besides, nothing you proposed would do anything towards creating racial flavours.



I agree on that "least RP consious game(r)" part. Nonetheless, games changes based on the official back story still make more sense than all of a sudden, out of the blue "WTF? Planets?" kinda changes.

Quote:

Currencies not so much, too complicated, as stated above multiple times.



Can't be more complicated than PI or WiS. And it would add another money sink ("exchange fee/rate") and even provide the chance to add an additional skill (another money sink) for lowering the rate/fee.

I also agree that this thread would be better in Assembly Hall. The OP might consider reporting his own thread and ask for having it moved to Assembly Hall.

ThisIsNotMyAlt
Posted - 2010.07.13 15:13:00 - [43]
 

it is a false asumption that the four empires would only benefit from "secure trade" in times of peace. Actually the (cold)war is indeed one of the thriving factors that does generate the profits for them.

Thrasymachus TheSophist
Posted - 2010.07.13 15:21:00 - [44]
 

I also like MDD's suggestion - but they need not be exclusive.

You could improve lowsec generally as stated by MDD, and further add lowsec paths between the various empires.

As for incentives to "risk" goign through lowsec - simply create market rules and/or scarcity of goods between the races that aren't getting along. For example - Gallente ships cannot be sold on the market in Caldari space, or vice verse.

I even think the currencies would be interesting, if not overly complex, with taxes on currency exchanges, etc.

After pew-pew, Eve's market is its best resource. No other MMO has as complex or rich a market. This would be a nice addition that would provide additional opportunities for hauling as a mini-profession. It might also develop some interesting citizen-police forces for those low-sec pathways ...

SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks
Posted - 2010.07.13 15:32:00 - [45]
 

Edited by: SencneS on 13/07/2010 15:35:22
Originally by: Thrasymachus TheSophist
As for incentives to "risk" goign through lowsec - simply create market rules and/or scarcity of goods between the races that aren't getting along. For example - Gallente ships cannot be sold on the market in Caldari space, or vice verse.

After pew-pew, Eve's market is its best resource. No other MMO has as complex or rich a market. This would be a nice addition that would provide additional opportunities for hauling as a mini-profession. It might also develop some interesting citizen-police forces for those low-sec pathways ...


It would make "RP" sense to have boycotts on Gallente anything in Caldari Space, but that would also kill markets. Which might not be bad, but it's reducing marketing/manufacturing areas for profit.

I'd rather see..... You can't build anything Gallente in Caldari space stations (But you can at POSES) and you can sell them in Caldari space.

This would mean..

1) You have to travel to Gallente space to pick up the BPO, or buy the overpriced BPO from Jita.
2) You have to build in Gallente space and haul, or deploy a POS in Caldari space and build at the (Currently 1.1 waste multiplier) Ship assembly arrays.
3) Buy ships from Gallente space which sell cheaper because of cheaper build costs, haul them to Jita.

All the while taking the risk of transporting either ships or BPOs across low-secs.

If you want to build non-local racial stuff you have to do it from a POS. I could DEFINITELY support that.

MailDeadDrop
Rage and Terror
Posted - 2010.07.13 16:01:00 - [46]
 

Edited by: MailDeadDrop on 13/07/2010 16:10:21
I'm not convinced that driving people towards POSes is a good thing. For starters, POSes are corporate assets, not personal assets. The roles interface is already a mess; imagine how much worse (Eve) life will be when you push more people to have to deal with it. Actually, I think you (SencneS) owe a fine for even suggesting such an idea. (Pay Chribba; he'll see that it is properly disbursed to a worthy charity.) But I get what you're trying to do (introduce more racial effects into the markets), and agree that appears to be a worthy goal.

But, I believe that the NPC seeding of racial items should be addressed. And from a programmatic point of view, it seems like a trivial change for CCP. It has the added effect of stimulating more player-run economies (skillbook & blueprint trading).

Alternative to POS bonusing: have station assembly lines provide some bonus/penalty assessed because of the NPC's standing to the race. So, for example, Carthum Conglomerate's assembly lines would provide some build bonus (time? resource efficiency?) for Amarr blueprints, neutral for Caldari blueprints, and penalize for Gallente and Minmatar blueprints. Has the same effect of making building stuff in its racial home better, without the unwanted effect of pushing people to POSes.

MDD
(Edit: Correct spelling of SencneS' name. Sorry 'bout that. Also added alternative idea to POS bonusing.)

SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks
Posted - 2010.07.13 16:26:00 - [47]
 

Edited by: SencneS on 13/07/2010 16:29:55
Originally by: MailDeadDrop
I'm not convinced that driving people towards POSes is a good thing.


I doubt we'll ever see such a report even if we requested it, but I'd be interested to know how many non-Caldari Things are built in station slots in Caldari space. And I agree POS pushing is not a good idea, it would place demand on POS fuel and cost more to run my POSES :) So I would refine my statement to...

Have it cost 1.1 material multiplier for all T1 and T2, non-local racial items being built in stations. Make sure if you build say a Thorax in Caldari Space at a Station it's 1.1x, and at a POS it costs 1.1 too (At the moment it's only 1) and adjust Local Racial T2 ships to have a 1 Multiplier at POSes. This means it'll be cheaper to build T2 ships in that Empire's space, at Station and at POS, and everything non-empire costs 10% more to build.

Create some real need for haulers to go from empire to empire picking up local manufactured T1 and T2 items for sales in other regions. Taking the homogenization out of EVE again.

Edit - After you're second edit my post is redundant but I like the way we think YARRRR!! Either a bonus for racial, or a penalty for non-racial items in each Empires space is something worthy of a CSM topic.

Hel O'Ween
Men On A Mission
EVE Trade Consortium
Posted - 2010.07.13 16:51:00 - [48]
 

Edited by: Hel O''Ween on 13/07/2010 16:53:43
As a middle ground between "Can't build other race ships in stations - use POS" and "Build where you like" you could restrict building to the racial stations in the foreign empires.

Taken the Gallente ship from the example: you can build it anywhere in Gallente empire (or anywhere in Gallente + Minmatar empire) or in Gallente (+ Minmatar) stations*) in any of the other empires.

Not sure though, if the distribution of those stations would allow for this.

*) "Stations" as in "stations controlled by a NPC corporation aligned with Gallente empire"

HowardStern
Posted - 2010.07.13 17:44:00 - [49]
 

I wonder how many iterations it would require to get to this little lot to a non-****ed state.

Durin Sarga
Posted - 2010.07.13 17:52:00 - [50]
 

Originally by: Your Client
sounds like a nightmare if you live in nullsec... what currency would you use?


Umm.... because I'm a nerd.

Quote:
Your Republic credits are no good here!


I agree. Four distinct currencies would be a pain to keep track of. Would the nerds like any of us like it? Maybe. Probably. Would the mainstream computer gamer like it? Hassle = No. If this type of system was implemented, I would advocate for no designated currency in null-sec. Lawless space would most likely recognize the Factional currency with the most purchasing power at the time, however it needn't be so. Large alliances could say 'We only take Tritanium' and in effect you would trade Trit at their stations in exchange for goods/services.

As for getting rid of the hi-sec highways, sure. I'd support that. I agree that it would probably achieve the OP's goal of lowering the 'crowds' in some areas.

Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
Posted - 2010.07.13 18:10:00 - [51]
 

I think the OP has a good idea... it would add excitement and challenges

...it could create an incentive for more group play in trading if there were lucractive arbitrage profits where a corp controling a couple low sec systems could escort a jump freigter to cynos on both sides. Perhaps the trader would be in corp or perhaps escort corps could build enough trust and repuation to charge tolls for safe passage.

A suggestion though: I think that a few more low sec systems or links should be put in so systems like rancid or amake wouldn't be quite as much linchpins to travel. A few low sec systems parallel to them would allow a little more cat and mouse and make counter ganks on pirate gangs (or between pirate gangs) a bit more feasible without as many jakals concentraded in one system to warp in on others figts. (not a bad thing, just that it can get out of hand and a little tweeaking would help if things got too concentrated)


Dzil
Caldari
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve
The Fourth District
Posted - 2010.07.13 19:02:00 - [52]
 

A couple thoughts:

I like the single consistent currency of isk, for use by concord. However, I can see a value in having a sort of empire / corporation specific currency for specialized items. Perhaps the easiest way to implement this, would be to make LP a marketable item (sort of like tags). This could be coupled by expanding the LP shop, and adding more ways to acquire LP than just mission grinding.


I'm not really sold on why anyone feels empire freighters need to be forced through low-sec. In my opinion, the whole concord system is a bit broken atm: you go from a guaranteed concord death to guaranteed concord leaving you alone at a clearly defined cutoff that divides piracy acts into very limited risk to the pirate, to guaranteed suicide. You feel empire "carebears" have it too easy: IMO the problem is that piracy is entirely too easy, but then shuffled off under the rug where only a tiny % of the player base bothers with.

I'd do this instead: make it really random in .5 - .7 systems how long it takes till concord shows up: essentially, it should be possible to gank someone and flee the scene before the cops show up, taking a smaller security hit and no concordokkan. Possible, but not guaranteed. Sometimes Concord might show up within seconds, and bust the freighter gank. Concord should also police the remains of any ship blown up: frankly scooping loot with a hauler alt right in front of the cops is terrible pvp design.



Varo Jan
Caravanserai Consulting
Posted - 2010.07.13 19:41:00 - [53]
 

Originally by: Fumitsugu Sylwia
Lowsec serves a valuable purpose.

Really? What purpose is that? Which major section of the EVE population benefits from low sec?

Quote:
If you have balls and brains you can safely navigate through lowsec space and therefore profit.

You need neither balls nor brains. You need a frigate or a BR. Singing "U Can't Touch This" is optional.
Anyone with a modicum of sense knows not to take a floating brick through Hagilur when the weekend weenies are out.

SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks
Posted - 2010.07.13 19:47:00 - [54]
 

I remember reading somewhere someone suggesting that instead of Concord being overzealous cops, they need to be peace loving hippies full of passive aggressive attributes. Where Concord didn't show to blow you to pieces but they showed up to rescue the ship under attack.

It when something like this.. There should always be a chance for you to kill someone anywhere any time. However the higher the sec the more "HIPPIES" show up to remote repair the ship under attack.

Attacking Concord gets the local Navy to attack you, but if you're setup right and can tank the Navy you can kill the Navy AND the Hippy Concord, and then the target. But you have to be fast because the Local Navy spawns every minute or so, and Concord Hippies spawn every 45 seconds or something. If you choose to gank a Freighter in a 1.0 system, you're going to have to come at it with more a LOT of fire power, because the Hippies have UBER Repairing abilities, all three to, Remote Hull, Remote Armor, Remote Shield.

The idea was a something about removing Sec-Status but I can't be bothered to find it. OLD Idea I've always thought might be fun on SISI but I don't think it'll work in EVE. People will die all over the place without Wardecs because you have 50 battleships camping Jita killing everything that undocks even if it's empty.

Aurum Bellator
Posted - 2010.07.13 20:15:00 - [55]
 

Originally by: Hel O'Ween
I also agree that this thread would be better in Assembly Hall. The OP might consider reporting his own thread and ask for having it moved to Assembly Hall.


Done. If it does get moved, I hope that those of you who support the idea will continue to follow the discussion at Assembly Hall. Perhaps we can get one of the CSM on board. Smile

AUB

Varo Jan
Caravanserai Consulting
Posted - 2010.07.13 20:20:00 - [56]
 

Originally by: Aurum Bellator
@Varo: Well I just plain disagree with your viewpoint.

Of course you do. :) Consider this. Caldari and Amarr are allies. Minmatar and Gallente are allies. Each faction has more than one region. It makes zero sense to have low sec borders between regions belonging to the same faction; and low sec borders between either Amarr and Caldari or Minmatar and Gallente. If you really want to play the RP card, think it through.


Quote:
As far as the multiple racial currencies piece, that was not the focal point of my suggestion and was more of a throw-away off the cuff suggestion.

A major change warrants more analysis and thought than an off the cuff suggestion. Ditch it. It doesn't belong here.

Quote:
As far as your comment about 'buffing' the most lucrative career in Eve; if you are talking about 'trade' you are painting with too broad of a brush.

Yes I am painting a broad brush. That's all that's needed right now. Buff mining before you even start to think about buffing trading or pirating.

Covert Kitty
Amarr
SRS Industries
SRS.
Posted - 2010.07.13 20:26:00 - [57]
 

I had suggested something like this awhile back, the difference being that there could be a rolling "security tide" where security status would fluctuate predictably through the week. So on some days the empires would be surrounded by only lowsec, other days various combinations would be connected, and on others it would be as it is now.

Other possibilities would be utilizing fleet warfare to effect change in security status in some way.

Though I would certainly support a permanent lowsec around all empires as well.

CCP Zymurgist


Gallente
C C P
Posted - 2010.07.13 20:45:00 - [58]
 

Moved by request to the Assembly Hall from Market Discussions. If you support it please be sure to reply again with a thumbs up!

EyeCeeYou
Posted - 2010.07.13 20:54:00 - [59]
 

I like the mandatory lowsec to go to different regions, as long as (1) there are multiple ways to do it so that its not just a guaranteed gate camp/gank and (2) there are sufficient economic incentives to bother - i.e. disparate seed rates for highly used items (supply imbalances), possible restrictions on market listings in each region, etc. As long as every route isn't gatecamped and simply an insta-gank, it would provide economic incentive for haulers/traders to venture into lowsec (to get/deliver cheaper goods).

I also like the idea of putting some "risk" into ganking people in lowsec by having some kind of chance of a Concord response that is variable.
A big part of the problem with lowsec is the perception that if you go, you better be in a fast covop or equivalent, or you better have friends, because you will get in a fight. This could change that and cause a group of 5 to think hard before jumping a solo frig trying to pass through - is it worth possibly losing all 5 ships for that one little frig?

Aurum Bellator
Posted - 2010.07.13 20:57:00 - [60]
 

Originally by: CCP Zymurgist
Moved by request to the Assembly Hall from Market Discussions. If you support it please be sure to reply again with a thumbs up!


Obviously, I support this idea. I certainly hope anyone else will take the time to read through the posts and continue the discussion. Although I like the 'idea' of the racial currencies, if possible I'd like to drop that topic as it is not directly related to the main thrust of this post.

CSM reps, please take note! Let's have this brought up Wink

AUB


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7

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