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

Voogru
Gallente
Massive Damage
We Are John Galt
Posted - 2010.07.13 20:59:00 - [61]
 

This would never happen, but I do like the idea.

One problem with the idea though, you might have people just moving over to one empire and then everybody does their missions there. Right now this would pretty much be Caldari space.

So you could see everyone from the other empires move over to Caldari space and the other three empires go bone dry.

To the pirates that whine about no targets in low-sec, it might have something to do with insta-popping with 15 bs vs 1 cruiser, and scrambling once 3 bs show up to counter 15 bs. Lay off the targets and just siphon off their profits when you catch them. If you make it unprofitable for them to be in low-sec, they won't go there anymore. Simple.

Heroldyn Yhamad
Posted - 2010.07.13 21:02:00 - [62]
 

Voting against the proposal for Reasons allready stated within the Thread.

Fumitsugu Sylwia
Posted - 2010.07.13 21:13:00 - [63]
 

Originally by: Varo Jan
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.


First:
Lowsec is an extremely viable casual PvP environment that faction warfare and pirates benefit from. Explorers go there. POS are set up there due to their proximity to Empire. It is a good place for people to experience a life outside highsec without the drag of bubbles (pun intended) which poses a tougher challenge. I could go on, but it is safe to say a large portion of Eve players live there.

Second:
My definitions of balls and brains are relative to the majority of Eve players Smile
I didn't mean "navigate from gate to gate". I meant "move around in". Even so, if you believe you are perfectly safe going through lowsec in a BR or frig you are mistaken. It's just safer. I'd say Covops frigs are 99% untouchable, however.

Varo Jan
Caravanserai Consulting
Posted - 2010.07.13 21:37:00 - [64]
 

I do not support this at all.
It would buff the most lucrative profession in EVE - trading. There's no call for that.
As far as low sec is concerned, tinkering with the tarmac is pointless. The whole concept needs a radical overhaul, and this isn't it.
It makes zero sense from a role play angle when you consider carefully the social context.

Originally by: Fumitsugu Sylwia
Lowsec is an extremely viable casual PvP environment that faction warfare and pirates benefit from. Explorers go there. POS are set up there due to their proximity to Empire. It is a good place for people to experience a life outside highsec without the drag of bubbles (pun intended) which poses a tougher challenge. I could go on, but it is safe to say a large portion of Eve players live there.

You make some valid points. However, I disagree with your claim that a large portion of EVE players live there. No, I haven't taken a census; have you? But all the whines about low sec being empty/unprofitable don't support your claim.

Quote:
If you believe you are perfectly safe going through lowsec in a BR or frig you are mistaken. It's just safer. I'd say Covops frigs are 99% untouchable, however.

Nowhere is totally safe, not even high sec. But you have to be incredibly stupid or incredibly unlucky to get ganked passing through.

Henri Rearden
Gallente
VIRTUAL LIFE VANGUARD
Black Star Alliance
Posted - 2010.07.13 21:49:00 - [65]
 

Edited by: Henri Rearden on 14/07/2010 21:23:39
Just chiming in with a thumbs up for a gradient of CONCORD responses, multi-route low-sec borders. Thumbs down for multiple currencies.

Jada Maroo
Posted - 2010.07.13 22:30:00 - [66]
 

Not supported, and it make zero sense from an RP point of view. You are telling me that some of what would be the most heavily fortified borders in the Eve universe are somehow going to be LESS secure? That pirates are going to have a field day in the same area where heavily armed navies would logically congregate to protect their territory?

Makes absolutely no sense.

Vasaczk
Posted - 2010.07.13 22:41:00 - [67]
 

Just putting in my thumbs up since it got moved.

- Love the idea of lowsec only routes - and i'm a trader/hauler not a pirate.
- Think Currencies is a tad silly and not something Eve is ready for.

Aurum Bellator
Posted - 2010.07.13 22:58:00 - [68]
 

Originally by: Jada Maroo
Not supported, and it make zero sense from an RP point of view. You are telling me that some of what would be the most heavily fortified borders in the Eve universe are somehow going to be LESS secure? That pirates are going to have a field day in the same area where heavily armed navies would logically congregate to protect their territory?

Makes absolutely no sense.


Look, this argument that it makes no sense from an RP point of view is simply wrong. "Heavily fortified borders" even if true does not necessarily equate to "heavily policed borders." In addition, who is to say they are heavily fortified? You don't just build a fence in space.

I can point to real world examples, to the extent they are relevant, to support my position. Take, for example, the United States border with Mexico. The two countries are friendly, if not necessarily allied. Yet the U.S.-Mexican border is a lawless zone of terror, murder, kidnapping, drug smuggling, human trafficking, and gang and cartel warfare.

There are other examples in the real world. Think of the frontier time in U.S. history a/k/a the "Wild West." There are many other examples but for brevity's sake I'll let someone else point them out. It only makes sense that states will focus their limited resources devoted to policing to secure the hearts of population and commerce, and that the fringe territories will be neglected.

So this whole notion that CONCORD, which is a police force, is going to focus its efforts on far-away solar systems that are not very heavily travelled is simply wrong.

AUB

Suah Sponte
Posted - 2010.07.13 23:02:00 - [69]
 

This would be a great change to the game as it matures. It would help spread the population out and it would give life to the lowsec border zones. Fantastic, thumbs up!

d4shing
Posted - 2010.07.13 23:16:00 - [70]
 

Sounds like fun.

Except the currency part.

SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks

Posted - 2010.07.13 23:32:00 - [71]
 

I agree, there needs to be some form of separate of the empires. It's silly to think I can fly between Amarr and Rens and not have to go though Low-Sec combat zones.

However, It does make sense to be able to fly from Amarr to Jita for example since Caldari and Amarr are allies.

For that matter, you could probably get away with very few high-sec links from Amarr to Gallente space since they are not exactly enemies but not friends either. Same goes for Caldari and Minmatar space.

This would make it possible to travel from Rens to Amarr in high-sec but you need to go though Caldari Space.

Andreus LeHane
Gallente
Mixed Metaphor
Posted - 2010.07.13 23:39:00 - [72]
 

No.

You now simply place the lion's share of trader-generaated wealth in the hands of people who have jump freighters, and you isolate a lot of players in a single empire. Now that there is no safe way of moving between empires, there exists no compelling reason for those players to do so - there is, besides the belt NPCs, available mission agents and occasional standings issues, very little actual difference between different areas of hi-sec, and in making it harder to get between them you take away the already very small number of reasons for people who don't like low-sec to ever move between them. I realise that this will only inspire some people to comment on how the relevant people should learn to like low-sec, but you and I both know that's unconstructive and it's not going to happen anyway.

Looby Loo
Minmatar
Posted - 2010.07.14 01:22:00 - [73]
 

Originally by: Aurum Bellator
[


I can point to real world examples, to the extent they are relevant, to support my position. Take, for example, the United States border with Mexico. The two countries are friendly, if not necessarily allied. Yet the U.S.-Mexican border is a lawless zone of terror, murder, kidnapping, drug smuggling, human trafficking, and gang and cartel warfare.


AUB


Think this is kind of the point, the naysayers see Rancer gatecamps everywhere, the people for the proposal see a three thousand mile long border.
In order for this to work there needs to be a lot more lo-sec added, some routes one hop deep, some up to five and multiple paths at each point.
Means far less gate camps and finally the chance of lo-sec being seen as less like certain death.

But no to the currencies.

Crazy KSK
Posted - 2010.07.14 01:48:00 - [74]
 

Edited by: Crazy KSK on 14/07/2010 01:49:41
I support all of it except the currency part as there is just not need for it lol

I would love to see both lowsec routes only between empires and all empires moved away from each other a lot so there will be the need for smaller hubs on the way as traveling all the way from one to another empire would becrazy for one person but for that to happen there would be the need for hugely long ways like 100 jumps or even more which I think is way too much I rather increase the warp ranges by a lot which would actually make warp speeds of ships much more important too which I think would be nice

Onyth
Had Holdings
Posted - 2010.07.14 02:37:00 - [75]
 

Originally by: Aurum Bellator
Look, this argument that it makes no sense from an RP point of view is simply wrong. "Heavily fortified borders" even if true does not necessarily equate to "heavily policed borders." In addition, who is to say they are heavily fortified? You don't just build a fence in space.


They don't need a fence, they've got fleets stationed in these systems, and as you only have a few entry points, all they'd have to do is sit on their gates and blow you up when you come in through the 'gate', much as you'd do when you come in through the gate of a fence. Only here you can't climb over the fence, so its actualy more effective.


Originally by: Aurum Bellator
I can point to real world examples, to the extent they are relevant, to support my position. Take, for example, the United States border with Mexico. The two countries are friendly, if not necessarily allied. Yet the U.S.-Mexican border is a lawless zone of terror, murder, kidnapping, drug smuggling, human trafficking, and gang and cartel warfare.


This is EVE though, not the US-mexico border, the cartels have their own space here where they have their warzone and lawlessness (see .0 pirate owned space). On top of that, the us-mexico border is a long line that can't be quite completely foolproof watched, the EVE jumpgates however are much easier to monitor, definatly if you own the things (as I can imagine the factions do in their own space)

Originally by: Aurum Bellator
There are other examples in the real world. Think of the frontier time in U.S. history a/k/a the "Wild West." There are many other examples but for brevity's sake I'll let someone else point them out. It only makes sense that states will focus their limited resources devoted to policing to secure the hearts of population and commerce, and that the fringe territories will be neglected.


The distance between say Amarr and Jita is only 9 jumps, if the amarrian and caldari navy cannot protect that many systems between their 2 trade hubs, then I doubt they'd be capable as empires to defend themselves against the pirate factions should they ever decide to come and say hi.
So no, this is NOT the wild west, this is not some place that is just being colonised. Rather, its a hi-tech civilisation that will do everything in its power to insure its wealth remains intact and giving away trade routes to pirates is not one of those things.


Originally by: Aurum Bellator
So this whole notion that CONCORD, which is a police force, is going to focus its efforts on far-away solar systems that are not very heavily travelled is simply wrong.


I would believe that CONCORD is stationed according to sec status, and sec status is higher in more populated systems, hence you void your own point about 'far-away' solar systems, its the same as where a city has more agents than a town has, no matter how much closer the town might be to the capital than the city.

Mike C
Caldari
MicroFunks
Posted - 2010.07.14 02:44:00 - [76]
 

Edited by: Mike C on 14/07/2010 02:44:34
Nice idea but SEVERELY flawed. This is an age where everyone and their mother has a jump-capable ship. Markets would be about as homogenized as they are now. Any practical trader has more than one account, and it wouldn't cost much to keep a disposable cyno alt in a system...

Jita to Dodixie - Ark Rhea Anshar Nomad
1. Warp to Perimeter Gate & Jump (Saves some fuel)
2. Jump to cyno alt in Decon
3. Slowboat to Dodixie, 3 jumps.
4. Profit

Dodixie to Jita - Ark Rhea Anshar Nomad
1. Jump to cyno alt in Ignoitton
2. Slowboat to Jita, 3 jumps.
3. Profit

Amarr to Dodixie - Ark Rhea Anshar Nomad
1. Jump to cyno alt in Decon
2. Slowboat to Dodixie, 3 jumps.
3. Profit

Dodixie to Amarr - Ark Rhea Anshar Nomad
1. Jump to cyno alt in Naguton
2. Slowboat to Amarr, 4 jumps.
3. Profit


Not even going to go into Hek/Rens, my ****ing Redeemers could (and do) jump that run.

Jada Maroo
Posted - 2010.07.14 02:52:00 - [77]
 

Originally by: Aurum Bellator


I can point to real world examples, to the extent they are relevant, to support my position. Take, for example, the United States border with Mexico. The two countries are friendly, if not necessarily allied. Yet the U.S.-Mexican border is a lawless zone of terror, murder, kidnapping, drug smuggling, human trafficking, and gang and cartel warfare.


You're comparing a vast border with countless points of entry between two mostly friendly nations to a very limitted number of points of entry between potentially hostile empires.

And you're implying that those well known points of entry shouldn't be fortified to hell and back.

The empires better pray you never take charge of their defense. Laughing

ALso, one of CONCORD's priorities, RPly, would be to secure routes of safe trade between empires. Just from a logistics standpoint, CONCORD isn't going to allow its network of control to be carved into four seperate divisions unable offer each other support.

Varo Jan
Caravanserai Consulting
Posted - 2010.07.14 02:54:00 - [78]
 

Originally by: Aurum Bellator
I can point to real world examples, to the extent they are relevant, to support my position.
Mexico.
The "Wild West."

RL examples rarely help as we're talking about a game set far, far, far into the future. However, US comparisons are not appropriate at all as you're talking about a land-locked country - and most trade historically has been by water.

Countries like England, Spain and the Netherlands went to great pains to protect their trade routes. Stands to reason that empires that far into the future would do the same.

It is nonsense to think that low sec areas would abound along trade routes. So, yeah, this proposal makes no sense from an RP point of view.

Cain m
Minmatar
Republic Military School
Posted - 2010.07.14 03:16:00 - [79]
 

Originally by: Varo Jan
Originally by: Aurum Bellator
I can point to real world examples, to the extent they are relevant, to support my position.
Mexico.
The "Wild West."

RL examples rarely help as we're talking about a game set far, far, far into the future. However, US comparisons are not appropriate at all as you're talking about a land-locked country - and most trade historically has been by water.

Countries like England, Spain and the Netherlands went to great pains to protect their trade routes. Stands to reason that empires that far into the future would do the same.

It is nonsense to think that low sec areas would abound along trade routes. So, yeah, this proposal makes no sense from an RP point of view.


Erm, what the hell are you on? Only two countries (Paraguay & Bolivia in South America) in the western hemisphere are landlocked, plus Mali and Burkina Faso if you want to count them.

Hel O'Ween
Men On A Mission
EVE Trade Consortium
Posted - 2010.07.14 09:33:00 - [80]
 

Posting to add support for this suggestion. (Although I will hate it myself, but it does make sense, game/RP-wise, in my opinion).

Aineko Macx
Posted - 2010.07.14 11:16:00 - [81]
 

You propose a solution that doesn't really fix something that isn't really a problem. And the issues with low sec are more grave than you could fix by driving more people through it. And like was mentioned before, trading doesn't need a buff, especially those already flying jump freighters.

Quote:
Space is crowded. Jita is today's Yulai. Prices are once again mostly homogenized (not completely).

That's the result of efficient markets, not necessarily smallness. Anyway, if you think space is too crowded and that markets should be de-homogenized a bit, there's been a few proposals around citing the following ideas, among others:
- Make the universe bigger by adding more systems/regions, maybe also increasing the distance between the main hubs
- Tweak resources and drop rates in each region to make them more distinct then they are currently (you mention that too, point given)

Quote:
With this change, you could add four new currencies unique to each empire each with a fluctuating exchange rate with the isk.

That's just complexity for complexities sake -> bad game design.

All in all an interesting proposal that's not really feasible. Glad it came up tho, as the discussion brings up all counter arguments.

Resonanza
Posted - 2010.07.14 11:32:00 - [82]
 

Denied.

That is one more attempt to nerf highsec and to lure all the highsec players into lowsec to gank them, because pirates have run out of easy targets.

So no. Not supported.

Angie McFish
Gallente
Caldari Industrial Capitalist Consortium

Posted - 2010.07.14 12:00:00 - [83]
 

Supported.

Freelancer Discovery server, anyone?

Stegas Tyrano
Posted - 2010.07.14 12:10:00 - [84]
 

Supported.

Anyone saying that it goes against lore isn't exactly educated in the subject.

Make Jump Freighter's able to jump between low-sec system's but give AP freighter's a longer way around.

Seylah
Posted - 2010.07.14 12:23:00 - [85]
 

Edited by: Seylah on 14/07/2010 12:23:38
Fantastic idea. Supported.

I would like to briefly state that most of the replies against this proposal miss the main point. That is, to actually make the empires their own separate communities in and of themselves, making it dangerous and lengthy to travel between them.

If this were actually implemented (please, CCP!) I would be making my home in the space between the empires as I'm sure it would be full of content and lacking any significant population = profit. Also I like nonconsensual pvp, even if I'm on the ganked side every now and then.

Someone mentioned 'everyone and their mother' has a jump freighter these days. Maybe among the alliance CEOs, but your average Joe certainly doesn't.

King Rothgar
Autocannons Anonymous

Posted - 2010.07.14 12:59:00 - [86]
 

Excellent idea and I fully agree with the original poster. I don't think it really nerfs any activity. But it does add some real potential for profitable trade between empires.

Varo Jan
Caravanserai Consulting
Posted - 2010.07.14 15:17:00 - [87]
 

Originally by: Cain m
Erm, what the hell are you on? Only two countries (Paraguay & Bolivia in South America) in the western hemisphere are landlocked, plus Mali and Burkina Faso if you want to count them.

Yeah, bad choice of words. The fact remains that the US does not provide appropriate comparisons for trade routes.
And there are 44 land locked countries in the world - they all count even if 42 aren't part of the Americas.

Raid'En
Posted - 2010.07.14 18:13:00 - [88]
 

Edited by: Raid''En on 14/07/2010 18:14:16
Edited by: Raid''En on 14/07/2010 18:13:05
Originally by: Voogru

One problem with the idea though, you might have people just moving over to one empire and then everybody does their missions there. Right now this would pretty much be Caldari space.

So you could see everyone from the other empires move over to Caldari space and the other three empires go bone dry.

for sure this will happen.

do you really think carebear will move to low sec ?
you saw this will lv5 missions, they won't do it.
"you" hate carebear because they don't want to take risks, and you think they will do it with this change ? no way.

with your idea go live jita will become way more crowded, as all people who don't want to go to los sec will move to caldari space.

and as some already said, traders who are capable of using LS without much risk will gain ever more than before.

if the goal of this idea is to have more people on LS it won't work at all.
on the price difference between empire, it will change a little, but not so much.
it will only change who get the money by trading from a lot of people to a less people.

if you really want more people on low sec (and i'm for), you need to make it more profitable living inside, or adding something new on it.

this tweak won't work.

moreover there's a real risk about a part of players stopping the game with this, and of course CCP won't allow it.

not supported.


Auri Hella
Downwind Trading Guild

Posted - 2010.07.14 20:09:00 - [89]
 

+1

nickersonm
Posted - 2010.07.14 23:56:00 - [90]
 

I support lowsec borders, but there's no reason to abandon ISK as a universal currency.


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