open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked An idea to encourage population growth in low sec.
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6

Author Topic

betoli
Gallente
Posted - 2011.02.06 13:30:00 - [91]
 

Originally by: Mashie Saldana
Originally by: betoli
Random mechanic suggestion:

Introduce a graduated 'badness cost' (A=agressor, D=agressed)

Badness= (sec_status(D-A) + faction_standing(D-A) + ship_class(A-D))*2*(system_sec-0.1)
- Ship_class for barge=2, indy=2, combat ship=(size+0.41)^tech_level
- e.g. attacking a barge in a t2 bs is seriously bad, but a t1 frig actually gives a bonus!

Now link GCC and combat aggression timers to thee badness factor (maybe tune for up to an hour GCC and 20 minutes combat in a 0.4).

In the event of a kill, a fine is imposed based on badness. The fine is payeable next time you dock in that factions stations. A half goes to concord and a half to the victim (less any insurance already received, and capped at fitted market val). The fine can be tuned to provide balance, the aim is to stimulate attacks where there is actual isk reward, and discourage killmail motivated aggression. If you do it for the killmail, you will pay for the benefit. But by the time you are in 0.1, you get the same as currently (badness=0 in a 0.1 system)

The fine is paid by ALL agressors. It also promotes solo pvp, because reward isk is shared, but fine isk isn't.

How much would the fine using this system be for blowing up a Hulk in 1.0 using a battleship? Or blowing up a piņata hauler in 0.5 with a BC?

I see this as a massive nerf to suicide ganking in highsec if anything. How are you going to value the implants in pods that are unfortunate enough to go squish btw?


I'd only apply it to lowsec, concord fulfil the role in highsec. But you can take your BS loss from the suicide gank as a calibration point - thats just a defacto highsec fine already. Calibration the other end (a 0.1 system) is 0 fine. So for a BS, a fine spread of 40m,25m,10m (for .4,.3..2) - assuming no correction for standing. That seems fair to me - a bs is way overkill for shooting hulks. It should only be cost effective if the fit/cargo has exotic stuff.

If you use a cruiser, then reduce appropriately, I'd say break even to slight profit in 0.2 (so maybe 11m,8m,5m fines).

T1 frigate swarms are noticeably not penalised, thats good, we aren't aiming for risk free, and hulks can field t2 medium drones anyway, so thats ok.

Whats an average drop from a t2 fit hulk full of lowsec ore? 8m?

I can try to work out a decent/sensible formula, if the idea is interesting to people.

AlleyKat
Gallente
The Unwanted.
Posted - 2011.02.06 14:12:00 - [92]
 

Changing the way the map has been drawn might help.

I created this illustration and put it in another thread that was related to this:

EVE Security System

For those of you that do not have time to look at a picture; I suggest creating borders of high sec space around each of the 4 empire hubs with low sec in-between them. This would give not only vastly increased I/O points between high/low, but it would mean low sec rating pilots can move easier across the map, as well as alliance travel for moving fleets and logistical work.

This would boost low sec average population.
Increase the chances of survival due to reduction of choke points.
The end of Jita being the primary trade hub.

Just an idea.

AK

Mashie Saldana
Minmatar
Veto Corp
Posted - 2011.02.06 15:00:00 - [93]
 

Originally by: betoli
I can try to work out a decent/sensible formula, if the idea is interesting to people.

No need as I can't see anyone wanting to fix lowsec by turning it into highsec lite.

Just move/add interesting resources to lowsec and people will figure out a way to get it. I'm not talking about moving L4 agents but adding stuff like meteorites that can be mined for high end moon goo and similar incentives.

Admiral Leviathan
Posted - 2011.02.06 16:30:00 - [94]
 

The reason I also love low-sec is because it is where a 30-man corp can thrive without going pirate. Sure, it be easier to just gank those auto-pilot badgers, but 95% of pirate camps in low-sec fear the 30 man anti-pirate gang that baits them and cleans up the camp when they stay there too long. A

t the moment, those corps seem to always come from high-sec, suggesting they are based there as it is closer to Jita and they do not have criminal sec status. Again, nothing would prevent them from settling in a quiet low-sec system not far from 2-3 high-profile gate camps - I have seen it done at least 3 times in my region. I never saw 100+ camps, but I've seen 100+ gangs flying through low-sec going to 0.0. The biggest "blobs" I encountered were in FW. If during your prime-time you can field 25-30 pilots + logistics, very few pirate corps will be able to fight back effectively. Pirates love good killmails, and having 30, 40 people on your killmail sucks, hence why the biggest majority of pirate camps are around 10 people.

Pac SubCom
True Creation
The 0rphanage
Posted - 2011.02.06 16:35:00 - [95]
 

Edited by: Pac SubCom on 06/02/2011 16:49:40

The eve community has nobody but themselves to blame here. Low sec holds enough rewards.

The problem is the profit maximization paradigm that is purported here on the forums, no doubt reflecting the same unhealthy state of being encountered in real life. Reading these boards gives you the impression that everybody is caught in a rat race, that this is a video game played with other people for fun seems to be forgotten. With the use of intelligent cooperation and organization, low sec is safe enough for everybody. Only the notion that in order to maximize efficiency "you must do your own thing" as an individualist holds people back. In pvp they must cooperate already, that everybody is able to defend his own industry in a pvp environment has not been realized by the mainstream yet.


Quote:
If during your prime-time you can field 25-30 pilots + logistics, very few pirate corps will be able to fight back effectively. Pirates love good killmails, and having 30, 40 people on your killmail sucks, hence why the biggest majority of pirate camps are around 10 people.


In other words, if the "carebear" level of organization is higher than the pirate level of organization, the pirates stand little chance. One gets the impression that pirates are these mystical superplayers. They have to follow the same rules as everybody else.

Admiral Leviathan
Posted - 2011.02.06 16:51:00 - [96]
 

Originally by: Pac SubCom
Edited by: Pac SubCom on 06/02/2011 16:42:22
The eve community has nobody but themselves to blame here. Low sec holds enough rewards.

The problem is the profit maximization paradigm that is purported here on the forums, no doubt reflecting the same unhealthy state of being encountered in real life. Reading these boards gives you the impression that everybody is caught in a rat race, that this is a video game played with other people for fun seems to be forgotten. With the use of intelligent cooperation and organization, low sec is safe enough for everybody. Only the notion that in order to maximize efficiency "you must do your own thing" as an individualist holds people back. In pvp they must cooperate already, that everybody is able to defend his own industry in a pvp environment has not been realized by the mainstream yet.


Quote:
If during your prime-time you can field 25-30 pilots + logistics, very few pirate corps will be able to fight back effectively. Pirates love good killmails, and having 30, 40 people on your killmail sucks, hence why the biggest majority of pirate camps are around 10 people.


In other words, if the "carebear" level of organization is higher than the pirate level of organization, the pirates stand little chance.


Also to add to this, very few pirate camps actually have logistics. All they care is inflicting maximum damage in the shortest amount of time. If you bring one logi.. you pretty much already need another one. These logi pilots cannot be "alts" being dual boxed either. Carebear corps on the other hand can get away with bringing 9 guys against 10 pirates, and then jumping a single logi once the tanking ship hits half tank. Carebear corp brings 2 logis? 10 man fleet scatters.

Pac SubCom
True Creation
The 0rphanage
Posted - 2011.02.06 17:00:00 - [97]
 

Edited by: Pac SubCom on 06/02/2011 17:02:09
Yes, this is a typical thing. Like in high sec wars, where people tend to hide their logis away, put them in neutral corps, to even get an engagement in the first place, and it is similar with ECM ships. Otherwise they just all dock up.





Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
Posted - 2011.02.06 18:10:00 - [98]
 

Originally by: M Blanc
Using the population numbers from the Q2 2010 QEN and system counts from Grismar's site:

Highsec has 15% of the game's total systems and 53% of the total population
Lowsec has 9% of the game's total systems and 8% of the total population
Nullsec has 44% of the game's total systems and 32% of the total population
W-space has 32% of the game's total systems and 7% of the total population

We can get a measure of the population density in each type of space by dividing the percentage of players living in that type of space by the percentage of the game's total systems belonging to that type of space:

Highsec "population density": 3.53
Lowsec "population density": 0.89
Nullsec "population density": 0.73
W-space "population density": 0.22

So if lowsec is the most densely-populated pvp-friendly type of space... what exactly is it about it that needs fixing?

I'm not saying that it's perfect or that there aren't changes I'd like to see, but it's nowhere near as badly-off as some people want to make out.


\o/ statistical evidence to support my "fix" for low sec.

Essentially there isn't anything "wrong" with low sec ... it could do with a few more features for the fun of it but as the numbers say there, the only thing that's missing are MORE LOW SEC SYSTEMS.

there are:
~1200 high sec systems
~900 low sec
~3300 null sec

this should be:
~1200
~2250
~3300

So, please add more low sec systems... This means wider ranges for pk'ers and more places to hide for pve'ers. Add more low sec pockets that don't connect to null sec. Add low sec pockets that don't connect to high sec.

and here is HOW you add more systems to eve in a logical manner (not the FW method of "hey, look at that... something you never knew were there"). Have the new low sec systems be WH systems that the factions have made gates bridge (gates around worm holes to make them permanently stable). This adds lots of possibilities for size limitations and whatnot.

betoli
Gallente
Posted - 2011.02.06 19:27:00 - [99]
 

Originally by: AlleyKat
Changing the way the map has been drawn might help.

I created this illustration and put it in another thread that was related to this:

EVE Security System

For those of you that do not have time to look at a picture; I suggest creating borders of high sec space around each of the 4 empire hubs with low sec in-between them. This would give not only vastly increased I/O points between high/low, but it would mean low sec rating pilots can move easier across the map, as well as alliance travel for moving fleets and logistical work.

This would boost low sec average population.
Increase the chances of survival due to reduction of choke points.
The end of Jita being the primary trade hub.

Just an idea.

AK


Linkage

Glyken Touchon
Gallente
Independent Alchemists
Posted - 2011.02.06 20:26:00 - [100]
 

Originally by: CCP Chronotis
We have boosted low sec a few times before, ultimately what we are facing is psychology or "the wall". The possibility of risk introduces a barrier that is very hard to break down. Most people focus on the pain of loss, though the true pain of loss for any player is the time lost over the assets lost. Whether you have been playing the game for days or years, the time to replace your ship is fairly key to getting back running after being killed and this is fairly constant regardless of your "power".

At the same time, we have somewhat of a catch 22 since as ebil pirates become more successful as predators, they drive away their prey ending up in you fighting for whatever unfortunate soul dare jumps "the wall". In short, boosting rewards rarely works unless it was very high, instead what should be done is create different activities in each zone so it is a different rather than comparative decision.


The hard border between 0.5 and 0.4 with a warning message only reinforces that wall. The divide needs to be blurred a bit.

I've seen a couple of variations of this on here: allow a decreasing chance of a concord patrol being nearby in 0.4 and 0.3, and similar chances that there isn't a nearby patrol in 0.5 and 0.6. There would obviously need to be a rethink of the "avoiding concord is an exploit", maybe just include "if they arrive".

Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
Posted - 2011.02.06 22:17:00 - [101]
 

Originally by: Glyken Touchon

I've seen a couple of variations of this on here: allow a decreasing chance of a concord patrol being nearby in 0.4 and 0.3, and similar chances that there isn't a nearby patrol in 0.5 and 0.6. There would obviously need to be a rethink of the "avoiding concord is an exploit", maybe just include "if they arrive".

I'd not want to see concord in low sec, possibly faction police that does add a bit of defensive dps but does not ecm, neut and scramble you. That'd just be silly in low sec.

Glyken Touchon
Gallente
Independent Alchemists
Posted - 2011.02.06 23:47:00 - [102]
 

Edited by: Glyken Touchon on 06/02/2011 23:50:00
Originally by: Ravenal
Originally by: Glyken Touchon

I've seen a couple of variations of this on here: allow a decreasing chance of a concord patrol being nearby in 0.4 and 0.3, and similar chances that there isn't a nearby patrol in 0.5 and 0.6. There would obviously need to be a rethink of the "avoiding concord is an exploit", maybe just include "if they arrive".

I'd not want to see concord in low sec, possibly faction police that does add a bit of defensive dps but does not ecm, neut and scramble you. That'd just be silly in low sec.
Like I said, I've seen variations on that theme. I don't really know which one comes across best, but I feel that something along those lines is necessary to help break that psychological barrier.

edit: added quote to preserve context

Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
Posted - 2011.02.07 01:47:00 - [103]
 

Lets explore some features.
Sec status:
- High sec status
= does nothing.
- Low sec status
= you start getting color tags on the overview by default and an option for a skull icon.
= you start losing access to high sec.

The "bonus" of low sec status might even be considered better than the penalty. All the low sec status people I know have alts to do their high sec stuff for them so who cares about that part. As a bonus they get color coding and a skull symbol ... win.

No bonus for having high sec status? Seriously? How about fixing that?

The most dangerous part of low and null sec ... well, if you don't have eyes it's jumping into a system and undocking. Being "stuck" waiting out a camp or in station waiting for a scout to tell you it's clear or for all the people that are docked with you to leave is ... boring.

A lot of the low sec game is waiting... quitting your probing, missioning, ratting or mining to wait out the people that want to blob you. Eventually you spend more time waiting than playing through the content being offered. Likewise the blobbers wait their chance too.

All in all, low sec is mostly about waiting.
- this is a generalization, I've spent plenty of time in low sec systems that were free of blobbers for extended periods. But this generalization has become more dominant lately, post FW for example.

The thing is, low sec doesn't have much for the casual player and the serious player can usually get more from null sec. This is also where pos mining in low sec becomes ... annoying for everything else in that system.

Mutnin
Amarr
Mutineers
Posted - 2011.02.07 02:50:00 - [104]
 

Originally by: CCP Chronotis
We have boosted low sec a few times before, ultimately what we are facing is psychology or "the wall". The possibility of risk introduces a barrier that is very hard to break down. Most people focus on the pain of loss, though the true pain of loss for any player is the time lost over the assets lost. Whether you have been playing the game for days or years, the time to replace your ship is fairly key to getting back running after being killed and this is fairly constant regardless of your "power".

At the same time, we have somewhat of a catch 22 since as ebil pirates become more successful as predators, they drive away their prey ending up in you fighting for whatever unfortunate soul dare jumps "the wall". In short, boosting rewards rarely works unless it was very high, instead what should be done is create different activities in each zone so it is a different rather than comparative decision.

Buffing the roids is also a catch 22, more roids = more potential supply = price decrease. You might notice nocxium is fast becoming valuable and this comes from ores largely dominant in low sec. This was done by decreasing supply from other sources so there isnt always a need to increase supply (though that seems obvious to give more, although here, less=more).


Why not go the other direction and give the industrialist's a way to compete with us evil pirates. Instead of buffing things like ore tables that can greatly imbalance other areas of the game, why not give the miners tools that will allow them to go into those risky areas of low sec?

While this might sound strange coming from a pie, but I kind of thought CCP missed the boat with some of the things that "could" have been done with T3's. Personally I think T3's should have industrial sub systems for things such as ninja mining in dangerous space.

Perhaps CCP should look into adding some faction sub systems that can be sold through the ORE LP store, that could turn a T3 into a "decent" ninja mining platform.

Obviously, it shouldn't out preform a mining barge or be 100% invulnerable, but you can't exactly expect the poor miners to risk running ships like Hulks in low sec as it's just out right suicide. Risk vs Reward can only take you so far if the risk far out weighs the reward.

Give them the tools to work with and I'm quite certain you would see people making use of them.

Donnovich Vacano
Posted - 2011.02.07 05:05:00 - [105]
 

I like your thinking. Maby a new mining barge that is light and fast but has a lower yield. Or something like that. You know you can put a tec 1 cloak on a hulk btw but you have to give up a strip.

Also someone pointed out the difficulty in doing missions in lowsec. With nothing else to do in lowsec what else do people have to do but kill other players. Se i don't mind getting killed by other players in fleet actions but getting sucker punched is just lame, and i feel like they do it just to **** me off. I love pvp in wow, because it feels like it has a purpose. It's us v them. In this game it's like "dude we are both amarr you shouldn't be killing me we should be hunting caldari together". Also pve is just more fun. At least there i know that if i loose a ship its because i was overwealmed by a superior force. But every time i go to lowsec i get sucker-punched and get e-wared into total uselessness. I don't mind being tackled and forced to slug it out but this is just lame. All my expensive fittings and my awesome ship cant do **** and i have to just sit there and wait for this prik to spend the next 45 min slowly whittling me down. That's not fun, it's not constructive, it's just lame.

Donnovich Vacano
Posted - 2011.02.07 05:23:00 - [106]
 

Actually i just realized a major root cause. In highsec you have major market hubs. You can't really have any in lowsec. sure places that have manufacturing tend to be a pit better stocked. But you are never going to have a jita in lowsec. If such a hub were to form pirates would camp it day and night. Haulers would not be willing to go there, hence the hub would cease to be. Therefore to make any money or even to deciently fit your ship you have to either be in a good 0.0 manufacturing and hauling corp, or be high sec's bi+c#. If there were a special class of high sec systems scattered here and there that can be cyno'd then it would be much easier to live in lowsec without actually affecting the rest of lowsec.

TharOkha
Posted - 2011.02.07 09:37:00 - [107]
 

Edited by: TharOkha on 07/02/2011 09:40:27
Hisec - all space is "relatively" safe
Lowsec - gates and stations are safe (concord presence) all other space is unsafe (belts, deep space, plexes etc.)
nullsec - no safe
This shoud introduce lowsec "jitas" =>> more population in lowsec.
Lowsec is still EMPIRE SPACE. Gates and stations are property of EMPIRE =>> concord presence to keep it

betoli
Gallente
Posted - 2011.02.07 11:23:00 - [108]
 

Originally by: Mutnin
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
We have boosted low sec a few times before, ultimately what we are facing is psychology or "the wall". The possibility of risk introduces a barrier that is very hard to break down. Most people focus on the pain of loss, though the true pain of loss for any player is the time lost over the assets lost. Whether you have been playing the game for days or years, the time to replace your ship is fairly key to getting back running after being killed and this is fairly constant regardless of your "power".

At the same time, we have somewhat of a catch 22 since as ebil pirates become more successful as predators, they drive away their prey ending up in you fighting for whatever unfortunate soul dare jumps "the wall". In short, boosting rewards rarely works unless it was very high, instead what should be done is create different activities in each zone so it is a different rather than comparative decision.

Buffing the roids is also a catch 22, more roids = more potential supply = price decrease. You might notice nocxium is fast becoming valuable and this comes from ores largely dominant in low sec. This was done by decreasing supply from other sources so there isnt always a need to increase supply (though that seems obvious to give more, although here, less=more).


Why not go the other direction and give the industrialist's a way to compete with us evil pirates. Instead of buffing things like ore tables that can greatly imbalance other areas of the game, why not give the miners tools that will allow them to go into those risky areas of low sec?

While this might sound strange coming from a pie, but I kind of thought CCP missed the boat with some of the things that "could" have been done with T3's. Personally I think T3's should have industrial sub systems for things such as ninja mining in dangerous space.

Perhaps CCP should look into adding some faction sub systems that can be sold through the ORE LP store, that could turn a T3 into a "decent" ninja mining platform.

Obviously, it shouldn't out preform a mining barge or be 100% invulnerable, but you can't exactly expect the poor miners to risk running ships like Hulks in low sec as it's just out right suicide. Risk vs Reward can only take you so far if the risk far out weighs the reward.

Give them the tools to work with and I'm quite certain you would see people making use of them.


I like the idea of empowering non-pirates, but making t3 the mechanic to achieve that completely fails to support noob players.

How about just buffing gate/station guns so that tanking them in a 0.4 isn't practical and they have range to stop sniping, and slowly let gate gun firepower tail off as the sec status gets lower? You could even put occasional turrets at customs houses and belts (not all, and maybe not guns - rr, neuts or warp stabilising widgets)




Ruareve
Posted - 2011.02.07 11:42:00 - [109]
 

Originally by: betoli

I like the idea of empowering non-pirates, but making t3 the mechanic to achieve that completely fails to support noob players.

How about just buffing gate/station guns so that tanking them in a 0.4 isn't practical and they have range to stop sniping, and slowly let gate gun firepower tail off as the sec status gets lower? You could even put occasional turrets at customs houses and belts (not all, and maybe not guns - rr, neuts or warp stabilising widgets)


Increasing gate guns alone won't be enough to get more people into low sec for missions and mining. All a pirate has to do is sit cloaked off the gate then patrol the belts or scan down the grav sites.

Maybe get rid of low sec mining all together, just put all the ore types into high instead. Instead populate low sec with 2-3x as many complexes as current of all difficulty level. Increase the anamolies you can see in the overview with more rats as well. Basically make it so the whole point of low sec is to bring combat ships to conduct combat operations. Still some risk but the potential for increased rewards is there as well. Not all low sec systems are crowded and having rapidly accomplished objectives allowing for constant movement would increase appeal.

betoli
Gallente
Posted - 2011.02.07 13:45:00 - [110]
 

Edited by: betoli on 07/02/2011 13:49:04
Edited by: betoli on 07/02/2011 13:47:24
Edited by: betoli on 07/02/2011 13:46:14
Originally by: Ruareve
Originally by: betoli

I like the idea of empowering non-pirates, but making t3 the mechanic to achieve that completely fails to support noob players.

How about just buffing gate/station guns so that tanking them in a 0.4 isn't practical and they have range to stop sniping, and slowly let gate gun firepower tail off as the sec status gets lower? You could even put occasional turrets at customs houses and belts (not all, and maybe not guns - rr, neuts or warp stabilising widgets)


Increasing gate guns alone won't be enough to get more people into low sec for missions and mining. All a pirate has to do is sit cloaked off the gate then patrol the belts or scan down the grav sites.

Maybe get rid of low sec mining all together, just put all the ore types into high instead. Instead populate low sec with 2-3x as many complexes as current of all difficulty level. Increase the anamolies you can see in the overview with more rats as well. Basically make it so the whole point of low sec is to bring combat ships to conduct combat operations. Still some risk but the potential for increased rewards is there as well. Not all low sec systems are crowded and having rapidly accomplished objectives allowing for constant movement would increase appeal.



I'd be completely against dropping ls mining altogether, as long as some people do it, it needs leaving there :-)

I think we need to look at the mechanics of risk/reward for miners, without appealing to t2/t3 for solutions, we do want cannonfodder (er new players) in lowsec too. As it stands a mining barge is paper thin, a mining bs can potentially tank but at huge expense of mining amount that, at a guess makes mining lowsec not worth while. Neither option provides a fight back opportunity beyond drones. So the only survivability option is to run. Running makes sense - you are a miner.

A hypothetical aggressor has a covops frig and a buddy who can kill you. Both ships can fit a scram, so the first thing you know is that you have 4 points on you, and a BS at close range. Lets face it your dead. Having a support fleet a) won't save your bacon and b) splits the profit. The only counter to this is to dock up when you see someone in local. Thats fine, paying attention is a reasonable game mechanic. Except we are trying to increase lowsec population. So we have to work in a world where there are always people in local. Basically we need to increase the survivability of a barge that suddenly encounters hostiles.

a) penalties (as per my earlier post)
b) modules - may be a barge-only warp core stabiliser rig (at expense of strip miner cycle time)
c) ship - barges are completely unagile, unfast, and untanked. We need something else (t1) or a serious rethink of the current barge attributes.

For c) I would introduce a second mid-tier 2-strip barge (with price similar to the 3-strip ship) with survivable tank, and able to counter 2 scram points with 1 MLU or 4 scram points with no MLU (either with more low slots or a new rig). I'd re-purpose the (****, pointless) low tier 1-stripper for speed/agility and have a t2 version of it that can fit a cov-ops cloak for a low yield stealth barge.

+ the t3 industrial for highly skilled players. t3 is for adding flexibility not capability.

tl;dr a survivable mining ship has to have mining amount sufficiently high so that whatever the ore price delta, it is still more profitable than a tank-less hulk in highsec.








Mutnin
Amarr
Mutineers
Posted - 2011.02.07 14:12:00 - [111]
 

Originally by: betoli

I like the idea of empowering non-pirates, but making t3 the mechanic to achieve that completely fails to support noob players.

How about just buffing gate/station guns so that tanking them in a 0.4 isn't practical and they have range to stop sniping, and slowly let gate gun firepower tail off as the sec status gets lower? You could even put occasional turrets at customs houses and belts (not all, and maybe not guns - rr, neuts or warp stabilising widgets)




Well TBH, noob players should face a bit more risk if they want to try and venture into dangerous places. There should be a reason to spend that time training for things rather than getting easy access to everything right out of the box.

I will disagree with you on the gate guns. Half the reason pie groups have to "blob" up and fly BS/BC's with tons of un-beatable logistics is because of gate guns.

There are very few targets in belts or even running complexs/missions in low sec which means 90% of the fighting happens on gates. This is the reason you see all the gate camps in low sec and even null sec because it's the easiest and quickest way for the masses to get a fight/gank-mail.

IMO there needs to be better reasons for people to go exploring in low sec or mining and doing the various things. As it is right now, low sec is 100 times more dangerous than the current blue nap trains of null sec yet gets no where near the rewards.


Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
Amarr
Posted - 2011.02.07 14:40:00 - [112]
 

Originally by: CCP Chronotis
We have boosted low sec a few times before, ultimately what we are facing is psychology or "the wall". The possibility of risk introduces a barrier that is very hard to break down. Most people focus on the pain of loss, though the true pain of loss for any player is the time lost over the assets lost. Whether you have been playing the game for days or years, the time to replace your ship is fairly key to getting back running after being killed and this is fairly constant regardless of your "power".

At the same time, we have somewhat of a catch 22 since as ebil pirates become more successful as predators, they drive away their prey ending up in you fighting for whatever unfortunate soul dare jumps "the wall". In short, boosting rewards rarely works unless it was very high, instead what should be done is create different activities in each zone so it is a different rather than comparative decision.

Buffing the roids is also a catch 22, more roids = more potential supply = price decrease. You might notice nocxium is fast becoming valuable and this comes from ores largely dominant in low sec. This was done by decreasing supply from other sources so there isnt always a need to increase supply (though that seems obvious to give more, although here, less=more).


And this is why I never venture into lowsec nor anywhere where does exist the lesser chance to have to play for 200 hours just to rebuild my mission ship.

Lowsec and nullsec are PvP areas. Let them stay this way, and if they die out... tough for the PvPers, not my business. Laughing

OTOH, I would like to venture into the mouths of hell if I could kill everyone with a negative standing, and I mean KILL, make him start again with 0 ISK and 0 SP. I lose 200 hours of gameplay, you lose them too, pirate. ugh

That would balance the odds and I would gleefuly lose a marauder if I knew for sure that anyone I killed would lose the same amount of gameplay as myself... Twisted Evil

Mike Voidstar
Posted - 2011.02.07 16:00:00 - [113]
 

Edited by: Mike Voidstar on 07/02/2011 16:01:34
The thing about Carebears vs. Pirates is that if the Carebears wanted to pvp the pirates, they would not be carebears anymore.

Pretty much any gate camp is going to be better run, more organized and better prepared for PVP purposes because Carebears are not interested in hunting pirates down. Carebears are 99% targetable cannon fodder because they don't want to pvp.

Low-sec has a low population due to this reason alone. Nothing will make people who dislike being shot suddenly like it for even double the money. Many bears could lose their mission ships every day and not go broke for a year--- they dislike the PvP itself, which the pirates force upon them.

You want to see people in PvP areas, it's simple. Remvoe ISK from the game, and make faction matter. Gallente no longer group with Amarr or Caldari, period. Make all equipment available only with LP, and award LP only for completing mission goals against enemy and pirate factoins, and for killing enemy and pirate ships, pc or npc.

In the breif time before the game dies, you'll see people looking to pvp in the pirate controlled regions of space.

Ruareve
Posted - 2011.02.07 16:30:00 - [114]
 

Originally by: betoli

I'd be completely against dropping ls mining altogether, as long as some people do it, it needs leaving there :-)

I think we need to look at the mechanics of risk/reward for miners, without appealing to t2/t3 for solutions, we do want cannonfodder (er new players) in lowsec too. As it stands a mining barge is paper thin, a mining bs can potentially tank but at huge expense of mining amount that, at a guess makes mining lowsec not worth while. Neither option provides a fight back opportunity beyond drones. So the only survivability option is to run. Running makes sense - you are a miner.

A hypothetical aggressor has a covops frig and a buddy who can kill you. Both ships can fit a scram, so the first thing you know is that you have 4 points on you, and a BS at close range. Lets face it your dead. Having a support fleet a) won't save your bacon and b) splits the profit. The only counter to this is to dock up when you see someone in local. Thats fine, paying attention is a reasonable game mechanic. Except we are trying to increase lowsec population. So we have to work in a world where there are always people in local. Basically we need to increase the survivability of a barge that suddenly encounters hostiles.

a) penalties (as per my earlier post)
b) modules - may be a barge-only warp core stabiliser rig (at expense of strip miner cycle time)
c) ship - barges are completely unagile, unfast, and untanked. We need something else (t1) or a serious rethink of the current barge attributes.

For c) I would introduce a second mid-tier 2-strip barge (with price similar to the 3-strip ship) with survivable tank, and able to counter 2 scram points with 1 MLU or 4 scram points with no MLU (either with more low slots or a new rig). I'd re-purpose the (****, pointless) low tier 1-stripper for speed/agility and have a t2 version of it that can fit a cov-ops cloak for a low yield stealth barge.

+ the t3 industrial for highly skilled players. t3 is for adding flexibility not capability.

tl;dr a survivable mining ship has to have mining amount sufficiently high so that whatever the ore price delta, it is still more profitable than a tank-less hulk in highsec.




So few people mine in low sec as it is, and honestly it's not that thrill of low sec they want it's the ore that's available there. Move the ore into high sec and I bet 99.99% of miners will never say "gee I wish I could go into low sec and mine".

As for the rest of your suggestion, you want to design entirely new mining vesseels that only have the advantage of being able to run faster. That won't bring enough people into lowsec to justify the programming time.

The solution to low sec first requires admitting the current low sec dynamic doesn't work. Then you have to consider a completely new reason to have low sec. It's not just a buffer between high and null, there's no reason to have a buffer. The reason for low is a pseudo training ground for people to learn small scale pvp combat with a few additional safe play rules when compared to null. Looking at low in that light it's fairly plain to see low sec's only purpose should be learning combat. Whether it's through the use of complexe's, missions, or just plain old ratting the end result should be to beckon to combat ship pilots.

Mining requires a fairly secure area to operate out of and there is no way low sec can provide that safety in it's current form. Either you allow people to claim low just like null, thus making a carebear version of null sec, or you scrap low sec mining altogether and use something other carrot to attract players.

Mashie Saldana
Minmatar
Veto Corp
Posted - 2011.02.07 16:39:00 - [115]
 

Originally by: Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
OTOH, I would like to venture into the mouths of hell if I could kill everyone with a negative standing, and I mean KILL, make him start again with 0 ISK and 0 SP. I lose 200 hours of gameplay, you lose them too, pirate. ugh

Oh didn't you know, as soon as a pirate has a ship explode it is automatically respawned in the station ready to be used again. Rolling Eyes

betoli
Gallente
Posted - 2011.02.07 17:11:00 - [116]
 

Originally by: Ruareve

So few people mine in low sec as it is, and honestly it's not that thrill of low sec they want it's the ore that's available there. Move the ore into high sec and I bet 99.99% of miners will never say "gee I wish I could go into low sec and mine".

As for the rest of your suggestion, you want to design entirely new mining vesseels that only have the advantage of being able to run faster. That won't bring enough people into lowsec to justify the programming time.



Perhaps miners, like everyone else would like a viable practice ground of a more risky environment, without a full transition to 0.0 in exactly the way you described for combat pilots?

Mining gets scant attention from CCP. Less ships, less skills, less variety - for something that is a core part of the eve economy. How long does it take to implement a new ship anyway - all the barges are the same model +/- a strip miner. The changes I described would pretty much only be useful in less secure space (which we were trying to buf, not nerf into oblivion) so they are relatively safe. Compared to moving the low sec ores into high sec (which collapses their price, and hence has a largely unknown effect on the economy) its fairly easy and fairly safe.

Your post basically says leave lowsec for combat, and **** industry.



Zero Temperature
Posted - 2011.02.07 17:20:00 - [117]
 

One idea to boost low sec is to allow an alliance to enter a "partnership" with npc station owners. The partner alliance can get a few percentage from every completed missions, market transaction fees, ore refined, industry jobs, and repair fees in that station. This would give the local residents some reasons not to shoot every ship that comes in. More likely it will develop into some kind of landlord/renter system, turning the low sec pirates into low sec mafia.

Of course partnership does not equal ownership. So the partner alliance can not control the station like those in 0.0. The best they can do is to bring in more customers by providing protection in surrounding area. Now we have filled low sec with targets, pvp will follow. Naturally we can imagine that the systems with high quality lv4 agents will become the new "high-end moons" in low sec.

What's left is to dream up some kind of partnership establishing and maintaining system. There are quite a few possibilities here. It could tie to the standing between the alliance and the station owner, or it could be a profit quota system where the alliance must meet. Basically it should be tuned in such way that if the station is locked down by hostiles for a few days, the partnership ends.

I am sure for this to work there are still some details need to be worked out. Please comment.

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2011.02.07 17:31:00 - [118]
 

DAMMIT PEOPLE! You are still thinking inside the box called "high-sec"!
You can buff, tweak and polish the current low-sec to your hearts content but it will NEVER be anything other than "high-sec w. less security" which means the common man will still not venture there.

The rewards would need to be stupidly, game-breakingly high to entice the majority into giving low-sec a spin.
Originally by: Zero Temperature
One idea to ...

See my post on previous page, practically identical concept Smile


Zero Temperature
Posted - 2011.02.07 17:49:00 - [119]
 

Originally by: Hirana Yoshida

See my post on previous page, practically identical concept Smile



Sorry that I skipped many posts including yours, but I am glad we have similar idea.Very Happy

Corozan Aspinall
Perkone
Posted - 2011.02.07 18:35:00 - [120]
 

I really wish CCP would fix the sec status whack you get for fighting in low sec.

All it does is encourage -10 alts to live there and nobody else.

Nobody is going to risk their main being denied access to high sec. And nobody (sane) wants to spend 5 hrs a day doing missions or ratting to claw it back after living in low sec for a few days.

0.2% gain for a level 4 mission that takes 20 mins.

3.1% loss for engaging and destroying someone in low sec.

Ridiculously out of sync.

Fix this and people will go there and stay there and do business there.


Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6

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