open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked high sec hiways between empires, why?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4

Author Topic

mr rens
Posted - 2010.08.29 17:54:00 - [1]
 

I'm curious why (from a design perspective, not RP or whatever) there is a path from gallente to caldari space (etc. etc.) that is all high-sec.

What would the effect be if you had to go through low sec border areas to get between empires?

I believe that it would increase the costs of things due to increased time/risk associated with crossing. I also believe that it would increase the value of amarr corp stations in caldari space, etc etc, increase mfgr profits, etc.

Any other ideas?

I think the reason they don't do this is because it benefits the majority of eve players to have the safe transportation, and this reduces the edge between good and bad players.

Comments are welcome, but I'm interested strictly in a design perspective.

Duvida
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2010.08.29 18:08:00 - [2]
 

The effect would now be to bring inter-empire trade to an almost standstill. Low-sec isn't Russian Roulette anymore, it's more of a fully loaded weapon. Pull that trigger these days and more often than not, you'll be ganked, podded and down however many hundreds of millions or billions of isk were involved.

It's a stranglehold, not a risk anymore.

On the other hand, as players left with frustration, those remaining could enjoy the EVE of the old days, when 10,000 logged in was a major event.

shady trader
Posted - 2010.08.29 18:16:00 - [3]
 

mr rens you could try doing a search. the idea of low sec between empires comes up about once every 2 months. Also there is a dev blog about the changes to the highways they did a long time ago.

Llyandrian
Amarr
Livestock Science Exchange
Posted - 2010.08.29 18:31:00 - [4]
 


The border between Gallente & Caldari space is like the Berlin wall during the cold war. Highly guarded. Low Sec is the neglected back of beyond, more like like the Congo, Sierra Leone or Columbia.

Tres Farmer
Gallente Federation Intelligence Service
Posted - 2010.08.29 18:38:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Duvida
The effect would now be to bring inter-empire trade to an almost standstill.

If by inter-empire trade you mean 75% of market/contract trade is made in Jita, then yes.. this might (and should TBFH) change..

Originally by: Duvida
Low-sec isn't Russian Roulette anymore, it's more of a fully loaded weapon. Pull that trigger these days and more often than not, you'll be ganked, podded and down however many hundreds of millions or billions of isk were involved.

Here-say?
If we ever get those low-sec between empires ccp will for sure add more chokepoints..

Originally by: Duvida
On the other hand, as players left with frustration, those remaining could enjoy the EVE of the old days, when 10,000 logged in was a major event.

We got Jumpclones, Cov Ops, JFs.. don't know what devil you're painting on the wall there..

Professor Tarantula
Hedion University
Posted - 2010.08.29 18:43:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 29/08/2010 18:54:02
Everyone would just start using blockade runners to make it through lowsec gatecamps, because they'd have to. So you'd see modules and other small items still traded between hubs, but trade in larger things like ships would die overnight.

It would be great in theory to have lowsec between the empires with people trying to make runs in all kinds of haulers, but with gates in the equation, pirates just have to park on one and shoot fish in a barrel.

Blane Xero
Amarr
The Firestorm Cartel
Posted - 2010.08.29 18:57:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Professor Tarantula
Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 29/08/2010 18:54:02
Everyone would just start using blockade runners to make it through lowsec gatecamps, because they'd have to. So you'd see modules and other small items still traded between hubs, but trade in larger things like ships would die overnight.
No it wouldnt.

Mella Elcus
Posted - 2010.08.29 18:59:00 - [8]
 

Because it wouldn't work. You can't force people into lowsec, it's been proven over and over again.

There's a reason a large majority of players choose to stay in highsec. They would rather quit than set their foot in lowsec in something that's not warp stabbed or cloaked, and then there's some that won't even do that.

Professor Tarantula
Hedion University
Posted - 2010.08.29 19:03:00 - [9]
 

Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 29/08/2010 19:09:42
Originally by: Blane Xero
Originally by: Professor Tarantula

Everyone would just start using blockade runners to make it through lowsec gatecamps, because they'd have to. So you'd see modules and other small items still traded between hubs, but trade in larger things like ships would die overnight.
No it wouldnt.


So i'm going to have to play guessing games to figure out what you might mean because you can't rub two brain cells together at the moment to form an argument? Ok.

I'll assume you meant there would still be a fairly good market for Frigates and other relatively small ships, and you'd be right, so gold star for you. What i meant to say is any ship you'd normally see transported in large, slow to align, haulers.

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2010.08.29 19:15:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Tres Farmer

We got Jumpclones, Cov Ops, JFs.. don't know what devil you're painting on the wall there..


Very useful for traders. Rolling Eyes

Try moving something with a bit of volume to a trade hub in a Cov Op.

Even JFs are useful to a point. With CCP love for cokepoints we will end with 1 entry points for each region.

Ghoest
Posted - 2010.08.29 19:15:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: mr rens
I'm curious why (from a design perspective, not RP or whatever) there is a path from gallente to caldari space (etc. etc.) that is all high-sec.

What would the effect be if you had to go through low sec border areas to get between empires?

I believe that it would increase the costs of things due to increased time/risk associated with crossing. I also believe that it would increase the value of amarr corp stations in caldari space, etc etc, increase mfgr profits, etc.

Any other ideas?

I think the reason they don't do this is because it benefits the majority of eve players to have the safe transportation, and this reduces the edge between good and bad players.

Comments are welcome, but I'm interested strictly in a design perspective.


hi 2 u noob

Joan D'Jita
Posted - 2010.08.29 19:16:00 - [12]
 

I very much support the proposal to remove highsec from between empires. From an RP perspective, it makes sense for the border regions to be highly volatile. Think about the border between the US and Mexico, for example. It would give the border zones more of a 'frontier'ish feeling.

That being said, those who say it would kill trade, can't force people into lowsec, etc. blah blah are simply mistaken. Sure, you wouldn't be able to run 500m worth of tech 2 modules between Jita and Dodixie in a Badger Mk II. Rather, you'd use a Crane. Blockade runners are highly effective ships for traveling through lowsec. I do it all the time in lowsec today and have not yet been killed (despite many attempts).

For larger items like ships, you would use a jump freighter. Trade would become far more specialized. You'd have more of a niche profession for people who haul their goods.

Overall, I think it would be one of the best things to happen to this game. The highsec highways are a relic of when Eve HAD to be made smaller because there were fewer people. With such a large population, the game can easily support four relatively independent population centers.

Camios
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2010.08.29 19:20:00 - [13]
 

Edited by: Camios on 29/08/2010 19:22:00
This is an important question in my opinion, that has never been answered by game designers.

I don't think that the mean EVE player would care much about it anyway.

Someone thinks very naively that the competition in Jita drives the prices down, actually you can look at the market data and see how strong it is being manipulated. The prices of prometium and dysprosium were subject to heavy manipulation, there was not real competition in driving the prices down because some players (or groups of players) had so much money that they could actually manipulate the Jita market and keep the price up.

Many other think that Jita is the best place to trade. It is actually not right because the competition is to strong, unless you are strong enough (you have billions to invest). The only reason why people go to Jita to sell is that they are sure that there will be someone that will buy it soon, and certainty is a good thing in a free market.



Why Jita is so big? Because there are many pilots in caldari space, and it 's linked to Amarr by a 10 jump highsec highway.
This causes all the 0.0 products to be sold in Jita, and this means that all the big alliances that do stuff in empire buy and sell in Jita 4-4 (and maybe in Amarr).

The other trade hubs like Rens are fuelled by local mission runners, producers and miners, and very few of them go to jita to buy stuff, they just stick to Rens.

The removal of HSHWs would increase the risk or organization required to do interregional trade, and thus the revenue of it, while reducing its volume. You will basically need to hire some pvp guy to do it, and it would be a good thing. No more Autopilot freighters.

In a good scenario, the global traders would split between the four trade hubs.

In a bad scenario, global traders would stick to jita thanks to a sort of hysteresis. All 0.0 trade would need just one or two jump freighter jumps to reach jita, and the Jita supremacy would continue.

(my 2 cents).

Doddy
Excidium.
Executive Outcomes
Posted - 2010.08.29 19:39:00 - [14]
 

Edited by: Doddy on 29/08/2010 19:40:52
Originally by: Professor Tarantula
Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 29/08/2010 19:09:42
Originally by: Blane Xero
Originally by: Professor Tarantula

Everyone would just start using blockade runners to make it through lowsec gatecamps, because they'd have to. So you'd see modules and other small items still traded between hubs, but trade in larger things like ships would die overnight.
No it wouldnt.


So i'm going to have to play guessing games to figure out what you might mean because you can't rub two brain cells together at the moment to form an argument? Ok.

I'll assume you meant there would still be a fairly good market for Frigates and other relatively small ships, and you'd be right, so gold star for you. What i meant to say is any ship you'd normally see transported in large, slow to align, haulers.


There would be no difference in ships etc except some pirates would get a bit richer from protection money or some producers would have to hire mercs also for protection, or defend themselves. Or said pirates would just become the middle men doing the transporting themselves. Or people would jump-freighter stuff across. Hopefully that would help local trade hubs and we wouldn't all be pandering to the lunacy of Jita, but i have the feeling it would all end up as normal with a few small price increases.

Really how do you think stuff gets on markets in lo-sec or hi sec "islands" as it is?

Jassie Jayne
Posted - 2010.08.29 19:48:00 - [15]
 

Edited by: Jassie Jayne on 29/08/2010 19:51:07
Originally by: Mella Elcus
Because it wouldn't work. You can't force people into lowsec, it's been proven over and over again.

There's a reason a large majority of players choose to stay in highsec. They would rather quit than set their foot in lowsec in something that's not warp stabbed or cloaked, and then there's some that won't even do that.



I am very interested in knowing how many of the naysayers actually travel between empires on a regular basis? I've been doing inter-regional trade for four months and haven't left Caldari space. I honestly think that making this type of change would only affect maybe 1% of the Eve population. And it would make the game so much better.

It's been stated before, inter-empire trade wouldn't die, it would just be done in BRs and JFs. No big deal. You'd just have to become slightly more specialized, or take a bigger gamble in your Iteron 5.

JayJay

Professor Tarantula
Hedion University
Posted - 2010.08.29 20:06:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Doddy
There would be no difference in ships etc except some pirates would get a bit richer from protection money or some producers would have to hire mercs also for protection, or defend themselves.


How would people protect a hauler from an alpha strike right after it uses a gate and gets primaried?

I'm sure some corps or alliances have enough people to clear out multiple lowsec systems before bringing the haulers in, but with that much work needed, you'd be turning profitable trading into something only large alliances can do.

Originally by: Doddy
Really how do you think stuff gets on markets in lo-sec or hi sec "islands" as it is?


Because there's not enough attention paid to those areas. If lowsec was put between empire spaces it would be a feeding frenzy along those routes the likes of which the game has never seen. For about a week. Then everyone would either train up to blockade runners and trade small items, or say to hell with it and go back to mining or mission running.


mr rens
Posted - 2010.08.29 20:09:00 - [17]
 

Edited by: mr rens on 29/08/2010 20:16:12
Originally by: shady trader
mr rens you could try doing a search. the idea of low sec between empires comes up about once every 2 months. Also there is a dev blog about the changes to the highways they did a long time ago.


found a 2004 post explaining that they'd made some extra systems around the hubs, but never an answer about why no low sec

if the devs have shared insight on this, that's cool, got a link?

thanks to everyone else so far. :)

edit: oh, and chill out. Cool

Stick Cult
Posted - 2010.08.29 20:12:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Doddy
Really how do you think stuff gets on markets in lo-sec or hi sec "islands" as it is?

I've never seen markets that are in any way decent on the islands I've been to. Sure, some ammo, maybe a few ships, some modules, etc, but nothing in volume or at a decent price. They also get out there because it's usually through 1 or 2 barren lowsec systems. The lowsec routes between hubs would be camped ~a lot~, like Rancer.

Aurum Bellator
Posted - 2010.08.29 20:16:00 - [19]
 

This topic was debated and widely supported in Market Discussions and then to Assembly Hall, where it was proposed as a CSM issue. If you support the removal of inter-empire highsec highways, go to this thread in Assembly Hall and voice your support. Don't forget to click the button to cast a vote.

Be careful about buying into the counter-arguments of people like Varo Jan, who is obviously biased and speaks from a personal-interest point of view. It was later discovered that he is attempting to establish an Eve-wide POS/Research franchise and eliminating the highsec highways between empires would be a huge setback to his project.

The bottom line on this issue is the inter-region highsec highways are an antiquated device used to make the Eve world smaller, when there were FAR fewer subscribers and concurrent players. The game at this point could easily support four independent empires linked together by lowsec.

Along with the removal of highsec highways, CCP should tweak the drop rates of items and create other factors to tweak supply of materials (like minerals) and modules for the different empires --- spawning a more diverse inter-empire trade business.

Highly support this issue. Make it happen.

AUB

Simply Human
Posted - 2010.08.29 20:17:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: mr rens
...
I think the reason they don't do this is because it benefits the majority of eve players to have the safe transportation, and this reduces the edge between good and bad players.
...

You mean old and new players, right?

Professor Tarantula
Hedion University
Posted - 2010.08.29 20:20:00 - [21]
 

Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 29/08/2010 20:22:55
Be wary of people who support this idea for no reason other than to have more ships wander into their gatecamps, and aren't taking into consideration how those people wouldn't continue showing up to get exploded.

Large haulers need to have at least a chance to make the trip before this is a good ida.

Stick Cult
Posted - 2010.08.29 20:21:00 - [22]
 

Quote:
Be careful about buying into the counter-arguments of people like Varo Jan, who is obviously biased and speaks from a personal-interest point of view. It was later discovered that he is attempting to establish an Eve-wide POS/Research franchise and eliminating the highsec highways between empires would be a huge setback to his project.

And let's say I'm a pirate, so I'm all for making lowsec between empires because not doing so would be a huge setback to my possible profits. You also show bias against having Varo set up his research franchise. My friend doesn't want this because he makes money moving things in freighters between trade hubs. A guy I was talking to in local is a highsec carebear and thinks lowsec is bad bad bad, and doesn't want to be forced through it to go to another empire.

Everyone has a bias.

Note: That was all made up, except the part about you, but let's just pretend it's real...

mr rens
Posted - 2010.08.29 20:29:00 - [23]
 

Edited by: mr rens on 29/08/2010 20:29:10
Originally by: Aurum Bellator
this thread


This is about highways and currency, and I don't support the currency thing. :(

mr rens
Posted - 2010.08.29 20:31:00 - [24]
 

Edited by: mr rens on 29/08/2010 20:32:18
Originally by: Simply Human
You mean old and new players, right?


No, I meant good and bad.

Basically any time you introduce complexity to the game it allows for differentiation of results based on playstyle (in this case, we'll call that "skill" and call people without skill "bad").

Chesty McJubblies
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2010.08.29 20:33:00 - [25]
 

meh, why not

Doddy
Excidium.
Executive Outcomes
Posted - 2010.08.29 20:33:00 - [26]
 

Edited by: Doddy on 29/08/2010 20:37:24
Originally by: Professor Tarantula
Originally by: Doddy
There would be no difference in ships etc except some pirates would get a bit richer from protection money or some producers would have to hire mercs also for protection, or defend themselves.


How would people protect a hauler from an alpha strike right after it uses a gate and gets primaried?

I'm sure some corps or alliances have enough people to clear out multiple lowsec systems before bringing the haulers in, but with that much work needed, you'd be turning profitable trading into something only large alliances can do.

Originally by: Doddy
Really how do you think stuff gets on markets in lo-sec or hi sec "islands" as it is?


Because there's not enough attention paid to those areas. If lowsec was put between empire spaces it would be a feeding frenzy along those routes the likes of which the game has never seen. For about a week. Then everyone would either train up to blockade runners and trade small items, or say to hell with it and go back to mining or mission running.




4 or 5 compotent traders or industrialists (or associations) are more than capable of finding a spare couple of billion a month to either pay the pirate corp controling the trade route for blue status or hiring some mercs to clear the route, even if only at a specific time (how long do you need to fly some Freighters 10 jumps?) of a day or even a week. Controling one random lo sec system so you can jump freighter out of it is even simpler.

Thats quite apart from the lo sec alliances which would form to control the routes or any trading the pirates themselves carry out. All of these things already exist in lo sec, the only difference is it would become way more profitable. The fact that minor solo traders in haulers who didn't bother to arrange standings is irrelevent, and their loss certainly wouln't mean tarde in anything that wouldn't fit in a blockade runner would dry up which is what you said.

Finally nothing was mentioned about how many exits/entrances this imaginary lo-sec would have. If it was porous enough then it would be very easy to clear said pirates out of a system at a particular time, obviously if there was a single bottleneck system it becomes harder but in such a case it is more likely some entity will control it either for extortion or to trade themselves.


Aurum Bellator
Posted - 2010.08.29 20:37:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: mr rens
Edited by: mr rens on 29/08/2010 20:29:10
Originally by: Aurum Bellator
this thread


This is about highways and currency, and I don't support the currency thing. :(


Not many people supported the currency proposal. I fixed it for you, edited the original post to remove the currency proposal. If you want to see highsec highways removed, make a quick post in the Assembly Hall thread and make sure you click the radio button to "give your support to the idea/discussion going on".

I wholeheartedly agree with your OP.

AUB

Simply Human
Posted - 2010.08.29 20:41:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: mr rens
Edited by: mr rens on 29/08/2010 20:32:18
Originally by: Simply Human
You mean old and new players, right?


No, I meant good and bad.

Basically any time you introduce complexity to the game it allows for differentiation of results based on playstyle (in this case, we'll call that "skill" and call people without skill "bad").


In what way will player ability allow a t1 industrial to get through a gate camp?

Alexeph Stoekai
Stoekai Corp
Posted - 2010.08.29 20:46:00 - [29]
 

I think it would be an interesting development. Today, the market is really quite flat between highsec regions, because it's so easy to move items without risk. If the empires were more isolated, and moving goods between them was more risky, we could see some interesting developments as less intimately linked markets drift apart in value of different objects.

It would once more be interesting to make a living as a hauler trader, and give a healthy dose of tactics and risk-taking for inter-regional traders. It would also make life as pirate/anti-pirate/mercenary more interesting and profitable. Highsec traders might feel more driven to form collaborative groups as a method to pool resources for securing the trade routes, or enterprising individuals looking to strike out on their own may instead find new routes to outwit the pirates (giving us something close to proper smuggling).

I'm not certain it would work, but it would definitely be interesting to see the effects.

TheLordofAllandNothing
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.08.29 20:47:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Professor Tarantula
Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 29/08/2010 18:54:02
Everyone would just start using blockade runners to make it through lowsec gatecamps, because they'd have to. So you'd see modules and other small items still traded between hubs, but trade in larger things like ships would die overnight.

It would be great in theory to have lowsec between the empires with people trying to make runs in all kinds of haulers, but with gates in the equation, pirates just have to park on one and shoot fish in a barrel.


Jump. Freighter.


Pages: [1] 2 3 4

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