open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Remove highsec routes between empires....
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic

Ydyp Ieva
Caldari
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2011.01.27 08:05:00 - [31]
 

Originally by: Joe McAlt
Considering how much more crowded High Sec is than Low Sec one must assume that the vast majority of players preferr to remain in high sec regardless of what one would think by reading the Forums. Therefore it would be logical to conclude that constricting high sec even more would only serve to make thos High Sec systems even more crowded.

Well most stay in high-sec cause they don't want to get ganked or don't like pvp. As well as most don't know how to move safely through lowsec. Which is done pretty easy these days if you know how.

And what is wrong to put the inter-empire trade to the more skilled pilots? The new players can still trade inside their starting empire as much as they like. And the players with more courage then others can get more income: risk vs reward.

Xe'Cara'eos
Posted - 2011.01.27 15:10:00 - [32]
 

No-one's answered the problem of new players, from different races, wanting to go do a mission together, and getting shot up in the lowsec DMZ bridge systems getting frustrated and leaving EVE - CCP are running business both on EVE and here in RL

Infinity Ziona
Minmatar
Cloakers
Posted - 2011.01.27 15:38:00 - [33]
 

Edited by: Infinity Ziona on 27/01/2011 15:38:19
Originally by: Xe'Cara'eos
No-one's answered the problem of new players, from different races, wanting to go do a mission together, and getting shot up in the lowsec DMZ bridge systems getting frustrated and leaving EVE - CCP are running business both on EVE and here in RL

Newbie player a in caldari space "Jim" wants to take his brand new "Moah" to go play with his newbie friend in minmatar space "Billy".

Billy gets in a frigate and goes to where Jim is. Billy scouts for Jim. Billy and Jim arrive safely in Minny space. Billy and Jim now know how to use scouts and have found out that low sec doesn't mean instant death. Billy shouts 'Ding', and Jim hugs Billy. Billy likes it... More next week.

Admiral Leviathan
Posted - 2011.01.27 15:38:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: Joe McAlt
Considering how much more crowded High Sec is than Low Sec one must assume that the vast majority of players preferr to remain in high sec regardless of what one would think by reading the Forums. Therefore it would be logical to conclude that constricting high sec even more would only serve to make thos High Sec systems even more crowded.


I believe your fake survey speaks from your experience only when looking at Caldari high sec and some low-sec systems. I am pretty sure more people live in 0.0 + low-sec combined - keep also in mind how many more systems consist of low + 0.0 sec, which contributes to the spread.

Factor out high-sec alts, macro miners and just general starters. High sec is very populated in trade hubs, mission hubs and ice mining hubs. Anywhere else looks pretty much like low-sec.

I am totally for a player-influenced sec status, not necessarily changing every day but rather every month. This keeps all the carebear areas high-sec due to capsuler activity as well as highly used trade routes (Jita-Amarr?). Certain systems should forever remain 1.0 like the core faction worlds and starter systems. Running missions for empire + usage of stargates should influence the algorithm to calculate a system's sec status.

betoli
Gallente
Posted - 2011.01.27 18:07:00 - [35]
 

Originally by: Admiral Leviathan
Originally by: Joe McAlt
Considering how much more crowded High Sec is than Low Sec one must assume that the vast majority of players preferr to remain in high sec regardless of what one would think by reading the Forums. Therefore it would be logical to conclude that constricting high sec even more would only serve to make thos High Sec systems even more crowded.


I believe your fake survey speaks from your experience only when looking at Caldari high sec and some low-sec systems. I am pretty sure more people live in 0.0 + low-sec combined - keep also in mind how many more systems consist of low + 0.0 sec, which contributes to the spread.

Factor out high-sec alts, macro miners and just general starters. High sec is very populated in trade hubs, mission hubs and ice mining hubs. Anywhere else looks pretty much like low-sec.

I am totally for a player-influenced sec status, not necessarily changing every day but rather every month. This keeps all the carebear areas high-sec due to capsuler activity as well as highly used trade routes (Jita-Amarr?). Certain systems should forever remain 1.0 like the core faction worlds and starter systems. Running missions for empire + usage of stargates should influence the algorithm to calculate a system's sec status.


I like the general concept. A couple of immediate hurdles, player missioning activity is largely orientated around where the agents are, hence its a bit predetermined. Shortest routes between trade hubs would be busy and hence increase in sec status, and that goes against the grain of what the OP was suggesting :p . Also pos and can anchorage and moons and a whole bunch of other stuff uses the sec status and would break..

If a system had a core status (what the empire thinks) and an actual status (reality) which is allowed to fluctuate by +/- 0.1 that might work. The 'rules' are based on the core status.


Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2011.01.27 20:43:00 - [36]
 

Edited by: Venkul Mul on 27/01/2011 20:58:24
Originally by: Infinity Ziona
Edited by: Infinity Ziona on 25/01/2011 03:05:48
Overall demand would not drop. If 100 people desire a product and you separate them by a fence. 100 people will still desire that product.

If the product is difficult to get across that fence then the price of the product on the side of the fence that is affected would rise while the price on the side where the product exists would drop (50% less demand).

The same percentage of demand would still exist except there would be an opportunity for people with a bit of courage to buy low and sell high if they can get that product over the fence.

Price is dictated by demand, the price would never rise so high that people would lose their desire for that product, if that happened temporarily the price would drop down to a level where demand would pick up and eventually stabilize.


And what will be this mythic product that can't be produced locally and should be moved through the fence?

The empires have access to almost all the T1 BPO. The exception AFAIK ate the mobile warp disruptor (sold by Trukker in minnie high sec) and the barges/noctis sold by ORE in 0.0.

As the noctis BPO has proven moving enough BPO to saturate the market is extremly easy.

LP store items? You can find a foreign station with the appropriate LP store in every Empire.

Rival empire tags? You can get them even in every empire, even if it is not a good idea to gather Caldari navy tags in Caldari space and I see little reason to move them between borders.

So what is left?

Faction/officers stuff coming from 0.0, moon minerals minerals from 0.0. All stuff that come from 0.0 and has already its fence.

Some high sec mineral that is more common in one region and less in another, but even there gravimetric sites and WH mining remove the need to cross the fence.

So can you give one class of items that we will have to move across the fence?

Originally by: DrDooma
personally i would like to see a more randomised security status system. Sure, a few system where new players spawn should remain always the same, but the rest of the low and high sec space should change randomly after each DT by a few points.


LaughingLaughing "a few points" on a 0-1 scale.
Even a few decimal points would be excessive (you know nothing about how high sec POS and moon mining work, I suppose).

Maybe a max of a 0.05 change every day with a way to fight it and probably it will still be a real problem to manage for the game as the effects of the security status of a system are myriads.

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2011.01.27 21:38:00 - [37]
 

Edited by: Venkul Mul on 27/01/2011 21:48:01
Originally by: Admiral Leviathan
Originally by: Joe McAlt
Considering how much more crowded High Sec is than Low Sec one must assume that the vast majority of players preferr to remain in high sec regardless of what one would think by reading the Forums. Therefore it would be logical to conclude that constricting high sec even more would only serve to make thos High Sec systems even more crowded.


I believe your fake survey speaks from your experience only when looking at Caldari high sec and some low-sec systems. I am pretty sure more people live in 0.0 + low-sec combined - keep also in mind how many more systems consist of low + 0.0 sec, which contributes to the spread.

Factor out high-sec alts, macro miners and just general starters. High sec is very populated in trade hubs, mission hubs and ice mining hubs. Anywhere else looks pretty much like low-sec.

I am totally for a player-influenced sec status, not necessarily changing every day but rather every month. This keeps all the carebear areas high-sec due to capsuler activity as well as highly used trade routes (Jita-Amarr?). Certain systems should forever remain 1.0 like the core faction worlds and starter systems. Running missions for empire + usage of stargates should influence the algorithm to calculate a system's sec status.



*Type Population Q2 2010 Population Q3 2010 Q2% of Total Q3% of Total Change
*Empire 623,917 601,848 87.08% 86.51% -0.57%
*Null Security 76,739 76,999 10.71% 11.07% 0.36%
*Wormhole 15,808 16,846 2.21% 2.42% 0.21%


Source: QUEN Q3-2010

Suuure more people live in low sec/0.0 than high sec. Evidently the 87% in empire are all in low sec.



Sakura Shiro
Posted - 2011.01.28 00:58:00 - [38]
 

Originally by: Lusulpher
Train up covert hauler skillset and adapt as usual. Or don't. WoW is that way. <---



Remote sebo fleet boosted camps are that away as well ----->. this in effect there will set paths. Only so many ways to go through empires. Factor in concord and soe space that would also be sectioned off....just a few roads to gallante from caldari. Creates bottelnecks. SOme players...and this is odd I know...do not like jumping into remote sebo stacked camps if not disco parties as well. Which is what these bottlenecks would be. I'd run a camp like this anyway so would not blame them tbh.


Empire a carebear zone for a reason, all viable mmo's hav free zones where carebears run free. Keeps servers populated. That hard up for pvp in your low sec areas go to better ones. I am sure you will find some targets in tama or chamemi. Or if you really want easy to find pvp right now right now, go to torrinos set course for x-7 and jump jump. Sure someone will be in ec- to accomodate your pvp needs real quick. If not, you got systems like ewok on the way to find some trouble.

Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy
Black Sun Alliance
Posted - 2011.01.28 05:07:00 - [39]
 

I gotta question whether any of your stated goals would be accomplished. Here's what I believe would happen:

Fewer people would travel to other markets, creating larger populations that we have now in some markets (read Jita) while other markets languish and die.

There will be whole product lines that will be either not available or so expensive that finally it will drive the last hold outs into the more populace zones.

It will create predictable gate camps between high sec regions because suddenly all those banished players will be able to gank noobs as they try to move from high to high sec. I don't see this as a plus.. no, it's dumb. I like having a short cut through lowsec between high sec though.

If the low sec borders are narrow enough, jump freighters would just avoid them all together. Conservatively speaking these border zones would have to be huge to deny the well trained JF pilots a safe route.

Difficult price checks across regions and travel distance make moving goods risky enough with out careful research. I'm not sure we need these ideas but at the very least we should know for sure we can actually accomplish the goals you set.. How do we test that..?

The market on Sisi certainly is not robust enough to give us an idea.

Eklemata
Posted - 2011.01.28 08:33:00 - [40]
 

Also remove Highways between cities and countries, market should be like in the old pre-Roman times :)

Tegan Karus
Posted - 2011.01.28 08:41:00 - [41]
 

If you turned Hek into a 0.4 prices in Rens would go through the roof, and eventually it would be a Ghost Town

Commander Amy Stewart
Caldari
Posted - 2011.01.28 09:21:00 - [42]
 

I see the positives and negatives of this proposal, it would make the game a bit more exciting though.
* The faction thing would actually get a bit more meaning in the game;
* More trade hubs;
* More chance for profit at greater risk (like selling CNRs in Gallente space);
* The EVE universe will seem bigger;
* Lowsec gets more used;
* CCP has to make a lot of things double, like the epic arc;

Originally by: Venkul Mul



*Type Population Q2 2010 Population Q3 2010 Q2% of Total Q3% of Total Change
*Empire 623,917 601,848 87.08% 86.51% -0.57%
*Null Security 76,739 76,999 10.71% 11.07% 0.36%
*Wormhole 15,808 16,846 2.21% 2.42% 0.21%


Source: QUEN Q3-2010

Suuure more people live in low sec/0.0 than high sec. Evidently the 87% in empire are all in low sec.


I'm not saying there's more people in 0.0 then in Empire space but if you read the QEN more carefully, you'll see that these numbers are a snapshot of the location of all characters in EVE. It doesn't say they're trade alts, forum alts or even that they have undocked the past 6 months.
If you really want more representative statistics they should also make a sperate graph for things like hours played and total SP. These numbers don't say as much as it seems.

Sophia Amelia Stone
Posted - 2011.01.28 09:44:00 - [43]
 

Edited by: Sophia Amelia Stone on 28/01/2011 09:45:09
Originally by: Goose99
This used to be in game at one time. It had to be removed. A tried and failed concept.



And it would fail again.

It won't stop the low-sec PvPers tears, continuely crying that they don't have enough easy targets to kill, to up their kill mail amount.

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2011.01.28 19:10:00 - [44]
 

Edited by: Venkul Mul on 28/01/2011 19:11:10

Originally by: Commander Amy Stewart

Originally by: Venkul Mul



*Type Population Q2 2010 Population Q3 2010 Q2% of Total Q3% of Total Change
*Empire 623,917 601,848 87.08% 86.51% -0.57%
*Null Security 76,739 76,999 10.71% 11.07% 0.36%
*Wormhole 15,808 16,846 2.21% 2.42% 0.21%


Source: QUEN Q3-2010

Suuure more people live in low sec/0.0 than high sec. Evidently the 87% in empire are all in low sec.


I'm not saying there's more people in 0.0 then in Empire space but if you read the QEN more carefully, you'll see that these numbers are a snapshot of the location of all characters in EVE. It doesn't say they're trade alts, forum alts or even that they have undocked the past 6 months.
If you really want more representative statistics they should also make a sperate graph for things like hours played and total SP. These numbers don't say as much as it seems.


It is fun how people try to argue that the characters in high sec are all "alts" while the characters in 0.0/low sec are "mains".

I can counter with "a lot of characters in 0.0 are ratting alts and bots. Proof in the forum threads about botting."

Equally unprovable and as much subjective opinion than yours.
The alts argument is simply a way to say "It is as I say, not as the number say."


Admiral Leviathan
Posted - 2011.01.28 20:29:00 - [45]
 

Originally by: Venkul Mul
Edited by: Venkul Mul on 28/01/2011 19:11:10

Originally by: Commander Amy Stewart

Originally by: Venkul Mul



*Type Population Q2 2010 Population Q3 2010 Q2% of Total Q3% of Total Change
*Empire 623,917 601,848 87.08% 86.51% -0.57%
*Null Security 76,739 76,999 10.71% 11.07% 0.36%
*Wormhole 15,808 16,846 2.21% 2.42% 0.21%


Source: QUEN Q3-2010

Suuure more people live in low sec/0.0 than high sec. Evidently the 87% in empire are all in low sec.


I'm not saying there's more people in 0.0 then in Empire space but if you read the QEN more carefully, you'll see that these numbers are a snapshot of the location of all characters in EVE. It doesn't say they're trade alts, forum alts or even that they have undocked the past 6 months.
If you really want more representative statistics they should also make a sperate graph for things like hours played and total SP. These numbers don't say as much as it seems.


It is fun how people try to argue that the characters in high sec are all "alts" while the characters in 0.0/low sec are "mains".

I can counter with "a lot of characters in 0.0 are ratting alts and bots. Proof in the forum threads about botting."

Equally unprovable and as much subjective opinion than yours.
The alts argument is simply a way to say "It is as I say, not as the number say."




Point taken, I thought the numbers were pretty even when you looked at high-sec versus everywhere else. That aside, do we have stats on how the distribution looks like with active players? I for one have my main and alt in 0.0/low-sec, but my 4 other characters those 2 accounts allow me to create are in the high-sec trade hubs. This would suggest I play 25% outside of high-sec only where in fact it is closer to 99%. Anyways good job on finding the numbers.

MoeStyles
New Eden Logistics
Detrimental Imperative
Posted - 2011.01.28 21:38:00 - [46]
 

Originally by: Joe McAlt
Considering how much more crowded High Sec is than Low Sec one must assume that the vast majority of players preferr to remain in high sec regardless of what one would think by reading the Forums. Therefore it would be logical to conclude that constricting high sec even more would only serve to make thos High Sec systems even more crowded.


Not only is this the correct assessment of the idea, but considering this has been done before and it failed miserably; you're not going to get CCP to agree to do something that adversely affects their revenue stream.

The vast majority of players in game play in high security space. If you you want more action then move to null sec and play out there. That's what it's there for.

If you're complaining about wanting more tears then obviously you need to go into areas where there is a higher volume of traffic. Low sec is a great place for some but obviously you're not getting enough traffic to satisfy you. So why not either join a corp that can give you that action or move somewhere that you can get the action you're looking for to satisfy that urge.

Forcing people to have to go through low sec areas that don't want to go into low sec is a bad idea. Newer players are confined to areas or are ganked by pirates constantly as they try to move from one place to another to expand their experience in the game. Why should they be punished for your lack of insight?

From a point of sales view I can say that this would turn people off to the game and that CCP would lose more than it would gain. While the idea may have some merit to it, the people factor and needs CCP has to continue to grow the game for all of us would be compromised by this idea.

Bad idea. Simple as that. Tried and failed, it's not likely to come back again due to the simple fact that the learning curve would cause newer players to see the game as being far to hostile to invest their time and money.

Angry PrairyDog
Posted - 2011.01.28 22:11:00 - [47]
 

Originally by: Commander Amy Stewart
I see the positives and negatives of this proposal, it would make the game a bit more exciting though.
* The faction thing would actually get a bit more meaning in the game;
* More trade hubs;
* More chance for profit at greater risk (like selling CNRs in Gallente space);
* The EVE universe will seem bigger;
* Lowsec gets more used;
* CCP has to make a lot of things double, like the epic arc;

Originally by: Venkul Mul



*Type Population Q2 2010 Population Q3 2010 Q2% of Total Q3% of Total Change
*Empire 623,917 601,848 87.08% 86.51% -0.57%
*Null Security 76,739 76,999 10.71% 11.07% 0.36%
*Wormhole 15,808 16,846 2.21% 2.42% 0.21%


Source: QUEN Q3-2010

Suuure more people live in low sec/0.0 than high sec. Evidently the 87% in empire are all in low sec.


I'm not saying there's more people in 0.0 then in Empire space but if you read the QEN more carefully, you'll see that these numbers are a snapshot of the location of all characters in EVE. It doesn't say they're trade alts, forum alts or even that they have undocked the past 6 months.
If you really want more representative statistics they should also make a sperate graph for things like hours played and total SP. These numbers don't say as much as it seems.


And with that in mind I only know one person in null that doesn't have an alt account down there as well(at all in his case). I do however know an awful lot of people who have 3 or more alt accounts in null and the number of scout and cyno alts is pretty impressive as well. In my high sec corp there was only four out of 20 that had alt accounts. There is more incentive in null to have alts than in high sec. In null you can get tore up for not scouting for various reasons and you can use alt's to cause tons of grief as well by cloaker camping systems, monitoring JB's, and finding cyno alts. In high sec you need a market alt in Jita.

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2011.01.29 07:54:00 - [48]
 

Edited by: Venkul Mul on 29/01/2011 19:21:30

Edit: corrected the "wandering quote" syndrome. Neutral Sorry, Admiral Leviathan.



Originally by: Admiral Leviathan

Point taken, I thought the numbers were pretty even when you looked at high-sec versus everywhere else. That aside, do we have stats on how the distribution looks like with active players? I for one have my main and alt in 0.0/low-sec, but my 4 other characters those 2 accounts allow me to create are in the high-sec trade hubs. This would suggest I play 25% outside of high-sec only where in fact it is closer to 99%. Anyways good job on finding the numbers.




The numbers are characters on active accounts.

Some year ago in another QUEN there was a statistic on jumps done in the different security zones (it was before WH, so fairly old). But again the values are questionable (as the values above are, see the bot/alt discussion).

In 0.0 there are reason for ratters and and miners for never leaving a system and for roaming gangs to do a lot of jumps. In high sec there were reasons for missioners (before the change of the allocations of the system where the mission happens) for rarely leaving the system, same thing for miners and trade characters, while hauling characters would do plenty of jumps afk.

Maybe the best measure would be time logged with the single character, but even with that system there are problems, AFK cloaking, second account trading characters that are logged but actually used 1 minute every 60 and so on.




Admiral Leviathan
Posted - 2011.01.29 11:49:00 - [49]
 

Originally by: Venkul Mul
Edited by: Venkul Mul on 29/01/2011 07:54:01
Originally by: Admiral Leviathan

It is fun how people try to argue that the characters in high sec are all "alts" while the characters in 0.0/low sec are "mains".

I can counter with "a lot of characters in 0.0 are ratting alts and bots. Proof in the forum threads about botting."

Equally unprovable and as much subjective opinion than yours.
The alts argument is simply a way to say "It is as I say, not as the number say."




The numbers are characters on active accounts.

Some year ago in another QUEN there was a statistic on jumps done in the different security zones (it was before WH, so fairly old). But again the values are questionable (as the values above are, see the bot/alt discussion).

In 0.0 there are reason for ratters and and miners for never leaving a system and for roaming gangs to do a lot of jumps. In high sec there were reasons for missioners (before the change of the allocations of the system where the mission happens) for rarely leaving the system, same thing for miners and trade characters, while hauling characters would do plenty of jumps afk.

Maybe the best measure would be time logged with the single character, but even with that system there are problems, AFK cloaking, second account trading characters that are logged but actually used 1 minute every 60 and so on.



Point taken, I thought the numbers were pretty even when you looked at high-sec versus everywhere else. That aside, do we have stats on how the distribution looks like with active players? I for one have my main and alt in 0.0/low-sec, but my 4 other characters those 2 accounts allow me to create are in the high-sec trade hubs. This would suggest I play 25% outside of high-sec only where in fact it is closer to 99%. Anyways good job on finding the numbers.


uuugh.. learn to quote dude, I did not say that.

TharOkha
Posted - 2011.01.29 13:05:00 - [50]
 

Another "hardcore" PvPer who wants easy targets Rolling Eyes Dont like? dont play !!

betoli
Gallente
Posted - 2011.01.29 19:40:00 - [51]
 

Originally by: TharOkha
Another "hardcore" PvPer who wants easy targets Rolling Eyes Dont like? dont play !!


er, no, not at all.


Pages: 1 [2]

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