These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

Smooth the abrupt cliff between 0.5 and 0.4
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#21 - 2012-10-18 14:55:04 UTC
Obsidiana wrote:
It's a hotly debated topic. Fact is nullsec is safer than lowsec. Heck, sometimes it is safer than highsec.

IMHO...
Risk: nullsec > lowsec > highsec
Reward: nullsec > lowsec > highsec

The problem I see is that people want to throw money at the problem. They want to just add stuff to lowsec and even make highsec worthless. They also see juicy highsec targets with costly modules and think this change would make them accessible targets (I've seen the threads and pointed out the logic flaws). This conventional thinking is what has led to the depopulation of lowsec.

Lowsec needs to be safe enough to draw in many targets. Those targets need to make more ISK than they lose, or they will leave. No matter how much you can make in lowsec, if you can't turn a profit better than highsec, you leave. From there, it should be survival of the fittest, with the hunt being for weaker prey.

Most people want more easy targets in lowsec; they should want more difficult targets.

THIS

Lowsec will remain barren so long as the risk / reward balance favors high or even null.

Lowsec is like the no man's land between the fortress perception high sec has, and the player created fortresses secured in null sec. Desperately bored pilots who see a PvE fit mission boat see an opportunity that is hard to pass up. This happens evough for the PvE pilots to consider entering low as comparable to suiciding your ship.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Verity Sovereign
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#22 - 2012-10-18 16:12:56 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
As it sits right now, low sec gate and station guns are tankable.
With my suggestion, .4 guns would ****, .3 guns would leave little time to get away, .2 might leave enough for a quick battle, .1 would be tankable.

So, you would be protected fairly well as long as you're at a gate or station, and this would brake gate camps.

Not, the lack of capitals in. 4 and. 3 systems would help with those that like small scale pvp without worrying about hot drops.

It's a start, but Joe PvE doesn't hang out at gates or stations as much as he goes to mission sites, or roid belts.

If he doesn't think he has a good chance to survive a surprise attack, that fear of a surprise attack will keep him away.

yes... but Joe PvE should be most afraid of being ganked at gates and stations.. they are fixed locations that need not be probed down - and with gates, he can't tell what is on the other side.

As people in WHs will tell you - there is this thing called D-scan
It works in low sec too!
If you're in a mission with gates, you can be quite safe if you just pay attention (something like the blockade gives a lot less safety, as they can warp in right on top of you)- even without, just keep an eye out for combat probes on D-scan (or normal probes if you happen to be in a "nom" that can be scanned down)

The problem is now, even with much attention to dscan, use of safespots, cloaks, etc you can still get caught going through a gate - sure you can check stats, but you're still throwing the dice by jumping, unless you have an alt. IMO, you shouldn't need an alt to play a game.

Relative safety near gates would go a LONG way towards getting people to stick their noses into low sec space, while the rest of the system (maybe not stations, although you can dock easily enough that as long as you've got a decent tank, its safe- but pirates can engage you non-suicidally and this really hurts for lower tank ships) is still lawless.

Gate guns should be strong enough to stop gate camps, at least gate camps on highsec-lowsec gates
Cerlin
#23 - 2012-10-18 16:25:14 UTC
Hmm the Op's solution does not actually fix the problem, it just expands high sec....And we dont need more high sec.

The reason most people live in low sec is not because the money is great, but because it is a BETTER GAME! Even null sec, a majority of the grunts do not make a lot of profit if they pvp, but thats not the point. Pvp is fun, and the endgame for many players.

I have limited low sec living experience (mostly roaming and FW) but I respect the people who choose to make their life there. Whenever I get kicked out of null (or leave) low sec is a great place for some fun. Dont take it all way, that is silly. There are plenty of solutions to NOT DIE in low sec, please learn more.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#24 - 2012-10-18 17:23:58 UTC
Verity Sovereign wrote:
yes... but Joe PvE should be most afraid of being ganked at gates and stations.. they are fixed locations that need not be probed down - and with gates, he can't tell what is on the other side.

As people in WHs will tell you - there is this thing called D-scan
It works in low sec too!
If you're in a mission with gates, you can be quite safe if you just pay attention (something like the blockade gives a lot less safety, as they can warp in right on top of you)- even without, just keep an eye out for combat probes on D-scan (or normal probes if you happen to be in a "nom" that can be scanned down)

The problem is now, even with much attention to dscan, use of safespots, cloaks, etc you can still get caught going through a gate - sure you can check stats, but you're still throwing the dice by jumping, unless you have an alt. IMO, you shouldn't need an alt to play a game.

Relative safety near gates would go a LONG way towards getting people to stick their noses into low sec space, while the rest of the system (maybe not stations, although you can dock easily enough that as long as you've got a decent tank, its safe- but pirates can engage you non-suicidally and this really hurts for lower tank ships) is still lawless.

Gate guns should be strong enough to stop gate camps, at least gate camps on highsec-lowsec gates

You are dealing with reality.

I will keep it simple, I completely agree with the facts you present.

The problem is not based in facts, but in perception.
The high sec PvE pilot wants a complete round trip back to safety for his overpriced mission boat, complete with a successful mission experience. He feels justified in wanting this, considering his monthly fee or PLEX to be paying for it.

He is nuts for believing this. That said, the sad fact remains many more than you might expect fall into this category.

If they don't believe they can play and win, they won't bother. If this means they stay hiding in high sec, there they are. If high sec becomes too much like low sec, they may reevaluate playing since they don't see a happy win in their future.
That could mean trying low sec, but it also puts unsubbing in as an option.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Verity Sovereign
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#25 - 2012-10-19 06:30:51 UTC
While I don't spend much time in Low, I do go there from time to time (WH space more often), and personally, I am most afraid at the gates...
I would personally go into low a lot more if there was more protection at the gates.

I can't speak for others, but I don't think you'd need to offer "complete round trip" in safety.

There was once I went through low, dual boxing (actually triple boxing) with a 51 day trial account scouting - but it shouldn't have to be this way.

Other times I've went through low involve heading to high sec island incursions - in those cases I left my shiny nightmare behind, and took an Apoc, and yes it was nano'd and stabbed, and it was engaged at one of the gates, but I got away, simply because there was a more expensive ship in my fleet right behind me (a CNR), and they diverted enough points to it, that my 3 stabs enabled me to get away.

Gates are pretty much the only thing I fear in low sec...
Previous page12