These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Updated] How to repopulate nullsec - a question for highsec/WH players (and CCP)

First post
Author
Skunk Gracklaw
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#141 - 2011-10-19 21:47:28 UTC
Reislier wrote:
Living in empire is much like life in New York.. Lots of traffic, crowds, and chatter.
It’s good for people watching and cruising while showing off shiny ships.

Low sec has the reputation of a ghetto.. lock your doors and drive fast.

Null is like joining the military.. Sir, yes sir, my guns are enormous sir!

3 distinct mindsets, goals, and motivations.

What does incentive have to do with it?

It sure is easy to spot the people who have never been to nullsec.
Jennifer Starling
Imperial Navy Forum Patrol
#142 - 2011-10-19 21:49:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Jennifer Starling
Wel for me, nullsec just isn't what I envisaged it to be when i started playing.

I expected remote outposts with outcasts, enough empty space to get lost, ruthless pirate gangs and far away worlds with unknown spieces to discover.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#143 - 2011-10-19 22:01:01 UTC
Jennifer Starling wrote:
Wel for me, nullsec just isn't what I envisaged it to be when i started playing.

I expected remote outposts with outcasts, enough empty space to get lost, ruthless pirate gangs and far away worlds with unknown spieces to discover.


In bucket loads.

I read a book about EVE before I even knew the game existed. I imagined flying through so much empty space, trying to find where the Guristas were so that I could join them.

Ha.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#144 - 2011-10-19 22:05:58 UTC
Lyubov Petrovskaya wrote:
I contributed earlier in the discussion in the spirit of the questions, but I think the larger question here is probably does null really need to be fixed? I'm trying to be constructive with this so sorry if it sounds like a rant.

For some people, like myself, the answer to "How do we get you to null?" is, "make it more like W-space." Which I think you're seeing suggestions like lowering the barrier to entry (cost/accessibility), give it a less populated, more "frontier" feeling, open it up more to the small guys, get rid of local, etc.

But then it would just be w-space. We already have that. I personally don't have any problem leaving null to the folks who want to shoot POSs/TCUs all day while hot dropping each other with blobs.

Null is just boring and terrible in my opinion and most people don't want to live there. I don't feel like I'm missing out on anything. I'm having fun doing what I'm doing.

Some people like null the way it is, good for them. No reason to give them the shaft by radically altering their whole game play experience. It would be the equivalent of 0.0 people starting a campaign to get local added to W-space because, "No one from 0.0 wants to live in WHs.."


Forgive me if this is blunt, but eve NEEDS people to go to null. The consumption from ship killing, fuel and ammo use and other things in null drives the economy. The unique experiances people have in null drive the game.

You (and others) seem to be questioning the very need to make null more attractive, and that's every bit as shortsighted as having PvPr's who don't understand the need for miners.

Rather than whining about changes, High sec players should be hoping and praying that CCP succeeds in gettin people out to null, even if they themselves don't go.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#145 - 2011-10-19 22:18:59 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:


Forgive me if this is blunt, but eve NEEDS people to go to null. The consumption from ship killing, fuel and ammo use and other things in null drives the economy. ...


I can't speak for all of null sec with this regard but the areas I was in, the economy was self contained. The alliance was self contained. It is only the odd component here and there that they sent to high sec for.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Junky Juke
Atom Heart Mothership
#146 - 2011-10-19 22:39:08 UTC
To make a link between high and null sec you need to fill the hole: low sec.
Actually low sec is nothing but a pew pew arena with no mining, no pve, no FW, no trade... nothing!

Russell Casey
Doomheim
#147 - 2011-10-19 22:45:44 UTC
This may sound strange coming from a highsec player but since you asked, I will tell the truth----and the truth shall make you mad: dedicated highsec players will not feel the need to carve out chunks of low/0.0/WH space for themselves or even go there until there's something they want that they cannot get in empire.

And since everything can be bought from someone if you have enough isk---basically if you spend enough time farming or buy PLEX---creating this want is only possible by nerfing PvE in highsec into the ground. You know those pesky belt rats you have to kill every twenty minutes or so when you mine in your hulk? And how the measly 200K, assuming it's a 0.5 belt, you bring in after an hour in the belt is barely noticeably next to the massive ore haul?

That measly 200K per hour would have to be the average income of a highsec player to sufficiently motivate them out of highsec.

A handful of asteroids depleting in a single cycle per belt, lukewarm incursions that can be done with a bunch of frigates, PI only capable of spitting up the cheapest resources at the slowest rate, and missions only going up to level 2 (please withhold your raging till the end of the post, thank you). Farming highsec belts in a hulk would have to be as pointless as ratting there in a T3 cruiser.

But the problem is, it's too late to do that. People are comfortable where they're at and they've had it that way for years. If CCP did just come out and say, "yeah you can solo in highsec, but you're going to be dirt poor, and we mean so poor that even a cruiser will be like a ferrari to you" they'd lose more subs than they did with Monoclegate because they would tearing down an entire way of life. We're well past the "reward vs. risk" incentive and there's no going back.

Move ice to null? Please, my two hulk alts mine veldspar all day and I don't own a POS so why should I care?

Reduce the loot/salvage of mission rats? I don't bother with the wrecks unless I see a ninja, then I shoot them with my marauder.

Better rewards in low/NPC null? Uh, I don't want to get ganked unless I'm at Jita. And besides, I have everything I need in highsec. Look at my shiny faction BS.

CCP, in their benevolent attempts to promote player interaction and cooperation inadvertantly added more ISK-printing options like lvl 4s and Incursions and because they're worried about losing lots of subs (which they should be) have nerfed the ISK-printing machine too slowly and not enough to really make a difference. As a result, empire and nullsec have grown further and further apart with each passing year and each expansion because they're essentially two separate games that cross each other's paths once in a while.

Highsec is essentially independent of nullsec which, in turn has become dependent on the goods flowing in from highsec when it should be the other way around. Nullsec players can't do squat to change highsec, and CCP won't risk losing the subs of their largest playerbase. Highsec controls both of them.

Case in point: whenever the goons declare war on miners, everyone yaps and cries that they're going to kill EVE as if such a thing were possible. They rampage around, pop some exhumers, cause a little mayhem, but when they finally have shot their load and call it a jihad, the highsec farmers go right back to what they were doing and a week later it doesn't seem like anything's changed at all except maybe a few hundred players have learned not to ignore rookie ships idling next to them.

Why is this? Because they're already wealthy enough to replace their losses from highsec PvE, and if not, they soon will be. Events like Hulkageddon and the Ice Embargo are like throwing rocks into a lake. You disturb the water and make some ripples, but come back an hour later and it's the same lake as before. Throwing in more rocks will not change the lake, you have to build a dam or drain it.

You may now rage.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#148 - 2011-10-19 23:21:36 UTC
Russell Casey wrote:
{Many many nerfs}
You may now rage.


I would just quit the game rather than go to null sec, especially pushed so hard.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Russell Casey
Doomheim
#149 - 2011-10-19 23:24:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Russell Casey
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Russell Casey wrote:
{Many many nerfs}
You may now rage.


I would just quit the game rather than go to null sec, especially pushed so hard.


My point exactly. Someone starting out in that environment wouldn't know what was lost, and they would just assume that was the normal way of things. But established players would claw their eyes out and smash their keyboards against their foreheards the second they saw the patch notes.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#150 - 2011-10-19 23:30:44 UTC
Russell Casey wrote:


My point exactly. Someone starting out in that environment wouldn't know what was lost, and they would just assume that was the normal way of things. But established players would claw their eyes out and smash their keyboards against their foreheards the second they saw the patch notes.


I meant it in terms of how I would be annoyed at being pushed down a particular line by a "sandbox" game.

One day, I might go to null sec again ... but I don't see the point. Easier and more profitable to pack everyone from the alliance into one or two C6 with static C6 worm holes or something and keep the main assets safe in high sec.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Reislier
#151 - 2011-10-19 23:48:19 UTC
Skunk Gracklaw wrote:

It sure is easy to spot the people who have never been to nullsec.


Apparently.. it isn't.

Russell Casey wrote:

You may now rage.


/agree

When a sandbox game becomes linear progression.. it loses it's box.

Be nice. If nice not work, be civil. If civil not work, beat with iron pipe till bloody and still.

Lyubov Petrovskaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#152 - 2011-10-19 23:50:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Lyubov Petrovskaya
Jenn aSide wrote:


Forgive me if this is blunt, but eve NEEDS people to go to null. The consumption from ship killing, fuel and ammo use and other things in null drives the economy. The unique experiances people have in null drive the game.

You (and others) seem to be questioning the very need to make null more attractive, and that's every bit as shortsighted as having PvPr's who don't understand the need for miners.

Rather than whining about changes, High sec players should be hoping and praying that CCP succeeds in gettin people out to null, even if they themselves don't go.


No, not too blunt at all, I actually like your reply. This thread has actually been reasonably constructive and I appreciate your reply because it is in the spirit of that. I totally agree that we need the stuff that happens in null to drive the economy.

My point is just that all that stuff goes on in w-space too, with the added bonus of not being terrible and boring (in my opinion). W-space is a better option for people like myself that don't want to care-bear risk free all day in hi-sec but don't care for the hassles of null either.

Why would you bother "fixing null" when there are still plenty of people enjoy it and the fun reasonable alternative is already at hand for those who don't? I might sound like a bit of a evangelist, but w-space is the solution for those of us who don't care for null.

If anything, CCP should add another big chunk of w-systems and I think we'd be in good shape.

(fixed for the fixers)
Jenshae Chiroptera
#153 - 2011-10-19 23:58:44 UTC
Lyubov Petrovskaya wrote:
W-space is a good compromisebetter option for people ... that don't care for the hassles of null ...


Fixed.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Lyubov Petrovskaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#154 - 2011-10-20 00:00:30 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Lyubov Petrovskaya wrote:
W-space is a good compromisebetter option for people ... that don't care for the hassles of null ...


Fixed.


OP fixed ;-)
Callduron
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#155 - 2011-10-20 00:02:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Callduron
I think the problem is that there's too great a gap between the haves and the havenots.

Nerfing supercaps is a good step. It'll be good to see how that plays out.

Nerfing Tech needs to happen. It creates "good space" and gives the powers that hold it an unassailable lead.


And lastly something that makes space holding less blobby. It's possible that POCOs might help this. If you have to defend a large empire you might become more reluctant to concentrate force, instead creating small roving defence fleets to stop POCO bashes.

At the end of the day a guy in a Hurricane should be able to make an impact, not be a spectator as invincible herds of super-ships stroll past.

I write http://stabbedup.blogspot.co.uk/

I post on reddit as /u/callduron.

Russell Casey
Doomheim
#156 - 2011-10-20 00:06:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Russell Casey
Reislier wrote:
Skunk Gracklaw wrote:

It sure is easy to spot the people who have never been to nullsec.


Apparently.. it isn't.

Russell Casey wrote:

You may now rage.


/agree

When a sandbox game becomes linear progression.. it loses it's box.


EVE is not a sandbox. A sandbox would have been launched, kept up to date with current hardware and otherwise totally left alone good or bad. That CCP put greater rewards in higher-risk areas takes the whole sandbox theory and shoots it in the face. They do want linear progression in this game.

If CCP wanted a sandbox, they'd have let m00 and zombie terrorize highsec until the playerbase stopped them.
Reislier
#157 - 2011-10-20 00:11:56 UTC
I wish they would mix it up a bit.

More empire space but in islands seperated by null.
Trader caravans across null to another high sec would offer interesting potential.
You want people in null.. how about caravan fleets passing thru?

More null but without sov and limit what ships can go there.
Turbulence maybe.. sharks with lasers for sure.

Much much more worm hole space.
Since the intermittent availabity of access keeps it available to more people.

Be nice. If nice not work, be civil. If civil not work, beat with iron pipe till bloody and still.

Jenshae Chiroptera
#158 - 2011-10-20 00:24:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
Islands, even large high sec islands that are separated by null sec already exist and they are empty. Why would you work hard there to get ganked taking it to market when you can be directly in line with the market?

If came along and said "There has been a huge rift in space and now getting to one trade hub from another would have to go through null sec ... why then you would just have four high sec areas and they would be self contained.

No matter what changes you make. High sec people will go for the safest option. They are not interested in null sec and no matter how much incentive you make, you will not get them there. Dish out the punishment and they will take their subscriptions to other games.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Scarlet des Loupes
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#159 - 2011-10-20 08:18:04 UTC
Well we either keep null as it is and the subsequent consequence that a lot of people dislike the specific playstyle or 0.0 has got to change to cater different kinds of players.

I have no idea if CCP thinks null is good as it is?!

I would like to have far more unexplored space though. Space feeling crowded and full, that's a strange idea.
Jennifer Starling
Imperial Navy Forum Patrol
#160 - 2011-10-20 08:47:49 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Forgive me if this is blunt, but eve NEEDS people to go to null. The consumption from ship killing, fuel and ammo use and other things in null drives the economy. The unique experiances people have in null drive the game.

You (and others) seem to be questioning the very need to make null more attractive, and that's every bit as shortsighted as having PvPr's who don't understand the need for miners.

Rather than whining about changes, High sec players should be hoping and praying that CCP succeeds in gettin people out to null, even if they themselves don't go.

Well not necessarily.

There's alternatives to push the economy. Think about an arena like PvP environment, people would go and lose 100s if not 1000s of ships a day. It will give the economy a boost as we've never seen before, for example Hulkageddon would be nothing in comparison.

The thing is that you can't force people into things that aren't enjoyable - for them, not trying to tell the absolute truth. People wouldn't mind losing ships in arenas because they'd think it's fun. If there's not enough people in null it just means it's not fun. And the argument "eve NEEDS people to go to null" won't really help in that case.