These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next page
 

Why does EVE-online need more people in 0.0 or any part of EVE for that matter.

Author
Simetraz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1 - 2011-10-20 14:56:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Simetraz
With all these discussions (CCP and Players) about how to get more people to 0.0 I have yet to see a reason why this is so important.

Other then the blanket EVE-online would be better off with more subscriptions.
The question is;

Why do we need more people in.
1. High-sec
2. Low-sec
3. 0.0
4. WH-Space
5. If the object is to remove people from another section of space then why do we need less in that part of space ?
6. Wouldn't it be better to get new players to populate these regions rather then to force existing players to shift ?

Kind of hard to propose a fix if nobody has defined the problem.

PS - Nobody has yet to answer the questions as of my last reply.
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2 - 2011-10-20 15:13:36 UTC
Problem of high-sec: there is nothing to shoot, ransom, grief, etc.....
Problem of low-sec: there is nothing to shoot, ransom, grief, etc.....
Problem of 0.0: there is nothing to shoot, ransom, grief, etc.....

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"

Dalek Commander
The Shinsengumi
#3 - 2011-10-20 15:27:13 UTC
The great circle of life in eve is why you need more people in lowsec and nullsec.

Without conflict the markets will plummet in recession. It is in the best interest of everyone in eve for there to be conflict in lowsec/nullsec and even worm space. The best way to ensure conflict is inevitable is to make it desirable for new people to go to these places and try and kick out the people who currently live there.

Eve is at its heart a PVP game with a market driven by this.
Malcom Dax
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#4 - 2011-10-20 15:35:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Malcom Dax
Simetraz wrote:

Wouldn't it be better to get new players to populate these regions rather then to force existing players to shift ?


Depending on the region in question... no. Most new players cannot just go straight out and populate WH space and 0.0, there is a great learning curve first of all, and the skill and ISK needed to be competitive in these areas as well as other barriers to entry I wont go into. New players will generally gravitate to high-sec and to a lesser degree low-sec. In order to increase the population in WH and 0.0 space it is the older, more experienced people living in high-sec at the moment that need to move.

That said, forcing players to shift is not desirable. There needs to be enough of a gameplay driver that people want to move to these areas and that new players see these getting to these areas as goals that they can reach.

.

Barakkus
#5 - 2011-10-20 15:35:24 UTC
Because:
1. Highsec is overcrowded.
2. Lowsec is kind of under populated.
3. Most of nullsec is just completely empty.

http://youtu.be/yytbDZrw1jc

Igualmentedos
Perkone
Caldari State
#6 - 2011-10-20 15:40:15 UTC
Dalek Commander wrote:
The great circle of life in eve is why you need more people in lowsec and nullsec.

Without conflict the markets will plummet in recession. It is in the best interest of everyone in eve for there to be conflict in lowsec/nullsec and even worm space. The best way to ensure conflict is inevitable is to make it desirable for new people to go to these places and try and kick out the people who currently live there.

Eve is at its heart a PVP game with a market driven by this.



I would like to add, targeting high-sec players in order to boost the economy is total ass. How about the 0.0 people actually get a decent war going? It's a ******* NAP fest out there. Kill a couple hundred supers and see what happens.

I think we need to encourage the people in low/null to go murder each other. Instead of sending a carebear to go get ****** sideways by a hotdrop.
Simetraz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#7 - 2011-10-20 15:43:26 UTC
1. High-sec overpopulated ?, are there people waiting in line ?
2. lowsec empty, why is this a problem.
3. 0.0 Every last bit of 0.0 has SOV on it, how can it be empty, and again why is that a problem.

The number of people in each section is the result.
But what is the inherent reason, why do the players and CCP want to redistribute everyone ?
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#8 - 2011-10-20 15:44:14 UTC
Igualmentedos wrote:

I would like to add, targeting high-sec players in order to boost the economy is total ass. How about the 0.0 people actually get a decent war going? It's a ******* NAP fest out there. Kill a couple hundred supers and see what happens.

I think we need to encourage the people in low/null to go murder each other. Instead of sending a carebear to go get ****** sideways by a hotdrop.


This answers the OPs question in a nutshell.

What happens in 0.0 drives a great deal of what happens in hi-sec. The demand for ice products, ships, faction ammo, etc etc, comes from 0.0 out of all proportion to the relative population. When the inhabitants of 0.0 don't feel that it's worth fighting in battleships and capitals, hi-sec suffers from the drop in demand. A boost to activity in 0.0 is therefore a boost to the hi-sec economy

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Simetraz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#9 - 2011-10-20 15:52:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Simetraz
Malcanis wrote:
Igualmentedos wrote:

I would like to add, targeting high-sec players in order to boost the economy is total ass. How about the 0.0 people actually get a decent war going? It's a ******* NAP fest out there. Kill a couple hundred supers and see what happens.

I think we need to encourage the people in low/null to go murder each other. Instead of sending a carebear to go get ****** sideways by a hotdrop.


This answers the OPs question in a nutshell.

What happens in 0.0 drives a great deal of what happens in hi-sec. The demand for ice products, ships, faction ammo, etc etc, comes from 0.0 out of all proportion to the relative population. When the inhabitants of 0.0 don't feel that it's worth fighting in battleships and capitals, hi-sec suffers from the drop in demand. A boost to activity in 0.0 is therefore a boost to the hi-sec economy


So what are saying is that redistributing people is not the problem at all, but the problem is that the players in 0.0 are stagnate and dead ?

Which means we are back to square one why try and redistribute the player base with new players in 0.0.
They are not going to miraculously dispose of the existing alliances.

All you going to do is add more people to go there and die of boredom and quit.
Aidan Brooder
Dynasphere Ltd.
#10 - 2011-10-20 15:57:29 UTC
Simetraz wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Igualmentedos wrote:

I would like to add, targeting high-sec players in order to boost the economy is total ass. How about the 0.0 people actually get a decent war going? It's a ******* NAP fest out there. Kill a couple hundred supers and see what happens.

I think we need to encourage the people in low/null to go murder each other. Instead of sending a carebear to go get ****** sideways by a hotdrop.


This answers the OPs question in a nutshell.

What happens in 0.0 drives a great deal of what happens in hi-sec. The demand for ice products, ships, faction ammo, etc etc, comes from 0.0 out of all proportion to the relative population. When the inhabitants of 0.0 don't feel that it's worth fighting in battleships and capitals, hi-sec suffers from the drop in demand. A boost to activity in 0.0 is therefore a boost to the hi-sec economy


So what are saying is that redistributing people is not the problem at all, but the problem is that the players in 0.0 are stagnate and dead ?

Which means we are back to square one why try and redistribute the player base with new players in 0.0.
They are not going to miraculously dispose of the existing alliances.

All you going to do is add more people to go there and die of boredom and quit.


Agreed.

Also: There is no valid reason to push players anywhere they do not want to be.

Blog: http://aidanbrooder.wordpress.com My EVE Playlist on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLSNuHY7z8n1q1BdLvW2verIfH8vvWtz_x

Mechanoid Kryten
N0VA 5
#11 - 2011-10-20 15:59:53 UTC
I think we need to get more people in a solar system called Cat. What can ccp do to get more people interested in going there?

What rocks are the most isk per hour to mine? Which of your mission loot is worth more refined than sold? What blue prints make the most proffit? Answers: https://eve-industrialist.com/ Never sell an item for less than its mineral costs again!

Elise DarkStar
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2011-10-20 16:01:07 UTC
Because Hisec online is not a viable game. Hisec exists because the rest of the game exists. If people aren't transitioning out of hisec, then those other areas will die. When those other areas die, the entire game will follow.

People who are trying to frame this as pushing fodder out for massive nullsec alliances are engaged in a farcically childish narrative. The problem is that CCP as designers and we as a community are failing to provide the proper transitioning environment to get people out of level 4 hubs and hisec belts and into the game the vast majority originally signed on to play.

The incredibly advanced gameplay that is singular to Eve comes with huge barriers to transitioning new people into it. As I've said before, nobody gives a **** about the people who will never under any circumstances venture beyond level 4 missions; the issue is the huge number of players who are finding the transitioning too intimidating or difficult.

The proper way to conceive of this issue is transitions, transitions, and transitions. If this isn't how you're framing the discourse, then you're pissing in the wind.
bilingi
Grandeur Illusions
#13 - 2011-10-20 16:08:24 UTC
Actually No one but Devs with BJS from RMTERs in o.o care about null sec and low sec... Eves bills are paid with high sec players... Sucks dont it hahahaha
Elise DarkStar
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2011-10-20 16:18:46 UTC
bilingi wrote:
Eves bills are paid with high sec players... Sucks dont it hahahaha


Hisec players who wouldn't exist if the game's selling point beyond hisec didn't exist.

I dare the tiny vocal minority of committed Hisec Onliners to impede efforts to better balance transitions in this game. I will happily watch this whole game crumble just to laugh in your faces in smug satisfaction.
Akrasjel Lanate
Immemorial Coalescence Administration
Immemorial Coalescence
#15 - 2011-10-20 16:19:47 UTC
Haters gona hate

CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude

Reislier
#16 - 2011-10-20 16:44:13 UTC
High-sec and null-sec are two distinct games.
Some transitioning may occur but a glance at the Eve map suggests that not that much.
It has always been so.. at least it has been in my 5+ years in Eve.

It’s two games.

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

Alistair Cononach
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#17 - 2011-10-20 16:48:23 UTC
There is no reason to push anyone anywhere. If you like the safety and PvE of High-Sec, great.

What there IS cause for is a proper balance of Risk vs. Reward.

I would never see a high-sec player should be forced to move to low or null sec.

I WOULD say that the rewards for choosing to live in High-Sec should be lower than those of low and null sec.

Mission all day if you prefer that, don;t interact with anyone if thats your game. I respect that.

Just don't expect your Missions to reward you the same as a player living in 0.0

That would be like a solo player in WoW grinding Boars expecting teh same loot drops as the raiding guilds beating teh enwest content.
Lharanai
Fools of the Blue Oyster
#18 - 2011-10-20 16:53:35 UTC
as mentioned in another thread


Lharanai wrote:
I see really one problem, all the rest is just mechanics.

Many players just don't want to be part of a mega alliance (including being a renter), but there is no way to defend your investment in null, if you are not in a big alliance or a renter.

Make null defendable for smaller groups and there will be a rush to null

Seriously, don't take me serious, I MEAN IT...seriously

Barakkus
#19 - 2011-10-20 16:53:38 UTC
Simetraz wrote:
1. High-sec overpopulated ?, are there people waiting in line ?
2. lowsec empty, why is this a problem.
3. 0.0 Every last bit of 0.0 has SOV on it, how can it be empty, and again why is that a problem.

The number of people in each section is the result.
But what is the inherent reason, why do the players and CCP want to redistribute everyone ?



1. High-sec overpopulated ?, are there people waiting in line ? - yes, I've had plenty of gate control messages about traffic not letting me jump into some systems, and recently

2. lowsec empty, why is this a problem. - you must like to just sit in highsec and do nothing but make more and more isk for no actual reason other than to have more isk, makes for a really boring game...

3. 0.0 Every last bit of 0.0 has SOV on it, how can it be empty, and again why is that a problem. - um there are large portions of nullsec you can't take sov in...if you jump into a system and there is no one in local but you, I would call that empty, most of nullsec is like that...

http://youtu.be/yytbDZrw1jc

Joan Avon
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#20 - 2011-10-20 17:42:56 UTC
I've never understood why so much of Null sec is empty and unused. Why take sov in systems you/your members arn't bothering to use/harvest/build up.

Let us begin....

123Next page