Player Features and Ideas Discussion

There's a reason most players don't venture into low-sec. It's not because of local, it's not because of AFK cloakers - it's not even because of the roving gangs and gate camps. It's because nearly every ship is outfitted with a warp disruptor or scrambler. This is why we can't have nice things, or at least venture outside of high-sec with them. But low-sec is a mixed bag of snakes, and it's kind of an introduction to null-sec - so we're not going to touch on that today.

Instead, this is the main proposal I'm putting forward:
• BAN the use of warp disruptors and scramblers in High-sec space.
• Eliminate CONCORD from 0.5 and 0.6 systems (this is where all the really profitable high-sec mission and mining happens anyway).
• A new "black flag" timer (pirate) that lasts 24 hours for any non-suspect/criminal/pirate ship kills in high-sec (0.5-1.0). Pirate flags would function somewhat differently than criminal flags in that gate guns, station guns and CONCORD (where applicable) would fire on you (in or out of a pod). Yes, CONCORD will now POD you.

While this will translate into fewer ganks in high-sec (oh, perish the thought!), there will be a lot more PvP combat and engagements in 0.5-0.6 systems And just because you're not warp jammed isn't any guarantee that you're going to be able to successfully extricate yourself, either. It also means that if you want to make an a** of yourself in high-sec by ganking or preying on unsuspecting players, you're more than welcome to do so. Just expect to be leaving sans pod or making alternate travel arrangements if you decide to whore in on the killmail.

0.5-0.6 missions and mining will potentially be less profitable if there's an inherent risk of having to choose between your ship and your valuable cargo or salvage. As it should be. AFK miners and bots can continue to plague high-sec, they'll just have to limit themselves to 0.7-1.0 systems for any assurance of safety.
.....

Addenum: If you don't like the idea, fine - take your petty comments elsewhere. If you think there's some merit in the concept but disagree with some aspects/implementation and have constructive suggestions, I'm all ears.

So to increase PvP you take away the only means to prevent escape or force an engagement?

A few things come to mind...

- This would only serve to increase ganking tactics (see: deal as much damage as possible before escape... so less than 5 to 10 seconds) and take away options from soloists and corps at war.

- You can ALWAYS warp away as long as you have 1 GJ of capacitor power and are not warp disrupted (you will simply not complete it and land somewhere between the place you are escaping and the proper destination... by which time you usually have enough capacitor power to perform another warp).

- No one is going to willingly stick around in an unfavorable situation unless they don't care or are forced to (see: warp disrupted). As soon as you see your tank failing, warp to station.

- Suicide gankers don't care about their pods (hint: they are "empty" clones).

- every single carebear will retreat to 0.7 or higher space... because any risk is completely unacceptable to them.

- pirates and outlaws will love the extra space to gank hapless people than travel through these systems.

Not all of them (see Gevlon Goblin for exhibit 'A'). But it does make for a lengthy trip back in any event (since the timer is in effect for 24 hours).


And how would that be a bad thing? There's a lot fewer resources in 0.7 or higher.


Again, without the ability to warp jam a successful gank isn't necessarily a foregone conclusion. For as many pirates and outlaws that would love the opportunity, I imagine there'd also be a huge number of players looking to capitalize on shooting suspect, criminal and pirate ships.

Ol' Fluffers beat me to it.



They are, in fact, very much risk-averse.

edit:
There's also the massive problem that banning warp disruptors and scramblers in highsec would greatly mess with legitimate wars going on in high sec.

Low-sec is unfavorable to most because...

1. there is no way to properly secure a section of low-sec for PvE activities like in high-sec or 0.0 without exceptionally high effort (high-sec has CONCORD... 0.0 has bubbles, local intel, undockable stations, and being far from the general rabble).

2. there is a larger proportion "skilled players" relative to other areas of space that call it home.

3. rewards in low-sec aren't that much better compared to high-sec relative to the risk involved in going there (as per points 1 and 2)... and has worse rewards relative to the risk in 0.0 space (as per points 1 and 2).


The reason some players prefer to call low-sec home is because of of points 1 and 2. We enjoy the "chaos" of low-sec.


Why do you think giving players the ability to escape any and all engagements will increase PvP?

Agreed on the PvE in relation to PvP part... which is why there have been grumblings that CCP should make PvE more similar to PvP (less numerous, but more powerful NPCs)... however that would **** off the "casual crowd" among the playerbase who don't want that kind of "challenge."

Limited engagement are just that... limited engagements. Duels fill the need for the some people's desire to PvP in a more limited sense without committing to a protracted war (plus the can flip mechanic was getting fairly dated).

As far as teaching the necessary skills for surviving in low-sec... it isn't as simple as you make it. People have to want to do it. It is more of a "mentality" thing rather than an understanding of the mechanics (though, they often go hand-in-hand).

What your idea does is give players who want to engage others (whether by choice or otherwise) a larger area than before to apply their specialties (mostly ganking) with few penalties (because "professional" outlaws never go to high-sec)... which means the risk is more or less the same as going to low-sec for those who don't want to deal with that kind of atmosphere.


Mind you... I'm an outlaw. I enjoy PvP. I live in low-sec full time. I make my money there. I love the chaos and uncertainty that low-sec has to offer both to myself and my adversaries. But I also respect people's playstyles (within reason). That's why I'm saying "no" to this idea.

Actually... it doesn't. A true gank kills a person before the need of a warp disruptor is ever necessary. That's why you don't see many warp disruptors on suicide gank squads.


High-sec without CONCORD would basically become the same as low-sec (the corporation MoO proved this back when CONCORD was tankable). It would be like suicide ganking without losing your ship.


Principle. If there isn't a pressing need or vastly better solution to change core mechanics then there is no need to change them. Balance is key.

Lol

The core mechanics are [more or less] fine (there is always room for tweaks though). Again, the reason that low-sec is "deserted" is due to the risk to reward imbalance caused by the players themselves, not the mechanics.

You can't make low-sec safe enough without turning it into high-sec to make it worthwhile for your average high-sec player.

You can't make low-sec more profitable without making it more attractive than null-sec currently is.

And you can't make null-sec more profitable than it is now without causing all sorts of issues regarding ISK faucets, ISK sinks, and the imbalances these would be cause to other areas of EVE (which, again, go back to safety... parts of 0.0 space are arguably safer than most of high-sec).


The problem lies with the extremes in player habits. And it's a no-win situation unless you are willing to incur the wrath of a portion of the playerbase.

0/10