These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 page123Next page
 

[proposal] Take nocxium out of highsec and thereby buff lowsec
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#21 - 2013-10-23 00:51:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Allandri wrote:
What about hunting players with a negative sec status for Concord LP by players in good standing with Concord and/or whatever empire controls that portion of lowsec which could then be redeemed for confiscated pirate contraband (modules, ammo, weapons)
I think it's a good idea--anything to convince carebears to take up arms. I don't think it'll work because the carebears, generally speaking, come in one of three flavors:
1.) people with little PVP skill or organizational background
2.) people taking a break from PVP
3.) bot/macro/AFK accounts
Thus the gap that must be covered in order to bring them into the PVP arena is tremendous, much like the gap required to bring carebears to mine in lowsec.

Now I don't think that this gap is a valid reason for avoiding changes that will lessen it. They aren't wasted. A big part of why this gap is so large is because it is constantly being ignored in favor of changes that have a stronger impact in the short term. I think we need a bit more long-term thinking and planning when it comes to carebear-pirate interactions. It is one of the richest gameplay interactions in EVE, and one of the largest contributors to EVE's notoriety and incoming playerbase. It shouldn't be put on the backburner just because it is hard to fix it.

I think removing nocxium from highsec is a very simple change that can only have positive consequences. The price of nocxium will be prevented from skyrocketing because there is already a large amount of nullsec mining in place--the low zydrine and megacyte prices are a testament to that. And the price of tritanium is a testament to the stability of the value of mining in highsec. I submit that based on these points, there is no possible way that removing nocxium from highsec could be detrimental to the EVE economy.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Scarlet Firefly
Three Radioactive Assault Fish Frigates Inc.
#22 - 2013-10-23 01:57:18 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Quite honestly the only way I see more people going into low is if gate camping is eliminated. If you got rid of that (or balanced the scales a bit) then that's the only way I can see more people going (of those who dont today).

You've a good shot at staying alive in space no matter what you're flying, at a camp? You're toast. And yes, I'm well aware of scouting, maps and all the rest of it - but it's not enough to tempt the average person into low sec if they dont already go. It is skewed far too far in the campers favour unless you're in something tiny, agile AND get lucky.

Hell, I've an alt in FW and those guys kinda know what they're doing and they cant run camps a lot of the time...what chance does a wet behind the ears low sec newbie have on a gate? Bugger all. In open space though, with D-scan and viable options other than relying on alts/luck to get through the gates....they have a lot more options and suddenly there's a decent risk reduction - but not at the cost of a total neutering of PvP.

If you remove gate camping, it would make the system LESS secure, as anyone and everyone will be wandering through, meaning you won't have any control of who or what is in system. I gate camp daily. You know what is hard to catch currently? Frigates, and quick destroyers. This means if my pirate corp wanted to mine, we'd have to shut down operations every time a destroyer comes in, or we'd have to camp the belt we are mining.

The issue there is the profit margin. If you have a group of 10 people mining in low sec, with t1 barges, then you have a few other ships to protect them, lets assume 3 (a t1 logi, a BC for damage, and a interceptor to chase), plus a scout on each gate (assume 2 gates), then in order to make that group as profitable as mining in high sec they'd have to be making 50% more isk. This doesn't even compensate for the intense risk of the situation. If only low had cyno jammers it could be as safer. Honestly, I think null is safer than low, if you are the corp in control of the system. Maybe I've been hot dropped on too many times....

My proposal, make exclusive ores in low sec that are worth about 60% more than high sec ores. This would make the fleet of 10 +5 mining in high sec nearly profitable, and the venture mining profitable in low.

I don't know how null mining goes, but as far as I could see in my experience living in null, there are many systems were there is no one ever. They don't need a buff to their mining.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2013-10-23 02:19:51 UTC
I'd like to see a huge buff to nullsec, lowsec, and wormhole space mining, and a subsequent nerf to jump drives. I want nullsec to be more self-sufficient and have weaker trade ties with highsec. I want nullsec goods to be expensive in highsec, and for nullsec to not need highsec. As long as nullsec relies on highsec, highsec will always be a high-profit ground. If highsec became the needy ones, then highseccers would become poor by EVE standards, and they would long to journey outside of their protective bubble to where the wealth lies.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Meyr
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
OnlyFleets.
#24 - 2013-10-23 04:10:48 UTC
Honestly speaking, I'm not sure how to buff (a)... Anything that is in high demand but only available in lowsec would only bring in the powerful cartels (the ever-hungry Goon wallet springs to mind pretty quickly, they'd take over Aridia in a heartbeat), and elbow aside the smaller groups.

Concord LP for hunting negative sec status pilots in lowsec would be interesting, if it wasn't subject to abuse on a massive scale - this is the main reason we don't have a truly workable bounty hunting system. Every pirate's alt will be hip deep in Concord LP in no time.

Perhaps if specific players were allowed to put out a 'contract' on another players pod, or Concord negotiated a single contract with a pilot to place a bounty on another pilot's ship/pod, we could work this out - particularly if the target was unaware they were being hunted (I expect pirates and gankers to constantly be prepared for return fire - if you don't, you shouldn't be shooting other ships in the first place).

Thoughts on how to increase the population of lowsec -

1. Bring Concord into the mix. This may seem contrary, but think about it for a moment. An intermittent Concord presence in the very worst of the pirate-infested systems would temporarily push out the pirates (much like the law in the age of pirates, or the old American West). This creates some breathing room for those who may want to operate in lowsec, either to mission, mine, or do industry, with the knowledge that Concord will be there, just like in hisec. Have a galaxy-wide mail posted that system(s) X, Y, & Z will be under Concord Pirate Interdiction, effective immediately. Let them progressively slide back to no Concord presence over some random amount of time, but only once a certain activity level has built up.

This would force the pirates to move around some, and provide their targets some time to get established, prior to the pirates returning, giving their targets a chance to have something worth fighting for, instead of simply watching local, packing up, and leaving after a week. It will also force those who move in to either fight for what they've built, or move on to the next system that Concord interdicts, providing a chance for their goods to be blown up while in transit.

It would give people otherwise too afraid to venture into lowsec the chance to actually see what's there, and for them to gradually grow more comfortable with the compromises that have to be made in order to work/survive there.

2. Alter the sec status of lowsec/nullsec systems - too much pirate activity, and the system slides towards nullsec status - too much stability, and nullsec rises to lowsec status. Do this on a quarterly basis (the quarterly economic report would be a good place to start acquiring the information needed to make such a determination). Again, this would force some level of migration for the residents of both lowsec and nullsec.

I'm not opposed to having some of the gank central systems revert to lowsec status, either. This would alter the commerce patterns in hisec, as well as freighter/hauler traffic, and, potentially, bring greater variance to the market hubs, and lead to greater opportunities for arbitrage (buying cheap in one hub, and selling in another hub, profiting on the difference). Anything to reduce the stagnation can only be good in the long term.

3. Dramatically change mission rewards based upon sec status of the agent/actual mission system, and alter the sec status of a particular system as a result of the activity level. Osmon would immediately rise to 1.0, for example, and mission rewards would plummet, resulting in mission runners either tolerating lower ISK/hour ratios, or moving to lower sec status systems. Movement always equals risk, and opportunities for loss. (some of you may have read some of my posts regarding ganking - I'm not against ganking, I'm just against all of the risk being assumed by the haulers - if you have an 8-billion ISK loot pinata, you should expect it to be whacked eventually)

4. Make the new meta-contstruction materials PRIMARILY available in lowsec - but not entirely. Put limited amounts in nullsec, and about twice as much in hisec. This would certanly result in some very interesting hisec wars, and maybe some nullsec wars. The price would certainly rise to the level that would attract some 'carebear' interest in lowsec. Something along a 50% lowsec, 15-20% nullsec, and the remainder in hisec - let the war dec's begin!

(as an aside, the earlier post describing 'carebears' couldn't be further frrom the truth - most, if not all, 0.0 residents have hisec alts, because we need to earn ISK to finance our PVP habit in 0.0 space. Most of us have more than one alt, for missions, Incursions, and some industry. Think about what it takes to afford steadily losing ships in combat before posting such drivel, ok?)

Just a few thoughts about 'fixing' lowsec. I know that people will shoot all of this full of holes, but, at least it's opening up avenues of conversation that may lead somewhere.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2013-10-23 04:26:46 UTC
Meyr wrote:
2. Alter the sec status of lowsec/nullsec systems - too much pirate activity, and the system slides towards nullsec status - too much stability, and nullsec rises to lowsec status. Do this on a quarterly basis (the quarterly economic report would be a good place to start acquiring the information needed to make such a determination). Again, this would force some level of migration for the residents of both lowsec and nullsec.
That's backwards. If people can make the police go away simply by committing crimes, they will concentrate their crimes wherever they wish to be left alone by the police. If there is a lot of crime in an area, the sec status should go up. It should go down when there isn't much activity there. That will draw in new people as the resources grow--new people eating resources in a lower security system leads to crime which causes the sec status to rise again. It would put the galaxy in a constant state of flux, with nothing but the biggest trade hubs remaining constant in sec status.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Meyr
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
OnlyFleets.
#26 - 2013-10-23 04:42:48 UTC
New nullsec systems would attract the interest of 0.0 residents, and decreased interest from lowsec residents, with the reverse holding true for newly-minted lowsec systems - there are certain rules that operate completely backwards in the two categories which would result in a level of forced migration.

I wasn't proposing that all of these would, or even could, be enacted simultaneously. They're just concepts to be tossed around, shot down, polished up, and considered.
AnUnskilled Pilot
Doomheim
#27 - 2013-10-23 05:26:02 UTC
What about me... A newer player that wants to be in low sec?? Im told by everyone not to bother, and on my way to low sec I see the same ores in a 0.5 system as I do in 0.2 system. There is 0% incentive right now to be in low sec over high sec and that's sad. I'd like the challenge of increased reward for my risk but there is none
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2013-10-23 05:31:03 UTC
AnUnskilled Pilot wrote:
I'd like the challenge of increased reward for my risk but there is none
Unfortunately that's kind of the way it is right now. A newish pilot can make decent money in a class 1 wormhole system but lowsec PVE isn't really worthwhile.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Mascha Tzash
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#29 - 2013-10-23 06:34:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Mascha Tzash
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
I'd like to see a huge buff to nullsec, lowsec, and wormhole space mining, and a subsequent nerf to jump drives. I want nullsec to be more self-sufficient and have weaker trade ties with highsec. I want nullsec goods to be expensive in highsec, and for nullsec to not need highsec. As long as nullsec relies on highsec, highsec will always be a high-profit ground. If highsec became the needy ones, then highseccers would become poor by EVE standards, and they would long to journey outside of their protective bubble to where the wealth lies.


Or leave the game.
Meyr
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
OnlyFleets.
#30 - 2013-10-23 07:51:59 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
AnUnskilled Pilot wrote:
I'd like the challenge of increased reward for my risk but there is none
Unfortunately that's kind of the way it is right now. A newish pilot can make decent money in a class 1 wormhole system but lowsec PVE isn't really worthwhile.


This is the issue Reaver's original post attempted to resolve, but, as I stated prior to this, unless you skewed mineral/ore distribution to the point where more minerals were only sourced in low/null-sec space, the return on investment for lowsec mining is lower, and for greater risk, than nullsec mining, for similar investment. It's one of the issues that CCP has been attempting to resolve for years.

If you are eager to try lowsec life, by all means, do it. You'll find it a learning experience that will quickly make you either a victim or a survivor. Just make sure to have a no-implant clone, update your clone every time you're podded, and always get Platinum Insurance on your ships.

Learn the 'MWD/cloak' trick, practice it in hisec until you're comfortable with it, and consider fitting your cloaky hauler with rigs that extend MWD/AB cycle time. They're usually very inexpensive, and, when used properly, will help you escape small gate camps.

Good luck!
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#31 - 2013-10-23 08:19:05 UTC
Scarlet Firefly wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Quite honestly the only way I see more people going into low is if gate camping is eliminated. If you got rid of that (or balanced the scales a bit) then that's the only way I can see more people going (of those who dont today).

You've a good shot at staying alive in space no matter what you're flying, at a camp? You're toast. And yes, I'm well aware of scouting, maps and all the rest of it - but it's not enough to tempt the average person into low sec if they dont already go. It is skewed far too far in the campers favour unless you're in something tiny, agile AND get lucky.

Hell, I've an alt in FW and those guys kinda know what they're doing and they cant run camps a lot of the time...what chance does a wet behind the ears low sec newbie have on a gate? Bugger all. In open space though, with D-scan and viable options other than relying on alts/luck to get through the gates....they have a lot more options and suddenly there's a decent risk reduction - but not at the cost of a total neutering of PvP.


If you remove gate camping, it would make the system LESS secure, as anyone and everyone will be wandering through, meaning you won't have any control of who or what is in system. I gate camp daily. You know what is hard to catch currently? Frigates, and quick destroyers. This means if my pirate corp wanted to mine, we'd have to shut down operations every time a destroyer comes in, or we'd have to camp the belt we are mining.


Yes, but this is about getting people in there who think they have a fighting chance at survival. It's hardly about getting miners/pirates into mining.

If people feel like they actually have a chance to get through a high sec>low sec entry point you'll likely get more people in there. It's pretty well known the most risky low gates are generally the ones bordering high sec.

I dont think it makes a system significantly less secure, it makes catching genuine travelers harder...people remaining in system are just as catchable as before - only you might actually get more of them.

Point being the more people prepared to check it out and getting back out alive - or at least feeling like they could have done something to avoid it then I believe you'll have better odds of them returning.

Think of it as an investment - give a little for longer term gains, dispelling the myth of instant death at low sec gates.

It's well and good saying things like use a scout, use the stats but NEEDING an alt/sacrifical lamb or relying on iffy stats to start to explore a new area of space is just not conducive to getting people out there.

As a friend of mine once said - you catch more flies with sugar than you do with vinegar.
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#32 - 2013-10-23 08:43:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Mara Rinn
A refining batch of Pyrox could easily lose all 11 Nocxium and gain about 150 Pyerite and still be roughly the same value (apart from the drop in value of Pyerite due to something other than Scordite being a source).

But will removing all Nocxium sources from hisec improve lowsec? It will certainly make null sec mining more profitable, so you have to figure out whether the value of Nocxium ores will rise sufficiently to tempt the Veture & Skiff brigade into lowsec, or will the null sec miners simply flood the market with another valuable mineral that is in practically infinite supply out there?

I'd like to see all mining moved to grav sites, (i.e.: cosmic signatures), with different ores present in conglomerate asteroids as I wrote some time back. Then CCP could start playing games with mineral distribution with a nearly invisible hand.

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Arthur Aihaken
Kenshin Academia.
Kenshin Shogunate.
#33 - 2013-10-23 08:54:02 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Yes, but this is about getting people in there who think they have a fighting chance at survival. It's hardly about getting miners/pirates into mining.

If people feel like they actually have a chance to get through a high sec>low sec entry point you'll likely get more people in there. It's pretty well known the most risky low gates are generally the ones bordering high sec.

I dont think it makes a system significantly less secure, it makes catching genuine travelers harder...people remaining in system are just as catchable as before - only you might actually get more of them.

Point being the more people prepared to check it out and getting back out alive - or at least feeling like they could have done something to avoid it then I believe you'll have better odds of them returning.

Think of it as an investment - give a little for longer term gains, dispelling the myth of instant death at low sec gates.

It's well and good saying things like use a scout, use the stats but NEEDING an alt/sacrifical lamb or relying on iffy stats to start to explore a new area of space is just not conducive to getting people out there.

As a friend of mine once said - you catch more flies with sugar than you do with vinegar.

I agree. But even more important than figuring out how to deal with gate camping is local and AFK cloaking. CCP has apparently (Vegas?) hinted that cloaking will become more of a 'cat and mouse' setup, so it basically falls to figuring out how to deal with gate camps since there have been a few excellent ideas already presented for dealing with local (not necessarily eliminating it, but making it unavailable for docked ships, ships inside a POS and cloaked ships).

The simplest solution for gate camping is to buff the gate guns on all high-sec and high-sec ‹› low-sec gates (and I mean big time buff, this is Empire space after all). This would ensure survival for suspect status, and deliver rapid destruction to anyone foolish enough to engage in criminal acts within range of the gate guns. This allows players to initially get into low-sec systems without a hitch, but "safety not guaranteed" for travel in or beyond that system further into low or null-sec.

Low-sec players still have the home advantage, and can continue to gate-camp any gates leading further into low or null-sec. AFK cloaked ships lose their access to local intel in low-sec, as do any ships docked up or within a POS.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#34 - 2013-10-23 11:40:10 UTC
Since when do people mine in lowse Totally serious question.
Silvetica Dian
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#35 - 2013-10-23 12:17:54 UTC
AnUnskilled Pilot wrote:
What about me... A newer player that wants to be in low sec?? Im told by everyone not to bother, and on my way to low sec I see the same ores in a 0.5 system as I do in 0.2 system. There is 0% incentive right now to be in low sec over high sec and that's sad. I'd like the challenge of increased reward for my risk but there is none



How are you a newer player? You are over 4.5 years old!
I've been running around low and null since a few weeks old.
Once you learn where the gate camps are and how to assess dscan and what the locals are up to it is actually pretty easy.
You would be suprised at the number of t1 industrials and other carebear stuff you will see flitting around in low and null. i have an alt that has mined in both low and npc null and both felt pretty safe tbh. i don't do it any more due to mining being too tedious.
Honestly high sec is the least interesting part of eve.

Money at its root is a form of rationing. When the richest 85 people have as much wealth as the poorest 3.5 billion (50% of humanity) it is clear where the source of poverty is. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/20/trickle-down-economics-broken-promise-richest-85
Velicitia
XS Tech
#36 - 2013-10-23 12:28:11 UTC
Silvetica Dian wrote:
AnUnskilled Pilot wrote:
What about me... A newer player that wants to be in low sec?? Im told by everyone not to bother, and on my way to low sec I see the same ores in a 0.5 system as I do in 0.2 system. There is 0% incentive right now to be in low sec over high sec and that's sad. I'd like the challenge of increased reward for my risk but there is none



How are you a newer player? You are over 4.5 years old!
I've been running around low and null since a few weeks old.
Once you learn where the gate camps are and how to assess dscan and what the locals are up to it is actually pretty easy.
You would be suprised at the number of t1 industrials and other carebear stuff you will see flitting around in low and null. i have an alt that has mined in both low and npc null and both felt pretty safe tbh. i don't do it any more due to mining being too tedious.
Honestly high sec is the least interesting part of eve.



I do believe the GP poster is a forum alt and can be (partially) ignored.

However, they do have a point. There's generally only one or two new rock types in 0.2 as compared to 0.5 (and sometimes, it's just crap because the rock type is available in hisec elsewhere).

Nox is not the only problem for hisec as far as minerals go. You can get everything from hisec right now, with the exception of Morphite and Megacyte, due to the static belts and grav sites.

There really needs to be a severe reduction in ores available in the (hisec) static belts, and some tweaking of the grav sites before people will really choose to go to lowsec.

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
AnUnskilled Pilot
Doomheim
#37 - 2013-10-23 12:50:52 UTC
Silvetica Dian wrote:
AnUnskilled Pilot wrote:
What about me... A newer player that wants to be in low sec?? Im told by everyone not to bother, and on my way to low sec I see the same ores in a 0.5 system as I do in 0.2 system. There is 0% incentive right now to be in low sec over high sec and that's sad. I'd like the challenge of increased reward for my risk but there is none



How are you a newer player? You are over 4.5 years old!
I've been running around low and null since a few weeks old.
Once you learn where the gate camps are and how to assess dscan and what the locals are up to it is actually pretty easy.
You would be suprised at the number of t1 industrials and other carebear stuff you will see flitting around in low and null. i have an alt that has mined in both low and npc null and both felt pretty safe tbh. i don't do it any more due to mining being too tedious.
Honestly high sec is the least interesting part of eve.


been unsubbed for most of that time, and you can be an old character and be new to low sec
Allandri
Liandri Industrial
#38 - 2013-10-23 13:00:13 UTC
Meyr wrote:
Honestly speaking, I'm not sure how to buff (a)... Anything that is in high demand but only available in lowsec would only bring in the powerful cartels (the ever-hungry Goon wallet springs to mind pretty quickly, they'd take over Aridia in a heartbeat), and elbow aside the smaller groups.

Concord LP for hunting negative sec status pilots in lowsec would be interesting, if it wasn't subject to abuse on a massive scale - this is the main reason we don't have a truly workable bounty hunting system. Every pirate's alt will be hip deep in Concord LP in no time.

Perhaps if specific players were allowed to put out a 'contract' on another players pod, or Concord negotiated a single contract with a pilot to place a bounty on another pilot's ship/pod, we could work this out - particularly if the target was unaware they were being hunted (I expect pirates and gankers to constantly be prepared for return fire - if you don't, you shouldn't be shooting other ships in the first place).



CCP could apply the same formula that is given to award FW LP

[Given LP] = ([Market value of target ship] - [Max. Insurance market value] + [Fitted mods, rigs and subsystem market value] + [Transported items market value]) / 10000

All you would have to do after that is adjust the LP store so that ganking oneself with alts ensures that it remains not viable
chaosgrimm
Synth Tech
#39 - 2013-10-23 13:58:16 UTC  |  Edited by: chaosgrimm
I love threads like these.

The result you expect:
Maor free killz

The result you get:
Y my ships maor expensive?

Honestly, you probably won't see much increase in lowsec traffic, nocx cost will increase along with the cost of ships.

Hisec ppl are more so attracted to the lack of risk + conveniences of hisec, and there are many players that don't mine nocx already. Significantly lower the risk of lowsec for miners who can't defend themselves and ull see more traffic.

Ex: scam [edit: scram] immunity to mining ships, more ehp, lower mining implant cost, etc. As well as rewards
Velicitia
XS Tech
#40 - 2013-10-23 14:19:46 UTC
chaosgrimm wrote:

Ex: scam immunity to mining ships, more ehp, lower mining implant cost, etc. As well as rewards



1. un-scannable barges seem OP, unless you lock it in with something else -- someone posted an idea that barges burrow into rocks to get all the goodies out. Something like this could work to make them un-scannable then.

2. CCP Just did that. Reaction from Mining community was "CCP, you ruined my ship".

3. They're pretty cheap right now (exception being Michi's ... but since that's an officer implant ... "expensive" is OK.)

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Previous page123Next page