These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 page123
 

[proposal] Take nocxium out of highsec and thereby buff lowsec
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
AnUnskilled Pilot
Doomheim
#41 - 2013-10-23 14:23:09 UTC
how bout give low some kind of unique thing over null. Similar to npc dogtags. You can actually make good money on tags in low
chaosgrimm
Synth Tech
#42 - 2013-10-23 14:30:39 UTC
Sorry typo scram not scan
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#43 - 2013-10-23 14:39:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Morrigan LeSante
Velicitia wrote:
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.


I think he meant scram, but maybe not.

edit: I see he did.

===

The entire notion of getting miners out there is paradoxical in the current meta.

Mining is widely known to be close to the worst paying profession, were I a miner and there was "pressure" to go to low, I'd not mine, I'd do any one of the far more lucrative activities as opposed to taking a helpless barge into shark infested territory.

You can't change this without a fundamental screwing over of the game balance/mechanics, not really.

===

What these threads boil down to is people wanting a more target rich environment in low; and that's a-ok....but you'll never get that unless you give people more of a sporting chance to survive without tricks/alts/spies. There is a non-trivial chance in low of dying and being able to do absolutely nothing about it, zero. That needs to go if you want more people down there, leave those kinds of risks for null.

Like I said, give people the belief (and more of the ability) that the prevention of a messy death is in their hands and they're not helpless pinyatas and you'll get more people going out there. I strongly suspect you'll get more action in low overall as a result.

Helpless, unpreventable (setting aside alts and all that nonsense aside) deaths just leave a bitter taste in peoples mouths. If they had something they could learn from, a mistake they that made was preventable...it's a huge psychological difference. For example I've lost covops (and pods) in low to battleships with smarties on a gate and there was not a thing could be done, now I'm long enough in the tooth I dont really care, c'est la vie, but people new to low....people just poking a nose in to see it? Obliterated and if you're unlucky enough to be the first couple of victims, not even the system stats would help you.

That's very different from dying in a plex/mission/anom because you missed dscan or were greedy and wanting that last bounty...


I guess what I'm saying is it's better to kill 10% of 5000 people than 50% of 200. Adjust numbers to suit, point is you'd have a better shot at invigorating low if the current status quo changed...and word spread.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#44 - 2013-10-23 23:31:30 UTC
I think the most effective way to bring people into lowsec will be to increase the security there, give more options for players to defend themselves--and this won't make it a more target-rich environment unless these security measures are restricted enough to prevent players from defending themselves too well. Ideally what is wanted is a risk/reward balance. Here are some ways to accomplish this, and I'm mixing ideas from you guys with my own, as well as things I have heard suggested in the past:

1.) Having more gate and station security makes it easier to get into lowsec systems for a peek, but having weaker security away from gates/stations forces players to accept risks in order to profit

2.) providing incentives to get players into both offensive and defensive factional warfare creates a two-side friends vs. enemies system with NPC support that can give solo players group support

3.) giving warp strength or warp scram immunity to barges makes mining in dangerous space easier--warp strength without bubble immunity is most effective in lowsec

4.) giving lowsec unique resources will bring people in, as some players will find a way to get those resources regardless of the difficulty of doing so

5.) just having lowsec be generally a lot more profitable than highsec will really help encourage players to go there. Things I think highsec should not have:
* high-nocxium ore
* level 4 agents
* incursion vanguard/assault/HQ (I think highsec should have something much weaker than vanguard with a much lower payout)
* direct connections with class 3 or higher wormhole space systems
** while I do feel that grav sites should have better ore than belts, I think rather than put Jaspet in highsec grav sites, the omber and kernite should be scarce in the belts.

Mascha Tzash wrote:
Or leave the game.
If highsec becomes a low-profit area, some people who are currently subscribed will definitely leave. They are almost entirely people who do not significantly contribute to the EVE Online atmosphere and will be replaced with much greater numbers of people attracted to the intrigue of the newer, better risk vs reward system.

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."
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#45 - 2013-10-24 00:12:38 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
If highsec becomes a low-profit area, some people who are currently subscribed will definitely leave. They are almost entirely people who do not significantly contribute to the EVE Online atmosphere and will be replaced with much greater numbers of people attracted to the intrigue of the newer, better risk vs reward system.

I don't think you need to change anything in high-sec. Just buff the gate guns such that getting into low-sec isn't an issue, and players will follow. "If you buff it, they will come."

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Meyr
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
OnlyFleets.
#46 - 2013-10-24 00:55:54 UTC
Reaver - they already removed the Level 5 agents, and moved them all to lowsec.

The issue is NOT with the profitability of hisec - nothing comes for free, it all takes work (even those lazy-a**ed gankers have to work a tiny bit, just not as much as I'd like to see).

What you should truly be working to enhance is the profitability of lowsec. Figure out a way to make meaningful ISK in lowsec that isn't Faction Warfare, and a way to make it difficult for pirates to interfere with.

Note that I said 'difficult', not 'impossible'. There needs to be the definite risk of loss at the hands of another, but, as I've stated much earlier in this post, the very enthusiasm with which pirates gleefully kill and pod everything that crosses their paths is what keeps the population density of lowsec below that of northern Siberia in winter, i.e., no one with any brains that has a clone/ship worth more than a cheap T1 cruiser goes there! There's no chance for anyone to build up anything WORTH FIGHTING FOR!!! Why risk anything, when you can, with minimal effort, make sure that your Skiff or mission-runner will survive long enough in hisec to earn a profit, or, with a little more effort, make a profit mining/ratting/exploring in 0.0 space. There's no draw in lowsec that can't be performed more slowly, but with less risk, in hisec, or for more profitability, BUT STILL LESS RISK, in nullsec.

It's the claimed space, with the infrastructure investment, that makes nullsec worth fighting over. How can anyone create something similar in lowsec, on a personal, corporate, or alliance level? Answer - they can't! There's not enough stability there to allow the creation of enough in assets to make it worth sticking around when the idiots show up and start blasting everything that they can get a target lock upon.

Until someone can accumulate enough in assets in a particular area, they have no reason to fight to stay there. Anyone who does, is simply looking for a short-term fight.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#47 - 2013-10-24 03:18:56 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
I don't think you need to change anything in high-sec. Just buff the gate guns such that getting into low-sec isn't an issue, and players will follow. "If you buff it, they will come."
Highsec really is too profitable. Even if lowsec were made profitable, many people would still choose the easy path. If there were no options at all for making a high income in highsec (aside from PVP), then people would be a lot more likely to try their hand elsewhere.

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."
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#48 - 2013-10-24 03:36:08 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Highsec really is too profitable. Even if lowsec were made profitable, many people would still choose the easy path. If there were no options at all for making a high income in highsec (aside from PVP), then people would be a lot more likely to try their hand elsewhere.

Before we start seriously considering the nerfing of high-sec income, let's not forget that a lot of low-sec and null-sec players have alts in high-sec for this express purpose. Most of the mining and manufacturing occurs in high-sec, so start messing with mining mechanics and all bets are off.

I don't really have a lot of sympathy for low-sec, to be perfectly honest. Players there were efficient to the point of ruthlessness, and it's entirely earned its reputation. Not only is it still that way, but it's even more depraved. Anything and everything gets shot for "tears" or just for kicks, regardless of whether there's any profit in it. Even pirates of old had more of a code... If it weren't for FW providing low-sec with an ample supply of fresh ships, I think these folks would go out of their mind with boredom. The steady stream of complaints that surface from low-sec players on AFK cloaking and hot-dropping is the ultimate in irony, because these are the very same players gate camping, idling in POS and stations and setting login traps.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#49 - 2013-10-24 03:39:50 UTC
Of course, there are serious self-sufficiency problems outside of highsec. If other areas were more self-sufficient, there would be no need for them to rely on highsec, and all those alts hanging out in highsec for resources could move out closer to home.

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."
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#50 - 2013-10-24 03:57:50 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Of course, there are serious self-sufficiency problems outside of highsec. If other areas were more self-sufficient, there would be no need for them to rely on highsec, and all those alts hanging out in highsec for resources could move out closer to home.

I just posted an idea for high-sec privateers. I think it's high time that if you're going to operate as a pirate in low-sec, you don't get to come and play in our world without consequences. Twisted

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Previous page123