Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I had a similar idea a while back...

CONCORD Disbands

It is different from OP and has a bigger impact.

There is no forcing going on. They can still hide in CONCORD space, same as always. Just with less reward and less space.

I get the intent, make low sec more populated, perhaps with a trickle down effect to boost null along the way.

Very noble. Wanting this is a good thing, and I support the intentions.

But you will not get positive results by diminishing high sec space.

Forget about playing with the reward aspect side of things, that horse has been beaten to death with obvious failures of cause and effect logic.
Put simply, the pilots who were willing to react to such changes were never needing the push to begin with.

You want more in low sec? DROP THE RISK.
High sec should be trivial risk, as it is now.
From the perspective of a high sec pilot however, the difference in risk between low and null is academic. They could be attacked by every potential sub cap class of ship in the game the moment they leave.
How is null more dangerous? Add capital ships. Oh, wait, they were already dead by the sub caps.

If you put something valuable in a dangerous place, it doesn't stop being dangerous! If they don't think they can survive in low, they will quit instead.

Forget rewards. They need to believe low sec is not a death sentence by means of bored PvP pilots hanging around.
They need to see low sec, and BELIEVE "I can do this!"
NOT "I am so dead...."

How? Give them what they will see as a safe means to travel and PvE in low sec. They have repeatedly demonstrated this is what they want, after all is said and done.

Well, that and the Trammel effect adding omnipotent CONCORD to EvE had.

What if Faction Navies were in Low sec? Not the omnipotence CONCORD promises, but far removed from the Sentry Gun only protection there is now. It makes no sense for an Empire to claim entire regions and leave them completely open to invasion.

It wouldn't limit pvp options, just make them a little more interesting. I personally think it is fair to 'force pve' on the players who 'force pvp'... it would be pretty fun. Especially if pirate factions would reward you for killing empire faction npcs.

I am a care bear 6 month noob. I believe i am part of your target (pun intended) group to move into lo-sec. I have more than one account. I do not want to try to coordinate my free-time with other players (my problem, not yours). If i wanted to do that i would have joined a corp/alliance in null sec which would make me only a little less secure than in high sec. I cannot gank. Spent way too long "removing" people like that in RL to become that in a game. (Yes I know the difference.)

When I rat in low i lose my ship 1 in 3 trips and usually podded for my trouble. When I mine in low I lose my ship and get podded for my trouble. You cannot mine effectively without time and you do not have time if you have to run every time someone shows on local for more than 1 minute. And before you say it is just my noobness, I read an article this morning by an experienced player (5 years) who invested time and 1 billion ISK in an experiment to see if the reward offset the risk and the inevitable losses. It did not! I'll post the link when i get it from my other computer if anyone cares.

You will not force people into low, you will force them out of the game because getting ganked is not fun. No amount of, as one poster called it, "hard-core purism" or wishful thinking will change that. That would be a shame, because it is the high sec players (like me) that actually pay real money (again me) for their accounts that let CCP do what they do so that you can go through lo-sec killing everyone you see.

With that said, I mine (off and on) in a .2 system. I sell products in a .2 system (likely to the same gankers that pod me). I decided to move a small part of my operations to low because of coming across a forum thread like this about a month ago. I took it as a challenge.

So here is my .02 ISK worth (yes it is a pun on me being in a .2 system).
Quit calling it risk vs reward. In low-sec it is LOSS vs reward. You are guaranteed to lose ships and implants. So you cannot include huge guaranteed risk and give a little bit better reward, which any honest person will admit (and has posted) is the current situation. It has to be the possibility of huge reward that will MORE than offset my losses. If i wanted to break even i'd stay in high-sec. The players that are not looking for pretty much complete safety need to have a compelling reason to come down here into low-sec with me. Huge reward.

Someone previously said that the carrot approach doesn't work. I don't think that is entirely true. It is just that the current carrots do not offset the losses that it takes to get them. The carrot is just too @@%** SMALL. I'll let you destroy my ships and pod me IF at the end of a month of play I make a lot more ISK for the joy of letting you kill me. Give me that and high sec will never see me again except to buy and sell.

No. I don't know what that huge reward is. You are the smart guys and smart gals with years and years of experience. You figure it out. I do know that it likely needs to include high sec activities. It, likely, needs to include mining rewards, exploration rewards, mission rewards and maybe manufacturing/research rewards. There has to be a realistic chance that i can make it out of low sec with my rewards.

No. I'm not waiting for you/CCP to figure it out. I'm going to invest 2 billion ISK (that i made in high sec mining) and a lot of training time to try out something that a care bear with 7 accounts, two displays and a VERY good graphics card (again me, oh and a VERY understanding wife of 39 years) can do in low sec systems that are sandwiched between two high sec system. I have different experiment for low sec that is surrounded by all low sec with multiple gates. that experiment will take about 4 billion and more training time. If i'm wrong, I'll lose everything and have to start building again ISK in high-sec. (Do you see why you can't nerf high sec?) If it works even the pvp'ers will love it because while i will be a mobile target with teeth, i won't be able to just run (nor will i want to, the whole idea is to be able to stay and mine for a few hours at least) for the nearest gate/safe spot at the sight of every pilot that wanders through the system. the question will be how many pvp'ers does it take to pod me toons and how much loss can i inflict on you in the process. It will be just too much fun finding out the answer.

BTW, i did like someone's suggestion about being able to rent concord in low sec. That makes the difference between low sec and high in that you have to pay for the protection in low sec while it is free (of a sort) in high sec. that adds into loss vs reward.

Yah, I'm done for now.

I was told to make real suggestions. She was right. So here goes.

This assumes that your touch stone truly is to get LOTS of high sec people into low, not just a few weird ones like me. Like one of the posters here, I am suspicious that this is driven by gankers that keep getting killed by smarter, more experienced, more skilled pvp'ers and are crying great big tissues of tears to ccp demanding a bunch more noobs and inexperienced pvp high sec pilots to be forced into low where they can have their pods squished over and over til they quit in frustration and take their RL money with them.

But, if you really want high sec pilots to come live, build, die and try it all again in low sec, then you have got to acknowledge that at least for the next few years you have to treat low sec as a special case. Here are some thoughts that may or may not be worth anything.

Ice
Move to low sec. None in high. But put it in a LOT more systems. Mix in more of the good ice in low while you're at it. That kills three birds with one stone. I'm saying that even though i have been mining ice for about a month now and love it.
1. The price of ice will stop dropping.
2. It will drive the bot miners nuts (always a good thing)
3. Moves possibility of huge reward into low, without upsetting the ABC people in null who seem to have such tender feeling about that.
4. Give a cycle reduction bonus (a good one) for mining ice in low sec
5. Limits the ability to mine AFK.

POS
Let it be anchorable anywhere in low sec. Much like secure containers. This is not new. I have seen it talked about in other forums. Stop talking and make it work. Don't put special restrictions on it. Just let me mine with it in the belt i'm in. That improves my survival chances but requires a level of risk, more planning, ISK spent and, if I'm wise, the hiring of mercs to protect it/me during setup.

To kill me would now require the gankers to team up and plan. It also increases their risk. Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. (Don't make me explain that).

More later.

I suspect if the POS anchoring is unleashed from moons, it will be required to be off grid from all mapped overview items.
(The ones you can see when you open up all filters, and you don't need to be on grid to see)

I am hoping it begins to step away from the invulnerable shield bubble to a more tactical hidden base feel.
We are not all brute force players expecting to hit reinforced shields and armor. Some of us want to think creatively and have hidden stations.

Sure, the hidden style will be pretty much abandoned if located, making it risky, but taking it up a notch is overdue.

Crap. Lost an entire post. Such a noob. Here goes again.

Damn Danika, you are completely correct. I did not think that one through. Thank you. It is a very bad idea.

Could it be though that it can be "anchored" 100km from a belt? My desire is to give a bit more protection to a mining operation with out making it completely safe. The pirate forums talk about cracking POSes all the time. Takes planning, takes loses but its done. Doesn't change the fact that POS is a juicy target. A mining POS would be even more so because of the ships and warehouses that would be there.

I don't mind that pirate orgs could put POS in the belts to. A pirate POS is just a juicy as a carebear POS. Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

Does this make non-moon anchored POS more of an acceptable option?

I would seriously consider the dev blog where station changes were being discussed. (Someone has a link, I don't have it at the moment)
They want to get rid of the shield bubble.

Without this bubble, having the station so close to the belt only serves to draw attention to it, and doesn't help the miners.