Player Features and Ideas Discussion

updated 1/17/2013

TL:DR: A carrot on a stick will lead a donkey on forever, but not if the donkey is dead. Make the carrot as big as you want, that donkey isn't going anywhere.

-

Let's start a thread for discussing improvements to lowsec (and NPC nullsec probably as well). There's a handful of other threads on the topic, but nothing comprehensive. Consider everything here brainstorming and subject to iteration, and not a hard set request for something specific.

Core Issues:
I saw someone say a while back that the reason lowsec is underutilized is not that Highsec is too good... but that lowsec actually removes gameplay options. This is a powerful insight and should be key to any lowsec redesign.

The normal call is to nerf highsec, highsec is too good, there's no reason to go to lowsec. The truth is that lowsec actually discourages people from going there, and any highsec nerf will not push people out of it. Lowsec isn't so much LOW security as it is NO security. Many carebears will gleefully accept a managed amount of risk to maximize their gains- the problem being that lowsec has completely unmanaged risk. The simple act of using a stargate or undocking from a station is extremely likely to result in death, and no amount of reward can compensate for the inability to actually play EVE.

Core Design:
The way forward then is to make lowsec actually have Low Security- meaning some security at all. The risks should be higher, but manageable. A carebear (not using term derrogatively, I am one through and through, even though I often go to nullsec to do it) should be able to operate in Low with the reasonable expectation that they can succeed with a bit of awareness and skill. A pirate should still be able to plunder, but will have to work harder and be more aware of the situation and need to strike the right target at the right moment. What lowsec is currently used for should be shifted out to NPC nullsec.

This low level of security should be put in place in a way that 1) interacts with players, and 2) is not guarunteed like CONCORD. The bait will be the increased profit opportunities of lowsec, which may need adjustment but for the most part already exist.

Brainstorming:
Requirement 2 brings up an obvious, already existing mechanic: Faction Police. They are already present, already have standing and sec status awareness, and are not an insurmountable threat. This is a good baseline mechanic to iterate on.

Requirement 1 should be addressed in some way that benefits player interaction and investment. It should also add as few new core mechanics as possible to make it easy to grasp. To me this says standings. Oh no, more grinding you say. I agree, that's bad. That's where the new design comes in: you develop relationships with NPC corps simply by doing business in lowsec. The more people doing business, the better the relationship, the more security those corps provide. This should emergently create lowsec economies, communities, and activity hubs as people reinforce each others actions.

Now a long list of ideas:

• Faction Police guard the gates, and respond to threats proportionately to the Faction Standing / Sec Status of involved capsuleers.
• NPC corps provide security at their own stations, and respond proportionately to their standings.
• Gate and Station security should dynamically change with activity in that system or station; more activity, more security.
• Minimum and maximum NPC security force depends on system sec, so that .4 will always have some protection, and .1 will be "bubble-less nullsec" unless developed. 0.1 should never be as safe as 0.4, given similar levels of development.
• Allow PC's and PC corps to join as sub-corps, swear allegiance, etc, to the existing NPC corporations. This lets them develop a relationship with a given corp and encourages them to live at their stations. This also provides a non-grinding route to developing standings.
• Corps naturally increase the amount of security at a station that does lots of business; manufacturing, research, market actions, agent missions, the works.
• Faction Police naturally increase the gate security in a system in a similar way.
• Provide a method for players/corps to directly invest in upgrading security, either through activity, LP, or raw isk, etc. This gives them stake in an area to encourage defend it.
• Security forces should be a powerful deterrent to aggression, but not be 100% reliable like concord is. Gates and station undocks should have Webs, Scrams, and varying levels of ewar and firepower, depending on how secure the area is at the time. These mechanics all have counters, but make it progressively more difficult to be aggressive in their presence. Capital ships also need to be discouraged in the higher security areas.
• Other areas of space (belts, poco's, etc) should not have security forces and should allow for free engagement. The idea is increase the security of pilots doing business, not prevent all pvp activity.
• Lowsec economic advantages should be extended in some way to any professions that currently do not have one there, such as research and trading.
• AFTER this system has been implemented, tested, approved by players and the CSM, and in place for roughly 3-6 months, reduce all CONCORD bounties in highsec by 10% to make the risk/reward gradient steeper. Do not do this until the lowsec changes are successful. Nerfing highsec (or nerfing it too much) without providing a working, reliable alternative will only drive players away from EVE entirely. Announce the intention to do this well ahead of time, and make it clear that you will delay it's implementation until the community is satisfied with lowsec.

Discuss.

As a lo sec resident I believe the problem is that there is too much content in hi sec, where the risks are far lower. The movement of some mineral types and level 4 missions exclusively to lo sec would solve all our problems.

I understand why you believe you are correct, but you are still wrong.

lightly edited for clarity

Thanks for the support, that's exactly what I'm getting at. Glad that there are some that see what's up. The general discussion forum is a cesspit and would lead one to believe all hope is lost

I don't believe you. Many carebears will gleefully do something risky to maximize their gains if they've been beguiled into believing that meaningful risk has been removed. Given that risk management in low/0.0 is not especially difficult at present, I suspect all the carebears who can tolerate risk for increased gain already do so. Moreover, if they're risk-tolerant, they're not going to muddle around in lowsec.


This is already the case.

Abandon the high->low->null progression nonsense and give each region unique content, worthwhile conflict drivers, and interesting gameplay. How about we take the fact that the people who live in lowsec presently aren't there because they can stand the risk of null, but because they don't like some aspect of the gameplay out there, and use that as our cue.

What will actually happen is 0.4 and 0.3 will be even deader as the local PVP population retreats from the police NPCs. Only the biggest meanest pirate gate camps will exist in 0.4 and 0.3 and will provide a guaranteed "awesome" experience for anyone who thinks lowsec is safe now.

This is a feature, not a bug.

I think you are wanting something different out of lowsec entirely, and not actually wanting to draw people out of highsec. Adding more toys for the lowsec locals will do nothing to change the current landscape; it will only add more things to the game that the majority will never experience.

Lowsec always has, and always should, depend on corps and communities. The idea is create a gentler environment for those communities to form in. The various rewards already in place should do the rest as corps/pilots become more confident, get their first taste of blood and decide they want more.

Bingo. And that's why a gradient from high>null makes sense. This makes the high/low border regions a place of challenge for pilots to seek out, not a barrier to be avoided. This concentrates people with similar interests. As they improve, thirst for more, or get owned and want revenge, etc, they are more liable to group up and move even deeper. It will be a breeding ground for nullsec corps. Right now, with no gradient, they just stay behind the highsec wall.

Some will always stay there, others stay there because there are no attractive alternatives. How many people will do it? I don't know. There's a lot I don't know. That's what this thread is for. I've met a good number of people that would jump at the chance to live in lowsec, if they could reasonably expect to survive undocking from station. Seriously, you can't access anything if you can't get your ship into space- and yet people think the problem is that highsec is too attractive? Now, I know how to make undocks and dodge gate camps and all that. The issue is the people that don't, and never get the chance to learn because as soon as they cross the border they get their face served back to them on 1 unit of tritanium. I think it can be agreed though that human nature desires safety, and the only way to open up lowsec is to extend some of that safety. The tricky part is in what methods are used and how steep the balance curve is.

Introduce level 4 missions exclusively for low sec that use fewer rats geared more for a PvP fit rather than PvE. Increase the mission rewards to reflect the greater risk .

The problem with Hi sec level 4 missions is that they are a solo activity that encourages the player to invest in valuable ships that can complete them quickly and easily (two problems here, solo and high value, they don't mix with low sec). Low sec missions should encourage and reward teamwork and require /encourage PvP fit cheaper vessels.

Heh, if Level 4 missions will ever be moved out of hisec I won't take my mach into low to run them, I will rather finally move into WH or exploration and you lowsec scum won't get your shiny kill anyway

Beside low already has exclusive L5s but how many people run them? I ask seriously because I have no idea but when you have no corpies backup on standby and sov systems buffer that aggressor has to get by to get to you and basically everybody present in system is there to kill you - you really think that people called carebears would run L4s in such environment?

Low is fine. There is enough PVP to everybody's heart content and there is PVE if you really want it and have balls/power to reach for it like exploration, L5s, better mining and whatever else counts as PVE.