Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Burn Jita this year frankly was well not even close to as bad as it was last year.
Perhaps the Goons ran out of ISK to throw away on ganking everyone and everything, but really it wasn't that bad past the extra traffic.

Still even then Traffic in Jita the past few months has grown to an unbearable level anyway, and hopefully the Winter Expansion will have an Industrial & Trade theme to it; because CCP do need to sort something out so that players spread out a bit more.

Hell even if they simply added in mechanics that spread out which stations in the Trade Hubs (well Jita) are used.
As it stands 4-4 Cal Navy is the heart of the universe, it isn't like Jita doesn't have other stations (actually has probably the most stations in a single system for 2-3 Regions ... but everyone uses the same one.

What I'd like to see would be docking limitations, say up to 50 people per Station along with Docking Fees for every 24hrs.
I mean these stations recharge your ship, provide you with a room, etc... and it's all for free? That has always bugged me, doesn't have to be anything major but say 100 ISK per hour to me would make sense.

Limitation on Players Per Station also would reduce the traffic to a single station, getting people to start spreading out to use at the very least the other stations in system; but perhaps the other minor trade hubs (e.g. Motsu and Ichoriya for example)

When you look at the problem of Burn Jita as a "Oh no gankers" issue, seriously you're missing the point as to why Goonswarm actually chose Jita. It isn't because they live close to it, but because it simply has the highest population and trade in the game.

You see the same thing during Hulkageddon, sure some people gank miners everywhere - but Goonswarm themselves go down to Amarr space where the majority of miners in the game are because there are almost no pilots down there who aren't mining with a massive amount of space.

They simply go where the best number of targets are, not because the mechanics behind Concord aren't strict enough or other such stupidity. As it stands I think Concord is just fine for 0.8 - 1.0 Space and needs to be nerfed (beatable) in 0.7 and below (just like the old days)

There needs to be High-Sec (Suburbs & City Centre), Med-Sec (Ghetto), Low-Sec (Warzone) and Null-Sec (Free-for-All)

We NEED that sort of middle ground where Crime and Piracy can co-exist outside of the disputed territories of the Warzone.
Yet at the same time the system needs to be balanced to really encourage small-gang Crime & Piracy, so for each Criminal extra Concord / Police show up ... there will eventually be a point where it becomes unmanageable, thus forcing the small gangs.

Still as I said the big issue with Jita, is definitely in-part the population.
The second thing is well violent actions allowed near Stations, I've said this before but Station Games frankly cause issues for EVERYONE ... not just those engaged in them.

To me it would make sense if every station has not only Sentry Turrets (which tbh are pathetic) but also Security that are always there, that will aggress anyone who begins a violent action within the Docking Range. (even if this action occurs from outside the Docking Range, provided it is focused on someone within)

Doing this action should result in a very STEEP Security Hit, no-par with Pods.
I mean tbh it would be like shooting someone in-front of a Shopping Mall, there are cameras everywhere; you frankly will become "most wanted" instantly. What's more is high-crime rate areas (like city centres) always have more police who actively patrol hotspots.

These are just small things that to me make sense to have, gate-camps and such are fine.
Just Station Games, especially around Trade Hub systems; these are basically city centres, to me has always seems stupid game mechanics.

Now as I point out this isn't about making High-Sec Safe, but simply some mechanics that encourage people to spread out more ... with a Cost-of-Living attached to a the Sec-Status of the System getting much Higher the further up you go; with less earning potential that goes with it.

This in turn would also encourage players to see more profitable and cheaper living costs in the less 'safe' areas.
Also spreading out the pirates from being basically "pure low-sec" to across Low and Med Sec would also encourage Low-Sec to become a bit more of a Hardcore Law-Less area rather than "Hey Guys Let's be Pirates and Camp Pipeline Gate A for 23hrs a day!" ... it's not piracy, i'd even argue about it being criminal ... as it is far more just "Easiest Kills to Effort", unless they get jumped by a bigger / nastier group generally they can do as they please.

What I think compounds even more of the issues is the total lack of Import / Export Tax.
Again you might not think this would have an impact but seriously think about it, if it cost you say 5% Cargo Value whenever you crossed Empire Boarders - how much Null-Sec Trade would end up in High-Sec?

It wouldn't stop it, but would increase these Null-Sec Alliances costs, pushing up the prices; In-turn this makes Low-Sec for that Empire (or even Med-Sec) more valuable as you don't have to pay those charges thus allowing even smaller groups to compete on an equal footing.

I mean to me Industry & Trade for the most part is what is currently causing the biggest issues within EVE, you spread out Targets, reduce the Import to High-Sec and Increase Export to Low-Sec / Null-Sec ... suddenly you have yourself a more working synergetic system that need each other to be successful.

Throw in added Risk of Piracy, with better ability to keep Freighters (or for the love of god MID-RANGE Transports between 50,000 and 900,000 ... Seriously why don't we have 100-350,000 m3 Freighters without Jump Drives that could be reasonable prices??) alive crossing dangerous territory. Say an ORE Industrial Logistics, focus on Hull Repair would make ti...

Ummm...

We killed 57 freighters and 14 JF last year.

This year it is 147 freighters and 13 JF.

How is that "not even close to as bad as it was last year"?


The first year, we were actually too picky, because we weren't as good at doing this. This year, it was so easy to line up a gank ever half hour that we went ahead killed low value and empty freighters. I will say we didn't do as much killing of industrials and exhumers, but that was becaue every time we had a bit of a lull and someone mentioned killing indys, our scouts would find a freighter and off we went. And there was that moment where we did drop on the 4-4 undock to kills some Badgers, and out popped pimped out Golem instead.

middle-sec = 0.7-0.5 ... though with how CONCORD works these days, it doesn't really matter... (like the idea tho).

Middle sec wont be fun, it will just be more dangerous then low. Either allow pvp or don't.
The only people who will thrive in middle sec are pirates with large support fleets, and when someone capable of fighting against them shows up it will lead to a ****** game of grab ass and seeing who shoots first to take advantage of aggro mechanics for the navy.

Neither carebears or pvp players will be happy.

Either make it low sec or **** it. Low sec isn't that dangerous and if your scared of it your a moron scrub.

There's the conundrum. If the players were willing to be that organized, they would be defending nulsec or even doing faction warfare, or making a killing off of merc contracts. Hisec is the antisocial club, thus organization is the weak spot.

Plus, for the nulsec entities, making money is not as difficult. Without some sort of ship replacement, hisec-only players would always be short on funds to keep the fight active.

So unless there was some form of advanced ship compensation to replace losses (maybe a default concord ship which could not use custom fittings, etc), and a means of allowing for NPC organization (an NPC subcorp)? Yeah, not entirely feasible.