These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

The geography of security.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Corey Fumimasa
The Organization of Fire and Steel
Elementium Alliance
#1 - 2013-05-25 13:51:21 UTC
I know its come up before, but it seems like there have been some changes and I'm just curious if peoples feelings have changed at all. Part of the reason highsec is so compressed is because it is a ball surrounded by low and null.

It seems to me that it would be much more interesting if it looked like an octopus fighting with a jellyfish. Long tendrils of alternate security tangled together and highsec with a border on the great blackness, rather than surrounded by null.

And rather than base ISK value on sec status at all just let things sort themselves out. There would be some very high bountied rats in certain highsec systems in this model; but they would be far away from the tradehubs and still susceptible to wardec/gank mechanics and just plain overcrowding.

It seems like a change that wouldn't take a huge chunk of coding resources and one that would really ad some new and interesting dynamics to New Eden.
Obunagawe
#2 - 2013-05-25 14:45:23 UTC
Posting in a thread which had a sole purpose of using the phrase: " if it looked like an octopus fighting with a jellyfish".
Gealbhan
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#3 - 2013-05-25 14:56:18 UTC
Octzilla Vs Jellythra. In theaters this fall.
Diablo Ex
Nocturne Holdings
#4 - 2013-05-25 15:24:00 UTC
I've often thought that the 4 major factions should be more separated. Send each one to a corner of the map, and have a "no man's land" of Faction Wars lowsec as boundaries between them. Trade routes between the hubs would then have to cross through FW lowsec.
There would also be a narrow zone of lowsec leading out to Nullsec which would be the outer fringes of known space.
Your ship choice should also impact your security status as well. If you are caught flying an Amaar ship in Minmatar space it should elicit a response from the locals, irregardless of who you might be. The same for a Caldari ship in Galente space, or a Minmatar ship in Amaar space. Basically make it Faction - NBSI. Of course, Ore Ships are neutrals.

Diablo Ex Machina - "I'm not here to fix your problem"
Lyris Nairn
Perkone
Caldari State
#5 - 2013-05-25 15:25:18 UTC
Obunagawe wrote:
Posting in a thread which had a sole purpose of using the phrase: " if it looked like an octopus fighting with a jellyfish".

Sky Captain of Your Heart

Reddit: lyris_nairn Skype: lyris.nairn Twitter: @lyris_nairn
flakeys
Doomheim
#6 - 2013-05-25 15:30:05 UTC
Diablo Ex wrote:
I've often thought that the 4 major factions should be more separated. Send each one to a corner of the map, and have a "no man's land" of Faction Wars lowsec as boundaries between them. Trade routes between the hubs would then have to cross through FW lowsec.
There would also be a narrow zone of lowsec leading out to Nullsec which would be the outer fringes of known space.
Your ship choice should also impact your security status as well. If you are caught flying an Amaar ship in Minmatar space it should elicit a response from the locals, irregardless of who you might be. The same for a Caldari ship in Galente space, or a Minmatar ship in Amaar space. Basically make it Faction - NBSI. Of course, Ore Ships are neutrals.



An idea i allways loved.Seperate the high regions from each other.Split up null and lowsec and just make it less of a whole.


Now you got empire in middle , low-sec around it and then null-sec around that.

Making it more of a blend would mean a LOT more entertainment for all parties.

We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
Corey Fumimasa
The Organization of Fire and Steel
Elementium Alliance
#7 - 2013-05-25 15:33:30 UTC
Diablo Ex wrote:
I've often thought that the 4 major factions should be more separated. Send each one to a corner of the map, and have a "no man's land" of Faction Wars lowsec as boundaries between them. Trade routes between the hubs would then have to cross through FW lowsec.
There would also be a narrow zone of lowsec leading out to Nullsec which would be the outer fringes of known space.
Your ship choice should also impact your security status as well. If you are caught flying an Amaar ship in Minmatar space it should elicit a response from the locals, irregardless of who you might be. The same for a Caldari ship in Galente space, or a Minmatar ship in Amaar space. Basically make it Faction - NBSI. Of course, Ore Ships are neutrals.

+1 I love that idea. Whenever it comes up there isn't any real disagreement to the idea, mostly just support. I wonder why CCP has decided to leave the map as is for so long.
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#8 - 2013-05-25 15:39:26 UTC
Corey Fumimasa wrote:
I know its come up before, but it seems like there have been some changes and I'm just curious if peoples feelings have changed at all. Part of the reason highsec is so compressed is because it is a ball surrounded by low and null.

It seems to me that it would be much more interesting if it looked like an octopus fighting with a jellyfish. Long tendrils of alternate security tangled together and highsec with a border on the great blackness, rather than surrounded by null.

And rather than base ISK value on sec status at all just let things sort themselves out. There would be some very high bountied rats in certain highsec systems in this model; but they would be far away from the tradehubs and still susceptible to wardec/gank mechanics and just plain overcrowding.

It seems like a change that wouldn't take a huge chunk of coding resources and one that would really ad some new and interesting dynamics to New Eden.


Found your real motivation...

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
Solhild
Doomheim
#9 - 2013-05-25 15:43:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Solhild
Leave the current map exactly as it is but expand to include new territory.

Add new low and null systems above and below the map and connect to existing gates deep into hisec. Make these systems important in fleet warfare and includes small islands of hisec in them.

This way we have continuity with the last 10 years and also enable the possibilities mentioned above.

by all means:
above current map - jellyfish
below current map - octopus
Adunh Slavy
#10 - 2013-05-25 15:48:20 UTC
Solhild wrote:
Leave the current map exactly as it is but expand to include new territory.

Add new low and null systems above and below the map and connect to existing gates deep into hisec. Make these systems important in fleet warfare and includes small islands of hisec in them.

This way we have continuity with the last 10 years and also enable the possibilities mentioned above.

by all means:
above current map - jellyfish
below current map - octopus



Space between existing systems would do it too. Make it all null as per ...

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3082779#post3082779

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt
flakeys
Doomheim
#11 - 2013-05-25 15:53:19 UTC
Solhild wrote:
Leave the current map exactly as it is but expand to include new territory.

Add new low and null systems above and below the map and connect to existing gates deep into hisec. Make these systems important in fleet warfare and includes small islands of hisec in them.

This way we have continuity with the last 10 years and also enable the possibilities mentioned above.

by all means:
above current map - jellyfish
below current map - octopus



That will just create more solitude like regions , aridia also has this in a small portion.Basically wastelands wich add nothing and people rather don't visit at all.


Nope won't work.

Adding more space is something i am against a lot btw.We have a huge load of systems that are basically mostly empty/unused in null-sec and low-sec.

We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
Nerath Naaris
Pink Winged Unicorns for Peace Love and Anarchy
#12 - 2013-05-25 16:00:22 UTC
I´d rather like to see some (slight) dynamic concerning security status depending on various factors.
Should be difficult to begin with and even more difficult to maintain it the longer a change lasts.

For example a Hi-sec systen could tend to temporarily lose security if ganks continually happen there, a Lo-sec system could gain security if rats and players with negative sec status get killed.
Obviously, measures must be taken to avoid abuse like disrupting pipes but the possibility to temporarily turn Rancer into a Hi-sec system or Haleima into a Lo-sec system would just be awesome.

Je suis Paris // Köln // Brüssel // Orlando // Nice // Würzburg, München, Ansbach // Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray

Je suis Berlin // Fort Lauderdale // London // St. Petersburg // Stockholm

Je suis [?]
Corey Fumimasa
The Organization of Fire and Steel
Elementium Alliance
#13 - 2013-05-25 16:37:10 UTC
I'm with Flakeys on the "No new systems!" wagon. There's plenty of emptiness already, its a matter of changing those systems up a bit to get some flow and interest. Perhaps change the rats, or lower the bounties in a certain area and offline a few of the jump bridges, purposely creating dead areas. After a few months they could be repopulated or maybe given a higher chance of radar sites or something. But a reward for people who spent some time out in those places looking around and manage to find the new resources before anyone else.

Very much like CCP Bayesian is talking about in Adunh's link.
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#14 - 2013-05-25 17:04:23 UTC
There is a thread down in Features and Ideas talking about separating the four empires so they have low-sec between them all.


My contribution:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2944355#post2944355

How did you Veterans start?
Adunh Slavy
#15 - 2013-05-25 17:05:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Adunh Slavy
Corey Fumimasa wrote:
I'm with Flakeys on the "No new systems!" wagon. There's plenty of emptiness already, its a matter of changing those systems up a bit to get some flow and interest. Perhaps change the rats, or lower the bounties in a certain area and offline a few of the jump bridges, purposely creating dead areas. After a few months they could be repopulated or maybe given a higher chance of radar sites or something. But a reward for people who spent some time out in those places looking around and manage to find the new resources before anyone else.

Very much like CCP Bayesian is talking about in Adunh's link.



Travel mechanics keeps a lot of eve empty. And I don't mean the time, though I surely agree that Eve has become too small with WTZ, cynos and bridges.

Simply, Gates Suck - artificial choke points giving perfect knowledge should be swapped out for imperfect knowledge compensated by an increased cost in time. This sort of thinking would keep non-consensual PVP alive and well, while reducing the barriers that hold people back from adventure for the sake of adventure.

Ah well, enough of my Quixotic ramblings about gates for one day ...

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt