These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Separate the four empires with low security space.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#761 - 2013-07-11 11:28:38 UTC
Supported as long as gate camps are nerfed. What about CONCORD at lowsec gates but nowhere else in the system?

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#762 - 2013-07-11 15:30:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Commander Ted
Zappity wrote:
Supported as long as gate camps are nerfed. What about CONCORD at lowsec gates but nowhere else in the system?

then what is the point of this, at all.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#763 - 2013-07-11 18:28:18 UTC
Ooo added support. Me likey.

I do wonder why fozzie did acknowledge his presense but hasn't said anything about the content of this thread.

NDA?

Maybe we're going to get this!

Maybe we'll get changed personal security rating too!?! Start new pilots at +1 and everyone negative is a free target in low sec. Everyone positive gives a sec loss.

This would give you some idea of a players intentions at first glance. Since positive sec rating is tough to get.

Maybe from 0 to 1 they appear as neutral so you have to put in quite a bit of sec work to be able to trick people but it would still be viable.
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#764 - 2013-07-11 20:21:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Commander Ted
Erutpar Ambient wrote:
Ooo added support. Me likey.

I do wonder why fozzie did acknowledge his presense but hasn't said anything about the content of this thread.

NDA?

Maybe we're going to get this!

Maybe we'll get changed personal security rating too!?! Start new pilots at +1 and everyone negative is a free target in low sec. Everyone positive gives a sec loss.

This would give you some idea of a players intentions at first glance. Since positive sec rating is tough to get.

Maybe from 0 to 1 they appear as neutral so you have to put in quite a bit of sec work to be able to trick people but it would still be viable.

Likely not.

CCP employees never say anything unless they are actually considering it. They are always supposed to be impartial. Also he probably doesn't want to be involved in the arguments in this thread, because picking either would indicate a possible favoritism of carebears or pvp people.

He would never flat out say, "lol, we are never going to do this." because that would not be professional, and he would never say that anything more than saying they talked about it because then he would be quoted by others and lead to false expectations.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#765 - 2013-07-11 21:16:11 UTC
Commander Ted wrote:

Likely not.

CCP employees never say anything unless they are actually considering it. They are always supposed to be impartial. Also he probably doesn't want to be involved in the arguments in this thread, because picking either would indicate a possible favoritism of carebears or pvp people.

He would never flat out say, "lol, we are never going to do this." because that would not be professional, and he would never say that anything more than saying they talked about it because then he would be quoted by others and lead to false expectations.


It wouldn't be impartial to point out issues or flaws with an idea.

We do seem to be in a weird place as far as development goes. CCP is going back fixing the things that always needed fixing, but we're in a period of time where they're afraid to make the big changes that we need. Aside from combat and mining ship rebalance, everything has been "meh" level changes. Bounties, scanning, jump effects, ore redistribution... Meh...

Dear CCP,

Go big or go home!

Eve needs change! Give it to us!

On a related note, separating the empires could be a door opener for future ideas. You could build mechanics around faction warfare that could impact the empires. Such as tax rates on refining and trade causing self sustaining high sec dynamics.

But you'd have to take this first step. Or maybe its a leap?
Zlake
The Terminus Enclave
#766 - 2013-07-13 17:26:20 UTC
I do a lot of carebear stuff over the past few years. I would love to see this. There should be long and short routes between empires. So you can take longer routes to avoid large camps. To really think about it caldari and amarr are not buddies buddies. As soon as gal/Minmatar fall they would be fighting one another. They are allies of convenience. It would be easy to fit it into cannon too also tbh the pirates hate the empires too. There is soo much that can be done with low sec. Tbh right now FW is low sec.
Call Rollard
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#767 - 2013-07-13 19:23:51 UTC
I do think its a good idea in ways, if this was to happen I wouldn't mind it at all, I may actually like it Big smile
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#768 - 2013-07-13 21:23:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Mike Voidstar
Commander Ted wrote:
Zappity wrote:
Supported as long as gate camps are nerfed. What about CONCORD at lowsec gates but nowhere else in the system?

then what is the point of this, at all.



You tell us. According to you these Gate Camps would be few and far between, easily evaded, casually avoided, and largely ineffective even when not distracted fighting off other pirates in the area.

So, since they are so unimportant already, surely making them impossible at the High/Low crossover gates would not make a difference in the effectiveness of your plan?

I can see it being more workable if you had 'shallow' and 'deep' lowsec. Shallow would have Highsec gates every jump or 2, being the fastest way through. Deep Lowsec would have tons of connections that would be difficult to lock down but a much longer route to get back to the shallow portions of lowsec. Most of your camps would concentrate on the shallow gates as the traffic must go through there.

I still think if it was profitable enough to be worthwhile you would wind up with big alliances simply moving in to control the commerce themselves, but it's not an idea without interest. I just don't like it with current PvP models.

EDIT: If every gate in Lowsec is patrolled by Concord, the whole point of this idea is completely negated as a means of making travel more expensive. I apologize Ted. On that point you are completely correct.
Atomic Option
NO Tax FAT Stacks
#769 - 2013-07-13 22:21:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Atomic Option
Commander Ted wrote:
The US Mexico border is a RL example of this, its a desolate desert covered with patrol agents and drug cartel operatives who will sew your genitals to your face and put explosives in them after sending your corpse back to your family.


Literally they will send your corpse to your family, and AFTER that they will come and sew your genitals to your face and put explosives in your face and in your genitals.

Grammar does some amazing things sometimes. Lol
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#770 - 2013-07-13 22:48:22 UTC
Commander Ted wrote:
Zappity wrote:
Supported as long as gate camps are nerfed. What about CONCORD at lowsec gates but nowhere else in the system?

then what is the point of this, at all.


You tell me because I'm struggling to see the validity of this gate camper's wet dream.

Commander Ted wrote:
This would buff trading by making it harder


If that were true it would get my unconditional support. Unfortunately, all it would do is decrease market liquidity. The majority of market opportunities (by volume) are created by cheap/easy inter-regional transport. If you make travel between market hubs more difficult then the smaller traders will be out of business. And they provide a lot of the liquidity due to their typically short term focus.

Sure, opportunities would be created but you would only be able to capitalise on them in any meaningful way with enormous infrastructure support. So you would lose liquidity. Volatile markets are fine, stagnant markets are not.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Zlake
The Terminus Enclave
#771 - 2013-07-13 22:55:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Zlake
Most people just do station trading. The small time traders wouldn't go under. They would keepup with their station trading. When I traded I just used a covert hauler to move my high vaule mods and I would go through low sec. If I was ever afraid of Smartbomb gatecamp I would warp to a planet off in another angel and jump through the gate that way. Also I wouldnt show up on the overview for them to time their bombs. Id mvoe about 200m-400m in mods at a time doing that. A covert hauler takes just as long as it takes to get a freighter. Any larger volume would have to be moved by JF or a freighter with a scout party.

Nothing OP about a gatecamp.
Scout jumps in. No one on overview, No one on Dscan.
Looks clear
Webs the freighter
Freighter insta warps to station/pos/other safe.

For those that don't know about warping.
Warp requires 75% of your max speed and your ship to be facing the general direction of where you want to warp.
So shutting off a MWD will make you enter warp faster.
Having a buddie web your ship forces it to reach max speed. Example lets say the freighter's max speed is 86m/s it starts warp hits 15m/s and than is webed. Its max speed is now 23. It only needs to reach 75% of 23 instead of speeding up to 86m/s and that why you always scram/point a target before webbing it.


Now if you can't toss on a covert cloaking all you need is a buddy or an alt that knows how to use a D scan and look at the overview. it seems really hard to use Dscan for a lot of people. There are distances. Most off gate camps will be about 500km (off grid) to about 2AU There are forums posts that translate the number entered in your Dscan for terms of AU. TBH lowsec gatecamps only kill people who are the follow
1.) Lazy
2.) dont care if they get popped
3.) Newbies
4.) people on AP and forget their path

There are not really covert gate camps due to the fact
If its a t1 cloak it fucks with locking time by a lot. Even with sensor boosters/scripts. Even if they don't cloak before targeting you they are still negated a lot on locking times
Even t3 hulls with the covert setup are not that tanky. They would need a few and gate guns would do a lot of damage to them

Also like its been said on the main post there is HS to HS WHs that can be used to connect the empires.

There is no HICs with boubles. Just the final strength point. So don't bother with warp stabs
There is no sling bubbles in Low sec.


All you have to do is use your head and you can avoid a low sec camp. Hey Null has some really crazy camps. You can toss a t1 cloaked hic at a POS and wait for titian to come by toss your bubble up and cyno in a dread fleet to blow it up. (I watched that happen)

At most this is making people work together more to get between empires or the use of alts.
supernova ranger
The End of Eternity
#772 - 2013-07-14 04:54:50 UTC
Fine with me but to implement it I would increase the number of H2H WH's tenfold and then ween them off as people adapt to the new play style.
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#773 - 2013-07-14 19:02:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Commander Ted
Zappity wrote:


You tell me because I'm struggling to see the validity of this gate camper's wet dream.


Sure, opportunities would be created but you would only be able to capitalise on them in any meaningful way with enormous infrastructure support. So you would lose liquidity. Volatile markets are fine, stagnant markets are not.



Gate camps = pvp opportunities. People swarm around a gate, form a fleet and kill them. My brain is actually starting to hurt reading this post.
It's bad man.

also
>implying Jita is at all volatile and that the other hubs are anything more than things people buy in bulk in Jita and move elsewhere.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#774 - 2013-07-14 19:03:36 UTC
also, 20k views!

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
Zlake
The Terminus Enclave
#775 - 2013-07-15 06:03:17 UTC
What would be nice if lvl 1-3 pirate agents were added. Have them be agents in space and turning in and requesting missions would have to be face to face. Would make just doing them risky and should help add some life to all the low sec that would be added.
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#776 - 2013-07-15 07:34:56 UTC
Zlake wrote:
What would be nice if lvl 1-3 pirate agents were added. Have them be agents in space and turning in and requesting missions would have to be face to face. Would make just doing them risky and should help add some life to all the low sec that would be added.


Maybe if the changing sec status thing were added access to these agents would be dependent on how well the pirates were doing?

at .5 sec status no agents
at .4 they are level 1
.3 at level 2
.2 level 3
.1 level 4

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
Zlake
The Terminus Enclave
#777 - 2013-07-15 08:41:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Zlake
I really don't want to take away from what null has even though null missions are not done that often other than by the controlling party in the null sec.

I would not like to see people getting their pirate rewards in low sec. LP rewards must still be picked up in null.
The pirate agents don't hold a station. They don't hold low sec. It still owned by empires just contested space.

I wouldn't care if lvl 4s would be there too much just really comes down to what people want there.
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#778 - 2013-07-17 05:42:08 UTC
who needs NPC pirate missions when you'd have real pirate missions to do?

I'd say we can worry about that later if needed ;p
Katie Door
the united
#779 - 2013-07-17 07:55:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Katie Door
Commander Ted wrote:


Piracy isn't all that profitable either.


Can we check your credentials somewhere ? how long have you been pirating to make such a, IMO, bold statement ? In my 6 years of gate camping, i've made my "fair" share of ISK. Just because you can't seem to make ISK off piracy doesn't mean somebody else can not either.

Commander Ted wrote:

eve pirates don't really affect commerce at all.


ow really ? can I see the statistics of which you base this ? let me give you a statistic: in the six years we've been camping, we've destroyed and/or looted 7 TRILLION ISK. where do YOU think all those ships, modules and implants come from? thin air ?

Commander Ted wrote:

Common Arguments:

snip

Every system will be like Rancer

Rancer is Rancer because it is impossible to go around it. Their is only 1 link that connects Minmatar and Caldari space, only one. If new regions are added like I prescribe then it will always be easy to circumvent these camps with a little know how.


Ow really ? I would suggest you check your starmap again, it might be out of date. ow wait, there has ALWAYS been a way around Rancer to get from Caldari space to Minmatar space..................................

Commander Ted wrote:

Gate camps aren't fun or pvp!

While mostly true the fact that gate camps exist will provide opportunities for pirates to make money actually pirating.
More importantly the fact that a gate camp is there means that someone will want to come and break it up, encouraging fleet pvp off stations encouraging more fun.


this argument, wether you agree with it or not, is riddled with incorrect "facts". first of all, like I alluded to earlier, I've been gatecamping for over 6 years, and still enjoy it. secondly, again wether you agree with it or not: gatecamping is most surely PvP (player(s) vs players(s) ): we (the united) are players, shooting at other players that come thru the gate, that makes it PvP.

So i ask you, good sir, please give us the be-all and end-all definition of piracy, something we ALL can agree on. I will grab some popcorn and watch you get flammed to Rancer and back. Also, PvP is large fleets bashing eachother over the head only ? Is PvP determined by the location where it takes place ? why does PvP need to take place off of stations or stargates ? otherwise, in YOUR opinion, it isn't "real" PvP ?

in closing, please don't mistake YOUR opinion for FACT, and check your other "facts"
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#780 - 2013-07-17 20:40:44 UTC
Katie Door wrote:
*snipped also*


What you're saying is that his facts are not correct.

The things he said were not fact specific but a generalistic overview.

"Piracy isn't all that profitable either."

What you read was "piracy isn't profitable". What he said was "piracy is profitable but not exceptionally so".
What he said is true, its not the most profitable endevor to take up. Though it may be fairly profitable, there are other things you could do that are "all that profitable."

"Eve pirates don't really affect commerce at all."

Sure you've killed and looted lots of isks worth over a long period of time. But has that really affected commerce? You ask for statistics for that basis but this is a statement of a non-affect. The fact that there is no big news article or readily availible statistics is testament to its non-affect. On the other hand there is one example of one such event that impacted commerce. The Goon's ice interdiction had a huge impact on gallente ice commerce and it can be measured. Piracy in general has had no such effect.

As for the rancer thing. Yes its possible to go around it, but it requires a massive detour. Rancer is rancer because its the only effecient way to move between the two areas. Rancer is what we'd like to avoid with this kind of a change becuase it would put too much emphasys on too small of an area.

Gatecamps... Starting to think you missinterperate his post. Nothing of substance to repy here to. No big ideas here for someone to really agree or disagree with.

The posts are based on the understanding of how these thing work. The only entity with the "facts" or what exists of facts for these things are at CCP. Or in another point of view, what we would like to change are the facts of the current stale empire area of space. We don't know what the fact of the future would be after the change nor does anyone else, all we can use is our understanding of how people (in general) work. And based on past experience what would be likely in the future.