These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS
Shadow Cartel
#1041 - 2013-10-06 08:40:22 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Gorr Shakor wrote:
Zloco Crendraven wrote:
Gorr Shakor wrote:

What difference would that make? Right now you undock, wait out the few seconds timer and jump. As soon as we are not allowed to jump JFs FROM highsec, simply jump to LS, hold cloak while you wait out the session timer, drop gate cloak and jum p. The chance of getting caught is minuscule.


You obviously didn't read the post. The idea would be to forbid jumping in and out of lowsec also.


Right, I obviously did not.
However, what you are saying is 'make JFs 0.0 only'. Following that logic, all jump capable ships should be 0.0 only. Is this what you are saying?


That would be ********....

Roll


I am not saying that...i am saying only Jump freighters. Do you even read posts before shooting nonsense on forums.

BALEX, bringing piracy on a whole new level.

boardin
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1042 - 2013-10-06 08:40:43 UTC
Anomaly One wrote:
Regina Gerze wrote:
Commander Ted wrote:
Regina Gerze wrote:
Honestly, this is an AWFUL idea, absolutely horrid and everyone will hate it if CCP goes with it...the same this happened in MechWarrior Online, stop crying for things then cry when you get them. Am I jaded, cynical, being an idiot or all three? xD

what does this have to do with mechwarrior and who is crying


Eh, I don't know...but it looks to be going the way of MechWarrior, the way of stupidity. You know what? I agree, but only if they add in a collectable animal or somethingOops I honestly need to take my medication so, night O-O


wtf just happened


LOL ... I needed to read this, thanks
Gorr Shakor
Shakor Freight and Mining Service
#1043 - 2013-10-06 16:27:42 UTC
Zloco Crendraven wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Gorr Shakor wrote:
Zloco Crendraven wrote:
Gorr Shakor wrote:

What difference would that make? Right now you undock, wait out the few seconds timer and jump. As soon as we are not allowed to jump JFs FROM highsec, simply jump to LS, hold cloak while you wait out the session timer, drop gate cloak and jum p. The chance of getting caught is minuscule.


You obviously didn't read the post. The idea would be to forbid jumping in and out of lowsec also.


Right, I obviously did not.
However, what you are saying is 'make JFs 0.0 only'. Following that logic, all jump capable ships should be 0.0 only. Is this what you are saying?


That would be ********....

Roll


I am not saying that...i am saying only Jump freighters. Do you even read posts before shooting nonsense on forums.

Banning Jump Freighters from highsec/lowsec can have only one incentive - to make logistics harder. However, what would stop people to load-up industrials, chuck them into Carriers and jump them into lowsec instead? To maintain the objective, one would also have to ban carriers from lowsec.
Or change their Ship Maintenance Bay to not be able to accommodate anything with a cargo bay large enough to (ab-)use this. And good luck with that..

It really seems to me that some people who do not have JFs at their disposal are trying to deny this to the rest as well. Not saying it's necessarily you, I am just getting that overall vibe.

Also, if you'd like, try to entertain the concept of NOT using subtle personal attacks against people whose opinion differs from yours. You'd be less likely to come across as a c-word.

I apologize for this slightly off-topic spin-off and to actually contribute to it, my opinion as a highsec dweller - yes, by all means, do it!
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#1044 - 2013-10-06 19:29:45 UTC
This thread still around?
I still think this is stupid, if this ever happened I'd probably just get 4 of each ship that I use.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.

Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1045 - 2013-10-06 20:18:52 UTC
Arya Regnar wrote:
This thread still around?
I still think this is stupid, if this ever happened I'd probably just get 4 of each ship that I use.


Yea that is kind of the point, this only affects the people who want it to affect them.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.

Matthew Charbonneaux
0FuqsGiven
#1046 - 2013-10-06 21:52:24 UTC
Rammix wrote:

There are no declared wars between factions, and there CAN'T be war zones between them. All systems of so called faction warfare are less needed systems where concord has less control - and concord has less control there because that systems are somewhat distant from central routes and play no sensible role in politics.
Every system in the core of empire space was disputed long ago and what could be divided (because needed) between factions - was divided between them long time ago. So bordelines in the centre are NOT disputed, there is no conflict for them and there is NO reason to make factions start all-in wars again.


On your next log in, please watch the lovely intro video... might explain something of where I came from... Besides, the game evolves, they are already making changes where players will be taking traditionally empire controlled assets (POCO's?), whats not to say that they are stable with the other issues developing? Maybe look into the ongoing lore, not just the ancient history.
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#1047 - 2013-10-09 18:12:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Maldiro Selkurk
Mr Barbeque wrote:
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:

With the entire high sec economy wanting to do business across this new low sec divide any reasonable number of paths between the new high sec islands will all be packed with gankers.

These 'gankers' you speak of aren't all blue to each other, and sharks eat each other. Are scouts out of the question?

Prepare for the worst of course, but just assuming the worst is silly. Its like assuming you'll be suicided on every gate, every jump, every day.

Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
Mr Barbeque wrote:

Freighters would not be forced into lowsec, nor does anyone expect them to be. They should not be flown there. There's a class for this called transport ships. Cloaky haulers can move your shinies, with reliable success. JF's can move large volume if you know how to cyno.


You want me to move an entire Charon full of ore through this new divide, parsing it into ships with tiny little holds, which under the best of circumstances means i make like 8-10 trips across this low sec space that im sure would be a multi-jump gate camp hell?

Your understanding of the transportation of large volumes of product in high sec space in EVE is profoundly flawed.

(JF = Jump Freighter) Smaller yes, such is the price you should pay for moving large quantities 'safely'. You assume much.


Maldiro Selkurk wrote:

You are using the current lowsec system model that is by-passed by high-sec transportation as an example of what it would be like when major commerce is using this new lowsec divide. Your ability to see the ramifications of your suggestion is both sad and laughable at the same time.

I am a supporter, not the OP. And yes, i do formulate my views on the information and experience i have collected.

Are you arguing that all pirates, NBSI pilots, faction warfare pilots, and the walk-ons will all band together to sit on a gate? PL and razor will drop by to say, "Hi guys, that's a pretty gate your circle jerking on. Can we join?" My point is if you allow yourself to become a target, someone may very well act upon that. That goes for everyone, and a bunch of guys on a gate is a fun looking target for the well equipped.

I still have yet to see a reasoned counter argument from you. However I do see evidence of a lack of fully reading things you quote. And I love personal attacks, means I must be doing something right.

Edit:
Tilly Delnero: thank you for being an adult, its very refreshing. I will put more time into digesting your post and writing a response when I have more to give.


1. What da f*** do i care if all the pirates arent blue to each other all i care about is what is going to happen when they see my charon without CONCORD protecting it.

2. A charon holds more than twice what the Rhea holds so to get from Rens to Amarr with my ore you want me to jump freighter that distance 4 times (twice for each half load), you have ZERO idea of the economics of high sec transport or about the low profit margins of highsec mining.

Also, if we're all going to be Jump Freighting our ass pass your new low sec gank fest what is the point of adding it?

3. You don't see a reasoned argument because having blinders on is much easier when you're being beaten in said argument.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#1048 - 2013-10-09 18:38:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Maldiro Selkurk
Mr Barbeque wrote:
"Many people will rage quit." Fair point worth consideration. I believe for every account that rage unsubs because life just got harder would be replaced by people seeing those succeeding in a more tumultuous environment, and wishing in on that more dynamic experience. No stats, simply my opinion.

Trade does not require stable and safe routes. Many examples are present, one very apparent is today's black markets. ********* is illegal in the US, therefore does not have stable routes by which to come from. Shipments can be confiscated, "employees" arrested or otherwise removed from your workforce/distribution network, ect. Yet it is so readily available to any who seek it. Its increased difficulty to acquire bottlenecks supply, increasing the profit gained from supplying the unbalanced demand. Making it an attractive option to those willing to run the risk for that reward.

Destabilizing the markets is the point, as static gameplay is boring.


Again, using poor examples to support your idea.

Yes black markets exist everywhere and your example of im, guessing Mary Jane, is a perfect example of why this idea sucks. Easy to move a few hundred kilos of something into and around the U.S. but try and sneak a 2400km space ship across our border or move it from city to city without attracting attention...seriously did you even think before you posted this?

Mr Barbeque wrote:

Destabilizing the markets is the point, as static gameplay is boring


I mine ore and run the same missions everyday, it is basically static. I cannot speak for all highsec players but there are definitely a significant amount of us that basically do the same thing every game day.

You find it boring, I find it peaceful. If you want excitement and volatility probably more than 1/2 of all game playing space is just that, go to Null, True or WH space and have at it.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Mr Barbeque
Mayhem and Ruin
#1049 - 2013-10-11 17:32:47 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:

1. What da f*** do i care if all the pirates arent blue to each other all i care about is what is going to happen when they see my charon without CONCORD protecting it.

2. A charon holds more than twice what the Rhea holds so to get from Rens to Amarr with my ore you want me to jump freighter that distance 4 times (twice for each half load), you have ZERO idea of the economics of high sec transport or about the low profit margins of highsec mining.

Also, if we're all going to be Jump Freighting our ass pass your new low sec gank fest what is the point of adding it?

3. You don't see a reasoned argument because having blinders on is much easier when you're being beaten in said argument.

1. The point is to illustrate how these gates wouldn't be perma-camped. Your response is it wont make your freighter safe. Yes, you undocked, you are no longer safe.

2. Thats your choice of investment. You would still be able to compete locally, saving those JF trips for what would be worth it. What is it that forces you to freight that cargo across empires? Could it be your choice of where to aquire these goods? Your choice of what goods to invest in?

2.5 The proposition isn't about ganking freighters.

3. Show how you've trumped the supporting arguments in any way shape or form.

Maldiro Selkurk wrote:

Again, using poor examples to support your idea.

Yes black markets exist everywhere and your example of im, guessing Mary Jane, is a perfect example of why this idea sucks. Easy to move a few hundred kilos of something into and around the U.S. but try and sneak a 2400km space ship across our border or move it from city to city without attracting attention...seriously did you even think before you posted this?

You attempt to argue against me by using the example of a space ship in the context of real life. Then proceed to attack me personally for poorly thinking. Sounds like projection. What makes it a bad example of how trade does not need stability to exist?

Maldiro Selkurk wrote:

I mine ore and run the same missions everyday, it is basically static. I cannot speak for all highsec players but there are definitely a significant amount of us that basically do the same thing every game day.

You find it boring, I find it peaceful. If you want excitement and volatility probably more than 1/2 of all game playing space is just that, go to Null, True or WH space and have at it.

What would stop you from continuing to mine or run missions?

Personal attacks just damage your credibility. They are also delicious. If you have a counter argument reasoned out I would be happy to see it presented.
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1050 - 2013-10-11 19:45:16 UTC
Wooo this topic is still around! This still needs to happen!!!!!
KanashiiKami
#1051 - 2013-10-11 22:18:01 UTC  |  Edited by: KanashiiKami
if CCP do seriously consider this, i will suggest the below :

1) instead of the suggested hard core low sec boundary around every empire, introduce a new type of space --> 0.4 space is now known as neutral space.

2) in 0.4 ... both lowsec and high sec mechanics are in place. there is a secondary concord police call the mercenary concord and there is also random pirates.

3) merc concord reaction time in 0.4 carries a delayed reaction time of additional 15 seconds but the armada that turns up will only consist of ECM frigates. they are destroyable ships.

4) CCP introduces a new type of player structure. a mercenary concord battlestation (MCB) with finite HP (player destroyable). the MCB defense mechanics is the same as a POS, but MCB consumables do not require player intervention. it only functions to dispatch more merc concord ships based on concord rules of engagement (and these MCB will dispatch ships that carry heavy firepower, not like ECM frigs)

5) every addition/anchoring of these MCB will impose a merc concord NPC tax on the anchoring corp. maybe a daily tax charge of 5m isk per MCB set to auto deduct from corp wallet. due to this variation, mercenary concord will also react faster to anchor corp members under "distress".

6) MCB structures are usable in 0.4sec (so now 0.4 may see a whole new type of game play). logistics "business" alliances will need to secure a route lined with MCBs, player pirate group will seek to destroy these annoying things in 0.4. and for these things to play out flexibly, CCP will need to create a rather large boundary of 0.4sec.

7) in any 0.4 sec, a MCB can be anchored (and up to 2 per gate) 500km off the gate. or maybe this is a new mechanics, MCB can be anchored off anywhere min 500km away.

8) MCB structure and ships can be targetted and destroyed just like a PVE item. a MCB station can spawn a finite number of merc concord ships per minute, and there is a maximum limit of 10 additional merc concord ship spawned per system per MCB anchored.

9) MCB can be upgraded by anchoring shield resist mods and other mods (limited by PG/CPU similar to a small POS). MCB therefore have much smaller HP than a POS.

10) instead of completely destroying a MCB. MCB can be taken over, by unloading 20000 units of marines into the MCB when it is vunerable during a 30 second window of it coming out of reinforce mode. this is a idea borrowed from HQ TCRC (incursions). now i think this is a good idea, CCP may extend this idea into normal POS, but maybe inject 50000 marines instead, or even 1440 exotic dancers to render it un-usable for the next 24 hours! LOL !

11) to bring things further, maybe this method of implementing MCB can be expanded into the entire universe and not just 0.4sec. and maybe the MCB can become an auxilliary anchor object next to your own POS? a military supplemental station. or even a "reversed" merc concord that attacks concord.

of cos .... i must be very bored to be thinking up the above .... plz do comment

WUT ???

Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1052 - 2013-10-14 14:36:33 UTC
ye

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.

Aesheera
Doomheim
#1053 - 2013-10-14 15:36:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Aesheera
Common Arguments:

This would make everyone just live in Jita!


If all hisec players lived in Jita then who would do amarr missions and mine amarr ice/ore?
Not everything can be found in one empire making it nessecary that players spread themselves out evenly.


**Don't they already?

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.


** You CAN get around it, it's just a truckload more jumps.

This interrupts my playstyle!

Do you really need to do Damsel in Distress once for every faction?
Is it really that big a deal if you now need to sell your products locally instead of at one super hub as an industrialist?


** Only truly bad indies sell it all in Jita.
Those that pay attention to their goods and their respective values ALREADY park their wares all over New Eden.

It is impossible to cross low sec safely and it disrupts traders gameplay!

On the contrary, empire to empire wormholes that can fit freighters and cloaking haulers are available to traders.
Volumes of items being moved to make prices more homogenous will be reduced meaning greater profits will be made each trip making the use of these methods more profitable.


** Such wormholes are few and far between. The opposite will occur: pirates will all get their sec up to be able to get to highsec and just buy there stuff their directly.
Lowsec markets will be even worse than they are now.

It doesnt make sense lore wise!

WRONG. Borders between enemy nations do not have to be safe and are often not. Security status is not determined by the presence of the empires military but concord's ability to secure those areas. 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.
The borders between allied empires could be also insecure, since they may be frontier areas since this idea comes with adding new regions that disrupt gate travel, these areas would be a frontier, thus not very well secured.


** Empire gates already aren't safe perse.
Plenty of freighters get suicide ganked as is.
Miners get ganked plenty as is.
Plenty of wars to disrupt empire 'safety'.
Also, borders are protected. The people - in EVE's case the players - make it unsafe. It's already that way.

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.


** As you mentioned before: JF's will be used to directly hop into lowsec - if they would to begin with.
As far as making ISK from pirating goes: gatecamping isn't necessarily profitable.
15 people on a gate, 1 bill isk, split 15 ways. Yay.
Also, with numerously more entries, it will be alot easier to detect where camps are, they'll be spread even more thin and creative people will avoid these systems easier than they do now.


I'm not trying to beat you down for being creative, but i don't think this will be a solution, this will only be frustrating.
And not just for carebears - for pirates as well.

- I think my passion is misinterpreted as anger sometimes. And I don't think people are ready for the message that I'm delivering, and delivering with a sense of violent love.

Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#1054 - 2013-10-14 18:15:48 UTC
Mr Barbeque wrote:

1. The point is to illustrate how these gates wouldn't be perma-camped. Your response is it wont make your freighter safe. Yes, you undocked, you are no longer safe.

2. Thats your choice of investment. You would still be able to compete locally, saving those JF trips for what would be worth it. What is it that forces you to freight that cargo across empires? Could it be your choice of where to aquire these goods? Your choice of what goods to invest in?

2.5 The proposition isn't about ganking freighters.

3. Show how you've trumped the supporting arguments in any way shape or form.

4.You attempt to argue against me by using the example of a space ship in the context of real life. Then proceed to attack me personally for poorly thinking. Sounds like projection. What makes it a bad example of how trade does not need stability to exist?

5.
mr barbeque wrote:
Destabilizing the markets is the point, as static gameplay is boring

Maldiro Selkurk wrote:

I mine ore and run the same missions everyday, it is basically static. I cannot speak for all highsec players but there are definitely a significant amount of us that basically do the same thing every game day.

You find it boring, I find it peaceful. If you want excitement and volatility probably more than 1/2 of all game playing space is just that, go to Null, True or WH space and have at it.

What would stop you from continuing to mine or run missions?

6. Personal attacks just damage your credibility. They are also delicious. If you have a counter argument reasoned out I would be happy to see it presented.


1. Stating that some pirates will be fighting each other over gate camp spots hardly qualifies as refuting that they will be perma-camped. Seeing as the pirates are fighting over them means that the gates are so valuable as camping places that intelligent pirates will be killing each other so they can feed on high sec commerce 23/7.

2. Why should my high sec activities and profits be nerfed into the ground just to make yours better?

2.5 If you don't realize this proposal definitely concerns freighters then i can only say that clearly your lobotomy was an absolute and unbridled success!

3. My arguments are better than yours that is just a fact, your inability to see that not withstanding.

4. You said that black markets exist and gave an example that mary jane gets smuggled into and around the U.S. all the time. Basically you are saying that since it is easy to smuggle a kilo of mary jane around the U.S. it would be easy for commerce to smuggle goods through the new gate camp infested low sec hell that this proposal would create. I said as a counter example that smuggling a 2km long spaceship around the U.S. surely would not go unnoticed and likewise major commerce going through your gate camp hell wont go unnoticed either.

5. Your argument was, "Destabilizing the markets is the point, as static gameplay is boring". I stated that what is boring to you is peaceful to me and others that live in highsec space. I personally would find endless blasting each other into bite sized pieces boring but i'm not calling for the end to piracy or any other pvp activity simply because i would find it boring. I only state that given that a majority of EVE space already is a pvp paradise that no further EVE space be given to it and more importantly that highsec no be busted into four parts by this new pvp space you desire.

5.1 Where do i state that i will stop running missions or mining? (I don't blame you for refuting arguments I never made, I know for a fact it is a much easier task than refuting the ones I actually make).

6. You state, "Personal attacks just damage your credibility. They are also delicious."

I at least have credibility to destroy, your arguments have none.


7. You said, "If you have a counter argument reasoned out I would be happy to see it presented".

Consider them so presented.

Looking forward to your next post ending with this exact same statement as it seems you end all our discourse with it. It is a lame attempt at APPEARING ahead in an argument you clearly lost three posts ago.

p.s. I will impose upon you to enlighten me about an area which i must admit total ignorance. It is clear you have spent countless years mastering this particular area of expertise so if you would be so kind as to answer this simple question.

How does it feel to lose every argument you get into?

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

KanashiiKami
#1055 - 2013-10-18 06:21:19 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
Matthias Thullmann wrote:
I should start a new thread "Separate the four empires space with nullsec". Big smile


Maybe we should separate the nulls with high
"It would create more dynamic gameplay"


HAHAHA ! YES !!!

and for aprils fools joke ... jita is surrounded by lowsec?

actually the idea null is webbed by hisec is great. but i would ... use the neutral sec thingy ... the neutral sec perforates every space system, neutral sec is the only real "highway" to all of eve

WUT ???

Anthar Thebess
#1056 - 2013-10-18 07:40:31 UTC
Up Up you go +1
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1057 - 2013-10-18 15:21:36 UTC
damn... and I thought this thread was dead... stupid alt bumping
Vox Zevin
Zevinup
#1058 - 2013-10-26 02:30:20 UTC
This is my first post on the Forums ever, My apologies If it isn't appropriate to post here i see it's a bit of a old topic. I am a care-bear , I have been since i started eve in 2011, I mostly play alone and don't have the personal time to devote to Big corps and hardcore pvp, Mad respect to people who do, I think it's really cool. That out of the way, Eve needs this, or something like it. I'm not entirely risk adverse, but why would i travel through low sec now?? I'm not a masochist.. Being forced to travel through low-sec though is entirely different and everyone would be in the same boat, I say bring it on.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1059 - 2013-10-26 03:33:59 UTC
Vox Zevin wrote:
This is my first post on the Forums ever, My apologies If it isn't appropriate to post here i see it's a bit of a old topic. I am a care-bear , I have been since i started eve in 2011, I mostly play alone and don't have the personal time to devote to Big corps and hardcore pvp, Mad respect to people who do, I think it's really cool. That out of the way, Eve needs this, or something like it. I'm not entirely risk adverse, but why would i travel through low sec now?? I'm not a masochist.. Being forced to travel through low-sec though is entirely different and everyone would be in the same boat, I say bring it on.



Alright, who's alt bumping.....
Anomaly One
Doomheim
#1060 - 2013-11-12 04:27:58 UTC
still think this is a good idea

Never forget. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8sfaN8zT8E http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5l_ZjVyRxx4 Trust me, I'm an Anomaly. DUST 514 FOR PC