These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
voetius
Grundrisse
#1161 - 2014-02-16 22:28:02 UTC

I like the idea in general but the implementation could be done in different ways. I'm also wary of Big Bang changes to gamepplay (aka Jesus features) that could have a serious effect on subscriber numbers - see Incarna.

I would be more inclined to agree with the person above that mentioned offering a choice, a longer high sec route versus a shorter less secure route. It's not all about sticks, it is possible to have a carrot and stick.

Hasikan Miallok
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#1162 - 2014-02-17 02:50:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Hasikan Miallok
You would probably just get a lot more jump freighters used and hisec traffic being moved by JF between small losec islands of just one or two systems.

Probably those same lowsec islands that already always have cynos up, the ones that are regularly used by bluesec people to move stuff from high into SOV.

Could be amusing, you might see nullsec alliances getting involved in the hisec carebear freight business.
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1163 - 2014-02-17 02:52:50 UTC
voetius wrote:

I like the idea in general but the implementation could be done in different ways. I'm also wary of Big Bang changes to gamepplay (aka Jesus features) that could have a serious effect on subscriber numbers - see Incarna.

I would be more inclined to agree with the person above that mentioned offering a choice, a longer high sec route versus a shorter less secure route. It's not all about sticks, it is possible to have a carrot and stick.



This is not a jesus feature.

A jesus feature is a resource heavy project.

Like Incarna.

and the problem with Incarna was it was just a stupid station hangar thing instead of anything remotely close to what CCP promised.

and $1000 dollar pants.

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

Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#1164 - 2014-02-17 07:56:20 UTC
Challenge people and they will come up with creative solutions. Necessity is the mother of invention, after all. I would love to see this linked in with expanding factional warfare to ALL lowsec, and include pirate FW. You could have the Khanid added as a permanently sovereign empire faction, so you balance with 5 high and 5 null. Having nullsec corridors like the ones you're talking about would be astonishingly wonderful because it would allow permanent profession pirates and solo pvpers the opportunity to navigate the whole of the map without too much difficulty.

A good way of introducing this from a lore perspective would be to have the onset of pirate factional warfare with each of the major empires shoring up their borders, and the breakdown of a non-capsuleer front since certain empires like the caldari and gallente would no longer be able to keep up a "border zone" which is technically a holdover from the days of peace.

The current map mechanics are antiquated and outdated. They need to change. Warzones can be expanded to different regions rather than a single map, and be more of a free-for-all setting with more emphasis on system capturing over LP donation.

As much love as I have for caldari FW, I would love to be a Khanid militia person fighting in low against the blood raider/sansha onslaught; I love the idea of FW players being the soldiers that hold back the tides of war and terror from the simple, sheltered ways of hisec.

Opening ALL lowsec to FW...and having lowsec corridors to separate the empires...now THERE's an interesting idea. :)
voetius
Grundrisse
#1165 - 2014-02-17 08:53:02 UTC
Commander Ted wrote:
voetius wrote:

I like the idea in general but the implementation could be done in different ways. I'm also wary of Big Bang changes to gamepplay (aka Jesus features) that could have a serious effect on subscriber numbers - see Incarna.

I would be more inclined to agree with the person above that mentioned offering a choice, a longer high sec route versus a shorter less secure route. It's not all about sticks, it is possible to have a carrot and stick.



This is not a jesus feature.

A jesus feature is a resource heavy project.

Like Incarna.

and the problem with Incarna was it was just a stupid station hangar thing instead of anything remotely close to what CCP promised.

and $1000 dollar pants.


Maybe I shouldn't have used the term Jesus Feature and just left it at Big Bang change although I think you are being a bit picky about terminology and you understand the point I'm making. Which is that big changes to gameplay could work out well or could work out badly but either way will have effects that are hard to undo if they go wrong.

I'm still generally in favour of the idea but would be more supportive if it could be implemented incrementally or in such a way that there was someway to back out if it all went disastrously wrong.
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1166 - 2014-02-17 14:23:31 UTC
voetius wrote:


Maybe I shouldn't have used the term Jesus Feature and just left it at Big Bang change although I think you are being a bit picky about terminology and you understand the point I'm making. Which is that big changes to gameplay could work out well or could work out badly but either way will have effects that are hard to undo if they go wrong.

I'm still generally in favour of the idea but would be more supportive if it could be implemented incrementally or in such a way that there was someway to back out if it all went disastrously wrong.



How would you even start by implementing it incrementally?

Nothing would really change until you sever the tie completely.

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

Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1167 - 2014-02-17 15:18:03 UTC
Commander Ted wrote:
voetius wrote:


Maybe I shouldn't have used the term Jesus Feature and just left it at Big Bang change although I think you are being a bit picky about terminology and you understand the point I'm making. Which is that big changes to gameplay could work out well or could work out badly but either way will have effects that are hard to undo if they go wrong.

I'm still generally in favour of the idea but would be more supportive if it could be implemented incrementally or in such a way that there was someway to back out if it all went disastrously wrong.



How would you even start by implementing it incrementally?

Nothing would really change until you sever the tie completely.


It's happened before.....twice
Amanda Rosewater
Universal Express
#1168 - 2014-02-17 17:58:05 UTC
Erutpar Ambient wrote:

Amanda Rosewater wrote:
The main point I do disagree with though is you greatly underestimate the power and numbers of the jump freighter. There are tons of them, and using them to mostly avoid the low sec wouldn't be that big a deal. I would expect JF's to continue moving goods between trade hubs w/o much issue.

When you bring up JF's there are a few things you have to remember.

First of all you still have to travel through (or jump into) at least 1 low sec system since you can't cyno in high sec.

Second and much more importantly, Jumping a Jump Freighter isn't free. Jumping a JF requires fuel. This has 2 very strong implications.
1. To continue the movement of materials to a place like Jita in any amount near what we have with continuous high sec, the amount of fuel used would be enormous. This would cause the price of isotopes to sky rocket.
2. There will be a minimum amount of investment return required to cover the fuel costs. Anything not meeting and exceeding this requirement will not be hauled via JF. And if the first implication has any weight to it at all, the minimum profit to use a JF will also increase substantially.

So to say we greatly underestimate the power and numbers of JFs is absolutely wrong. In fact we are very aware of the implications of such a large number of JF's and believe not only will JFs balance themselves, but will also drive other aspects of the market itself in doing so.


I don't think i'm trying to say what you interpreted. My comment related to JF's is in response to the OPs seeming dismissive attitude towards JF's being capable of picking up the hauling slack when freighters become less useful between trade hubs because they are too expensive and there aren't many of them. That is the part I disagree with. There are tons of them, and they are capable of picking up the hauling load freighters will no longer fulfill. That's the only point I was making. The flow of goods between trade hubs will not be too interrupted.

I agree JF's aren't free to operate, and tope prices could go up, but the cost of burning fuel to move goods will be added into the cost of the goods on the market, so prices of good will also go up. This does not inhibit the flow of goods, the added cost just gets pushed to the end consumer. You can't assume traders will continue to sell things at current prices given an increase in costs. Goods being produced within the high sec empire will be freightered to the trade hub at current prices, and goods not being produced within the high sec empire will be JF'd between empires at an increased cost to the consumer, all else being equal.

One last thing I'd point out though, I think you exaggerate the "enormous" cost of fuel and the "sky rocket" of tope prices in order to JF goods between trade hubs. If JF pilots choose to gate travel as much high sec as possible, jump a small low sec border, and then continue on using high sec gates, unless CCP created some crazy distances between systems, you're talking about a negligible amount of topes to move between hubs. Unless you are envisioning full regions of low sec between empires. I'm just talking like 1-4 systems. If you're only jumping between 1-4 systems, without crossing regions, you're only talking 2-5k topes to move between hubs.
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1169 - 2014-02-17 20:58:39 UTC
Catherine Laartii wrote:
Necessity is the mother of invention.


This is totally wrong!

Convenience is the mother of invention.

i.e. Drone Assist ;)
IoNiAn Beldrulf
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#1170 - 2014-02-17 21:34:05 UTC
I really hope CCP is not thinking of developing this into the game. Veteran players are not the only players of the game, and newbies want to roam in safety until they are ready to start losing all of their ISKies and start the chain reaction of lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex. I say buy more plex because it is too hard to make ISK in game that will cover all of the bills generated from playing PVP. Unless your a veteran player with tons of SP and you buy a shiny ship and never lose it. Now you want to make it even easier for newbies to lose their stuff. Come On... Are You Serious?
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1171 - 2014-02-17 21:43:05 UTC
IoNiAn Beldrulf wrote:
I really hope CCP is not thinking of developing this into the game. Veteran players are not the only players of the game, and newbies want to roam in safety until they are ready to start losing all of their ISKies and start the chain reaction of lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex. I say buy more plex because it is too hard to make ISK in game that will cover all of the bills generated from playing PVP. Unless your a veteran player with tons of SP and you buy a shiny ship and never lose it. Now you want to make it even easier for newbies to lose their stuff. Come On... Are You Serious?


I paid for my first 3 or 4 months of Eve. After that I plexed myself for 18 months on 2 accounts while flying expensive ships in lawless space.

I took a break from the game with 6 months of pilots licences already fully paid for with in-game plex on 2 accounts.

Most of my corp mates don't pay to play Eve. I pay now because it's more convenient to choose when I make isk rather than feeling as if I have to.

I never robbed anyone and never scammed anyone. Making ISK is very easy in Eve.


Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".

Jill Chastot
WE FORM BL0B Inc.
Goonswarm Federation
#1172 - 2014-02-17 21:44:22 UTC
IoNiAn Beldrulf wrote:
I really hope CCP is not thinking of developing this into the game. Veteran players are not the only players of the game, and newbies want to roam in safety until they are ready to start losing all of their ISKies and start the chain reaction of lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex. I say buy more plex because it is too hard to make ISK in game that will cover all of the bills generated from playing PVP. Unless your a veteran player with tons of SP and you buy a shiny ship and never lose it. Now you want to make it even easier for newbies to lose their stuff. Come On... Are You Serious?



Safety in eve is the greatest fallacy you will ever encounter.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=298596&find=unread OATHS wants you. Come to the WH "Safety in eve is the greatest fallacy you will ever encounter. Once you accept this you will truely enjoy this game."

Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1173 - 2014-02-17 23:56:04 UTC
IoNiAn Beldrulf wrote:
I really hope CCP is not thinking of developing this into the game. Veteran players are not the only players of the game, and newbies want to roam in safety until they are ready to start losing all of their ISKies and start the chain reaction of lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex. I say buy more plex because it is too hard to make ISK in game that will cover all of the bills generated from playing PVP. Unless your a veteran player with tons of SP and you buy a shiny ship and never lose it. Now you want to make it even easier for newbies to lose their stuff. Come On... Are You Serious?


Again, nobody is taking high sec away. This will, however, generate more of a reason to go into low sec. Currently there's basically nothing in low sec worth making the trip for. With an update like this you would have a reason to go through it at some point.
Cody Rasr
Goat Watch Inc. Look at all them herds
#1174 - 2014-02-18 00:04:46 UTC
IoNiAn Beldrulf wrote:
I really hope CCP is not thinking of developing this into the game. Veteran players are not the only players of the game, and newbies want to roam in safety until they are ready to start losing all of their ISKies and start the chain reaction of lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex. I say buy more plex because it is too hard to make ISK in game that will cover all of the bills generated from playing PVP. Unless your a veteran player with tons of SP and you buy a shiny ship and never lose it. Now you want to make it even easier for newbies to lose their stuff. Come On... Are You Serious?


If new systems were created that provided shortcuts to key systems far better than any current would not force anyone to take them or change any current routes. It would be a choice perhaps not allowing JF to jump across these new routs or into them unless the system they want to jump from/to has been captured by the empire the JF pilot is a part of. To promote player interaction between FW pilots and traders/haulers there should also be a requirement for JF to be given permission by the FW pilots who participated in capturing the system to jump to and from the systems. With the ideas I mentioned earlier this would provide more interaction and strategy in the game without forcing anyone to use this who didn't want to take the risk. There doesn't need to be a ton of these to test it out or make it worth while in my opinion.
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#1175 - 2014-02-18 00:07:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Hasikan Miallok
Erutpar Ambient wrote:
[quote=IoNiAn Beldrulf] Currently there's basically nothing in low sec worth making the trip for. With an update like this you would have a reason to go through it at some point.


Well there is FW and PI.

But PI alts only need to log every 4 or 5 days, play with the extractors in station and then make a quick 20 minute run around the planets before logging out for another 4 or 5 days.
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1176 - 2014-02-18 00:19:55 UTC
Hasikan Miallok wrote:
Well there is FW and PI.

But PI alts only need to log every 4 or 5 days, play with the extractors in station and then make a quick 20 minute run around the planets before logging out for another 4 or 5 days.

Though FW is in low sec, i consider FW it's own space. FW space is always in low sec, but low sec isn't always FW space. Basically, the general low sec is worthless.

As for PI, lowsec is less worthwhile than WH or Null but has as much if not great risk for a lower rate of return. And you still end up coming across POCOs anyways.

My statement still stands, there is nothing in low sec(in and of itself) worth making the trip for.
Paul Alpha Walker
Star Squad SDF-G1-W1-S6
#1177 - 2014-02-18 01:19:15 UTC
Commander Ted wrote:
Jackal Datapaw wrote:
as one person once told me these wise words. We need to find a way to buff null-sec and low-sec without nerfing high sec, cause lets be honest with eachother, there will always be carebears that want nothing to do with the lower sectors. I'm sorry to say Ted, but this isn't the right way, cause you infact did NOT buff low or null-sec in anyways, but you nerf the hell out of high-sec to the point where major high sec corps would all but quit, traffic would come to a stand still, and your tower will come crashing down.


No it won't your being silly. You can still mine as much as you want, you can still mission as much as you want, you can still wardec as much as you want, you can still single station trade as much as you want,you can still incursion as much as you want, you can still do exploration as much as you want, and you can still build as much as you want. Carebears don't have to participate and can still be afk casual zombies with the same mission rewards intact. All it ads are options for less risk averse people to make more isk than they already do. Carebears can team up with these risk takers, carebears do the farming while the haulers do the dangerous activities. It's not even like the risky activity is even hard or that dangerous! Also each high security region will still be self sufficient, just foreign goods will be harder to get. Stop being dramatic OMG EVERY REGION IS BIASED TO CERTAIN SHIP TYPES OMFG UNSUB.

Lowsec has very little real meaning outside of faction warfare. The only role it plays on the sov level is a safe cyno haven, the only role it plays in industry is that it is where capitals are safely baked in stations. If my change were added, lowsec would be a important part of the high sec dynamic. Null needs changes to it's industry that need to be addressed in an entirely separate thread, in such dire need it could be game breaking. Making alliances have to move their jump freighters slightly farther is hardly a nerf to null.



So what about high sec incursion runners? How are they supposed to move there big slow shiny ships from space to space without you ganking us all to hell for no reward huh? HS gankers already target and catch many now in the existing conditions with ship bumping tactics. (Which needs to be nerfed if not turned into a bannable offense, or at least make bumping inflict damage on said ships) but honestly... most incursion runners only have a couple ships and it takes them a long time to build them... separating k-space like this will cause many issues in the incursion community
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1178 - 2014-02-18 01:33:45 UTC
Paul Alpha Walker wrote:
Commander Ted wrote:
Jackal Datapaw wrote:
as one person once told me these wise words. We need to find a way to buff null-sec and low-sec without nerfing high sec, cause lets be honest with eachother, there will always be carebears that want nothing to do with the lower sectors. I'm sorry to say Ted, but this isn't the right way, cause you infact did NOT buff low or null-sec in anyways, but you nerf the hell out of high-sec to the point where major high sec corps would all but quit, traffic would come to a stand still, and your tower will come crashing down.


No it won't your being silly. You can still mine as much as you want, you can still mission as much as you want, you can still wardec as much as you want, you can still single station trade as much as you want,you can still incursion as much as you want, you can still do exploration as much as you want, and you can still build as much as you want. Carebears don't have to participate and can still be afk casual zombies with the same mission rewards intact. All it ads are options for less risk averse people to make more isk than they already do. Carebears can team up with these risk takers, carebears do the farming while the haulers do the dangerous activities. It's not even like the risky activity is even hard or that dangerous! Also each high security region will still be self sufficient, just foreign goods will be harder to get. Stop being dramatic OMG EVERY REGION IS BIASED TO CERTAIN SHIP TYPES OMFG UNSUB.

Lowsec has very little real meaning outside of faction warfare. The only role it plays on the sov level is a safe cyno haven, the only role it plays in industry is that it is where capitals are safely baked in stations. If my change were added, lowsec would be a important part of the high sec dynamic. Null needs changes to it's industry that need to be addressed in an entirely separate thread, in such dire need it could be game breaking. Making alliances have to move their jump freighters slightly farther is hardly a nerf to null.



So what about high sec incursion runners? How are they supposed to move there big slow shiny ships from space to space without you ganking us all to hell for no reward huh? HS gankers already target and catch many now in the existing conditions with ship bumping tactics. (Which needs to be nerfed if not turned into a bannable offense, or at least make bumping inflict damage on said ships) but honestly... most incursion runners only have a couple ships and it takes them a long time to build them... separating k-space like this will cause many issues in the incursion community

Beyond massive amounts of isk, what does the high sec incursion community bring to the rest of the eve community?

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Dav Varan
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#1179 - 2014-02-18 11:47:44 UTC
Commander Ted wrote:
Dav Varan wrote:


What are you saying ?, you want to stop solo movments of everything except for interceptor between empires ?
STFU.



That isn't remotely what I said Mr.Strawman.
How did you even come anywhere close to that?

I dont think it is to much to ask for a billion isk ship that takes 30 seconds to enter warp to need an escourt ship or two, considering that already there are tons of people who use webifiers to move faster in hi-sec.



You don't know what your saying is the problem.
By that I mean you are no considering the consequences of what you are proposing.

You are right when you say there is an unwritten rule don't travel solo through low sec in freighters.
That also applies to a lot of ship classes anything larger than frig is almost ceratin to get caught at some point.

Now that unwritten rule is fine with the current low sec distributiuon.

But you want to combine don't travel alone through low sec rule with a sec distribution that surrounds each empire with low sec.


The unwritten rule Don't travel solo in low sec becomes Don't travel solo between empires.

Travel between empires should never require multiple clients or a planned corp operation.
Thats unacceptable game design.

Confining high sec gamers to a single empire is no fun for them.

While I have no issue with low sec between empire it would need to be balanced with changes making low sec travel between empires less risky for larger ship classes than it would be today.


The unwritten rule should become
Its risky to travel between empires in a large ship
not
Don't travel between empires in a large ship ( because you die )















Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1180 - 2014-02-18 12:04:20 UTC
Erutpar Ambient wrote:
IoNiAn Beldrulf wrote:
I really hope CCP is not thinking of developing this into the game. Veteran players are not the only players of the game, and newbies want to roam in safety until they are ready to start losing all of their ISKies and start the chain reaction of lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex, lose isk, buy more plex. I say buy more plex because it is too hard to make ISK in game that will cover all of the bills generated from playing PVP. Unless your a veteran player with tons of SP and you buy a shiny ship and never lose it. Now you want to make it even easier for newbies to lose their stuff. Come On... Are You Serious?


Again, nobody is taking high sec away. This will, however, generate more of a reason to go into low sec. Currently there's basically nothing in low sec worth making the trip for. With an update like this you would have a reason to go through it at some point.

Only in uncatchable frigs, inties and covert ops ships. Which would be completely pointless. You would end up with 95% of people hanging around Jita and the rest a complete wasteland.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)