These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Discussion] Smoother and more floating borders (hi-lo-true-sec)
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sunai Karvinoinas
#1 - 2014-03-03 16:58:15 UTC
I know the annoying discussion about the carebears (like me) what like to be higher secured in hisec and the guys who look for victims instead of opponents in lowsec. Please don't scam this thread down to yet another ******* war between these completely foreign worlds. There's no way to find an equal opinion. But maybe there's a way to make a compromise.

So far I'm willing to make my hisec life a bit less secure and the life out there a bit more action.

I want not touch systems of 0.8 and above secu status. Jump-in with jumpdrives will be jammed and not possible.
Cyno gates will be jammed in close distances to gates and stations.
Systems with a secu status between 0.7 (except rookie systems) and 0.1 get a new floating border environment.

Characteristics like
  • faction standing (>5.0)
  • security status (>0, up to +5)
  • armament (armed or unarmed ships)
  • ship size and danger
build a factional security status coefficient. In theory it could become possible to enter the lowsec and less secure hisec with capitals. Armed capital ships are not welcome at 0.6 and above. Unarmed capital ships could reach 0.7 in theory (Faction: 10.0, secu-status: 5.0 for the corp/alliance/fleet)

The system could be related to the status needs for anchoring a POS.

Negative faction standing coefficient will call a Concord or Factional Cap Defense Fleet. This fleet will arrive faster and stronger as high the systems security status will be.

Depending on the corp/alliance/fleet factional security status coefficient (FSSC) you may be allowed to to some things, what are only available in low/true sec systemes yet:
  • lauch bombs
  • warp bubbles
So you can watch gates and be able to defend your gates against factional enemies.

Players get told: "You're leaving the high security zone.", if they enter a system with 0.7 or below security status.
From 0.7-space on, gates to lower security status systems are not watched. Gates to higher security status systems are watched by Concord or factional navy fleets.
Gates to 0.5 and below are watched by a less amount of common T1 sentry guns only. Below 0.3 gates are not watched by factional anchored weapons, but stations might be.

  • 0.7 secu status systems are permenently jumpgate-jammed, if there are 2 or more NPC stations of the faction with sovereighnity.
  • 0.6 secu status systems are permenently jumpgate-jammed, if there are 4 or more NPC stations of the faction with sovereighnity.
  • 0.5 secu status systems are permenently jumpgate-jammed, if there are 6 or more NPC stations of the faction with sovereighnity.
  • 0.4 secu status systems are permenently jumpgate-jammed, if there are 8 or more NPC stations of the faction with sovereighnity.
  • 0.3 secu status systems are permenently jumpgate-jammed, if there are 10 or more NPC stations of the faction with sovereighnity.
Maybe, POSs of corps with a faction standing above 8.0 can count too.

Goal of this discussion thread should be to soften the actually hard borders between high and true sec. So every lower security status shows up more risk but also more chances to make ISK.

This involves also the opportunity to get concorded in lower but factional owned security space. Concord and factional navy make a watching and patrol job in lowsec space too. But they are more sparse, than the secu status is low. Moreover they have a lower strength. It's more scouting than patroling.
Maybe a carebear could survive in 0.4 assisted by Concord or factional navy, if he's not dead instantly. Gatecamps become more dangerous and difficult for pirates in 0.4 and 0.3 though.
Strenght of factional navy might be comparable to rat strenght in hisec space

  • 0.1 has no factional navy but sparse gate and/or station sentries. Concord and/or factional navy have a small cap fleet to enforce the entry prohibition. Gates to 0.7 and above systems are watched by Concord permanently.
  • 0.2 has no regular spawns but a small frigate roam, if attacks have been detected. Concord and/or factional navy have a small cap fleet to enforce the entry prohibition. Gates to 0.7 and above systems are watched by Concord permanently.
  • 0.3 has regular small and low power spawns of frigates. Concord and/or factional navy have a medium cap fleet to enforce the entry prohibition. Gates to 0.7 and above systems are watched by Concord permanently.
  • 0.4 has regular small and medium power spawns of frigates. Concord and/or factional navy have a large cap fleet to enforce the entry prohibition. Gates to 0.7 and above systems are watched by Concord permanently.
  • 0.5 has regular medium and medium power spawns of cruisers/frigates. Concord and/or factional navy have a large and effective cap fleet to enforce the entry prohibition. Gates to 0.7 and above systems are watched by Concord permanently.
  • 0.6 has regular large and medium power spawns of cruisers/frigates. Concord and/or factional navy have a huge and effective cap fleet to enforce the entry prohibition. Gates to 0.7 and above systems are watched by Concord permanently.
  • 0.7 has regular medium and high power spawns of battleships/cruisers/frigates. Concord and/or factional navy have a large and effective cap fleet to enforce the entry prohibition. Gates to 0.7 and above systems are watched by Concord permanently.

Yes I you're completelyright, I have no idea about low sec or true sec systems. But some of the offers above have been made from inhabitants of true and lowsec space before. I tried to give them a direction I could live with as a highsec inhabitant.

All prposals above are made as examples/discussion points only. I'm not able to provide real values or any balancing. I'd be glad to enter a constructive discussions instead of the usual war of the eternal counterparts.
Lets find a golden middle in dialogue instead of flames. thx.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#2 - 2014-03-03 17:35:20 UTC
What stops me from taking my "unarmed" capital ship into the reaches where only unarmed capitals are allowed, then docking up (or even dropping a mobile depot) and then arming my capital ship to the teeth with guns that I've got stored in the cargo hold/POS/waiting freighter?
Aquila Sagitta
Blue-Fire
#3 - 2014-03-03 17:39:31 UTC
I'm assuming english isn't your first language so I'll try to ignore mistakes based on that and focus primarly on mistakes in your knowledge of game mechanics.

Firstly, as far as I'm aware all rookie systems are 1.0 security, so wouldn't have to make exceptions for them.

I'm just gonna pick this apart as I read through your post. Twisted
So basically if you have positive sec status and positive faction standing for the empire who's space your in this will allow you bring caps into .5-.7 space. About the armament restriction how will you regulate jumping an unarmed dread into .7 space then refitting it in space?

Having negative faction standing will incur Concord or Faction police. These are two very different responses! Do you want the player to die regardless of what they are flying if they enter the wrong empires space?

You keep referencing Truesec. Truesec is the actual security status that is assigned to each system which is then truncated in the client. When you refer to Truesec I think you mean nullsec. And since you're only changing .1-.7 you're not even dealing with nullsec. So when you suggest this:
Quote:

Depending on the corp/alliance/fleet factional security status coefficient (FSSC) you may be allowed to to some things, what are only available in low/true sec systemes yet:

  • lauch bombs
  • warp bubbles

So you can watch gates and be able to defend your gates against factional enemies.

These are things only associated with nullsec. You are suggesting to bring nullsec elements to not only lowsec but also highsec (upto .7)!

Ok, onto your cyno jamming hs with pos/station idea. This seems arbitrary to me. What is the purpose of this beside just adding complexity?

You suggest bringing concord to lowsec? Have fun with that.
Reading farther do you mean to change concord's abilities?
Quote:

  • 0.1 has no factional navy but sparse gate and/or station sentries. Concord and/or factional navy have a small cap fleet to enforce the entry prohibition. Gates to 0.7 and above systems are watched by Concord permanently.
    • ...

    Again Concord and faction navy are two very different things. Concord kills you regardless and is exploit to escape death by concord. Faction navy can be outrun and even tankable!

    Blue-Fire Best Fire
    Sunai Karvinoinas
    #4 - 2014-03-04 16:56:45 UTC
    I'm not interested in rising complexity. Means not players should handle it but game mechanics. So you should be informed, if you're entering system with a considerable higher risk for your equipment. This is the case already.

    As rookie systems I declare the systems with career agents. Those are 0.7 often. I want to except them. Those systems have no high value ore. This is also the case already. But the security status is the right one to learn, how hard a life in "mid-sec" might be.

    Please don't misunderstand. I want not harden the life in 0.7-0.5 much. But I'd like to bring some lowsec options there, if the player has best standings with the sov faction. The idea behind is supporting factional navy. But there are not only lovely and true hearted guys outside...
    But at the same time I want to make 0.4 and 0.3 partial slightly more secure for transit.
    So pirates cannot camp hour for hour at a gate without having sporadic challenges with factional navy. So maybe one or another player may escape. The challenge is as higher as higher the systems security status is.

    ---

    Anchoring a POS in HiSec needs faction standing for the anchoring corp.
    You can anchor at 1.0 with corp faction standing of 10.0. I think, this is a theoretical average value for a fleet/corp/alliance only.
    You can anchor at 0.9 with >=9.0 faction standing.
    You can anchor at 0.8 with >=8.0 faction standing and so on.

    I don't know whether this is the case in low sec too.

    A comparable scaling I wish to allow typical lowsec or 0-sec activities in slightly higher security space.
    But to enter lowsec with caps you need a friendly navy. This can happen with >+4.0 security status AND faction standing >=5.0 for fleet/corp/alliance. In my opinion this is not that easy to get for 0-sec players.

    Ship size/class will limit the reachable systems too.
    So call an unarmed ship an industrial class ship. I don't expect to see dreadnoughts above 01. - 0.3 anytimes, because 10.0 faction standing in average is a theoretical value for fleets/corps/alliances only. Always counts the lowest value in average (fleet, corp or alliance).
    So don't tackle the given example values at first.
    More interesting it would be, whether the idea behind could find any support.

    If you change the ships status (i.e. armament) later, the given value will change and the naval cap defense fleet may chase you around.

    Bubbling in low sec could be possible, if you're confidential enough to the sov faction. (Sec status + faction standing of fleet/corp/alliance) Launching bombs means the same.

    ---

    The Concord/navy fleets strenght depends on system security status. They will be heavy weighted and challenging but always vincible.

    Also Concord looses their invincibility. But fleets in hisec above 0.7 will keep a strenght to instant kill gankers (maybe with caps too).
    In 0.6 and 0.5 they are very strong but vincible. And they are at gates to higher security space only. Not roaming around.
    Concord becomes a "highway patrol", while factional navy enforces the factions interest in the hold systems.

    In 0.7 systems and below Concord will only patrol gates to 0.7 systems and above. Gates to lower security space are not patroled anymore.
    Lower security space will be patroled and/or scouted by factional navy only. As low the systems security status as low the fleet strenght. It might be comparable to the rat strenght in hisec but with bonus for experienced players.

    If you gank anybody with neutral or positive security status and positive faction standing at a gate in 0.3 or 0.4, navy could attack you. Sentries may fire. If you assist to kill a faction enemy, all is fine.
    So a pirate could be catched in lower security space too. Small spawns of factional navy with elite frigates may appear. And so on.
    So 0.4 and 0.3 could feel a bit less insecure at the first view. Make it smoother...

    Right now, we carebears are lazy and inattentively often. With some light changes the attention might be sharpened again for the harsh environment the space is.
    But finally you should not be in a permanent fear to be ganked without any visible reason in 0.7 and above. The "I do it only because I can do." thinking is a counterproductive one. But where I got ganked yet. In most cases it was in 0.6 and below. That's my risk and will be my own risk further.

    ---

    But career agents do not prepare a player for harsh environment. So I always thought about this, when I saw the agent for "advanced military". But the regular military path should contain a much better preparation for PvP-like fights. At a lower level of course, because the skills are not really available for hard fights in the beginning.

    Regular agents should hand out level 1 security missions matching your present skill level. Moreover they should provide recommendations about fitting and/or needed skills for better missions.

    Career agents and the tutorial must become more intensive on watching ship fitting and tanking. Maybe some skillbooks could be handed out by career agents or be recommended to buy.
    Exploring career agents may split their short chain and take over some strategic scan issues in addition. How to find a ship in free space...
    Sunai Karvinoinas
    #5 - 2014-03-04 17:40:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Sunai Karvinoinas
    Naval cap defense fleets are as stronger as higher the system security status is.
    The fleet size corresponds with the intruders strength.
    Fittings may be designed in co-working with experienced players (CSM?)

    You may not be able to enter 0.3 and above without having a matching security status and faction standing. The defense fleets will be hard and fast enough to stop an intruder.

    NPC faction in low sec may use on-grid jammers against jump portals. Military NPC corps may use on-grid cyno jammers as provided in Rubicon to save their stations additionally.
    Hisec systems are permanently jammed against jump portals, if they are settled dense by one faction. This is independent on systems security status or rises the systems security status. Systems security status is no extremely static value anymore. Several issues may have an influence on it. But I do not want it possible to strip down Jita (0.9) to a lowsec system of course.
    Keep it slightly and smooth always.

    Rat fittings for "med-" and hisec should be designed in co-working with experienced players. Rats should become more intelligent and dealing all kind of damage while tanking race typical damage. Rats should get faces and regular brackets.
    Bring down the difference between NPC and players. This will lower the fear against PvP, if rat fights are closer to PvP.

    Making PvE more PvP-like will qualify also industrialists to be more opponent than victim only. This may help everybody including carebears than me.

    ---

    Explored hacking or archaeological sites may have immediate or delayed rat spawns again depending on and corresponding with systems security status.
    Exploring career agents or advanced military agents should provide a basic training on tactical scanning.

    New players need first experiences with the typical behaviour in lower security space. They may forget it later, but they should be prepared by career agents once.

    ---

    Which options could help to blur the borders between high-, low- and 0-sec?
    Anhenka
    The New Federation
    Sigma Grindset
    #6 - 2014-03-04 18:44:10 UTC
    Sunai Karvinoinas wrote:
    I'm not interested in rising complexity.


    Perhaps if you were uninterested in rising complexity, what followed that statement should not have been two walls of text that outlines largely arbitrary, difficult to understand sweeping complex changes to game mechanics that impose a much greater burden of knowledge upon new players.

    -1