These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1381 - 2014-05-03 12:52:22 UTC
That's all nice and dandy, but how do I get moon mineral (and products from them) for a reasonable price in Amarr or other Hubs, let alone border regions? How do I get combat booster stuff to Amarr for a reasonable price? How reasonably priced rare minerals? I do produce in Domain and I do produce only for Amarr market, but I need Jita and the cheap prices there to be competitive. If I'd use Amarr's premium prices for the materials and components, I could not produce at all. And dividing the empires with Low sec and thus making it near impossible to get the required rare stuff for an affordable price into other regions, would not help to foster production there, it would in my opinion rather hamper it a lot.

Some people would certainly bring their moon mineral products to other hubs more frequently, but they would also ask for a higher price, which reduces on the one hand the producers profits and subsequently on the other hand the seller's turnover and he would leave the market again.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Gawain Edmond
Khanid Bureau of Industry
#1382 - 2014-05-03 12:59:39 UTC
moon minerals are only avalible in low and null so they wouldn't be affected as they're already able to be moved through low sec drugs too as far as i remember. Minerals that are only avalible in one empire will be cheaper in that empire and exported to the other hubs for selling, there are also mining sites that spawn the none local minerals in all the empire regions. Remember that everyone has to deal with the market and other people if you're not able to get competative prices that's your own fault not the games. Higher prices does not reduce profits if everyone is paying the same higher prices it increases the cost of the finished product.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1383 - 2014-05-03 13:11:59 UTC
They would be affected because they need to be moved into various regions, which would be a harder, but people would either have to do it to keep their turnovers or producers would need to export from the still unbroken hub into other regions and lose money.

I of course keep in mind that prices simply should rise if production gets more expensive, but that is not consistently the case. Not everyone pays the same higher prices, there are punks from other regions who produce for cheaper and just undercut you or throw the market into an irregular rollercoaster, simply because minerals and moon stuff is more expensive in your region - and this could be influenced quite easily into locking out an entire region from domestic trade and production. And don't say, this can never happen - it is a 100% certainty that it WILL happen, because this is EVE. Not really good outlook in my opinion.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1384 - 2014-05-04 10:13:30 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
but I need Jita and the cheap prices there to be competitive


This needed to be pointed out specifically.

Currently in Amarr you need the cheap prices from Jita to be competitive. Why?

Because due to the lack of boundaries Amarr and Jita are in direct competition for all resources.

If there was a separation you would no longer be competing with Jita prices, you'd be competing with local prices. Thus you would actually be very minimally affected by a change like this. You would just pass on the change in prices to your consumers. And they will pay the price difference because they won't have direct access to Jita. And anyone that moves goods from Jita to Amarr will also have to increase their prices and pass them on to the consumer.

Does this make sense?

Now having said that, there's another point to make.

The trade hubs will not be competing with each other, until the price disparity is great enough that it's worth the risk/cost to move goods from one hub to another. Thus the Trade hubs will have a normalizing force as well.

Not bad huh?
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1385 - 2014-05-04 10:21:43 UTC
I don't see that happening, exactly for the reasons I pointed out accompanying this quote.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Gawain Edmond
Khanid Bureau of Industry
#1386 - 2014-05-04 10:33:19 UTC
rivr you're wrong.

I feel this is enough to count as content as he has been told the right answer and refuses to listen, it's like he's left handed 50 years ago no matter how you tie him down he just won't stop using his demon left hand (being wrong) in favour of his good honest right hand (being right)
I Have 18Accounts
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#1387 - 2014-05-04 12:40:25 UTC  |  Edited by: I Have 18Accounts
Why would traversing low-sec be difficult? This is the part I don't understand. You are crossing a borderzone, which I'm assuming means you can setup a cyno in a low-sec system neighbouring a high-sec system on the other side. You can jump into a cyno at a safe with your JF, warp to the gate, and jump through.

By splitting the empires like this, those willing to actually play the game can still trade properly while those who wish to autopilot or take 0 risk will be confined to trading local commodities. It's more balanced IMO. If there is a demand for certain products in outside regions, you will see pilots who don't mind the risk take advantage of such opportunities. Markets will become more dynamic, and trading/hauling will become less of a chore and more of an experience.
Talon Kane
ExeKrab
#1388 - 2014-05-05 20:40:00 UTC
+1, I love this idea !

« I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer ».

♣♣♣ I offer a character pricecheck service ♣♣♣

Goatman NotMyFault
Lubrication Industries
#1389 - 2014-05-05 23:06:47 UTC
why not even make the different region be on Brinck of war and Close Down all border gates from time to time, that will choke the flow even more.
Whittorical Quandary
Amarrian Infinity
#1390 - 2014-05-06 00:20:15 UTC
I like the idea,

IMO it is a massive change to the economy either way, and there would be a huge disruption of all markets initially that could make the game unplayable for some. It would stabilize eventually, but the repercussions could damage some ppl's ability to play. IE Think "Burn Jita" on a multi region scale.

Not that this would all be bad, as it would make the game even more fun if it could be deployed successfully.

I don't think the current sec between hubs should be changed but I think this would be an awesome feature to an expansion. As you open up brand new economic possibilities but with that you will have many, many destabilizing glitches to be taken advantage of.

Hmm... Sounds familiar...

"The trouble with quotes on the Internet is that you never know if they are genuine."

— Abraham Lincoln

Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1391 - 2014-05-06 05:39:44 UTC
Goatman NotMyFault wrote:
why not even make the different region be on Brinck of war and Close Down all border gates from time to time, that will choke the flow even more.


hmmmm, shutting down gates?

A very simple yet very intriguing idea.

Not sure if i'm for or against it yet. I'll have to do some thinking to figure out the possible implications.

+1 for brain storming
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1392 - 2014-05-06 05:42:38 UTC
Whittorical Quandary wrote:
I like the idea,

IMO it is a massive change to the economy either way, and there would be a huge disruption of all markets initially that could make the game unplayable for some. It would stabilize eventually, but the repercussions could damage some ppl's ability to play. IE Think "Burn Jita" on a multi region scale.

Not that this would all be bad, as it would make the game even more fun if it could be deployed successfully.

I don't think the current sec between hubs should be changed but I think this would be an awesome feature to an expansion. As you open up brand new economic possibilities but with that you will have many, many destabilizing glitches to be taken advantage of.

Hmm... Sounds familiar...


Hmmm, not sure how it would damage some ppl's ability to play. I don't see how you can relate it to "Burn Jita".

What are these destabilizing glitches you're talking about? Like glitches in the code?

Are these just things you made up or are there real concepts behind them? Please when you start spouting off propaganda at least try to back them up with the idea you have in some way.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1393 - 2014-05-06 05:47:56 UTC
I'm still totally against this idea. It basically still forces those who have no wish to travel through losec to do so if they want realistic profits. Trade and business os something requiring stability and in my view hisec should be optimized for this. Want more player mobility? Make the regions better st different things and people will travel between them whilsf those who don't wish to won't have to. All that will happen is that hisec will bdcome a group of impoverished ghettos. Bad for players and bad for the game
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1394 - 2014-05-06 06:09:55 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
I'm still totally against this idea. It basically still forces those who have no wish to travel through losec to do so if they want realistic profits. Trade and business os something requiring stability and in my view hisec should be optimized for this. Want more player mobility? Make the regions better st different things and people will travel between them whilsf those who don't wish to won't have to. All that will happen is that hisec will bdcome a group of impoverished ghettos. Bad for players and bad for the game

Again, it doesn't "force" anyone to do anything. Can you please quantify the pharse you used "realistic profits". In the current High Sec Pangea we have now can you really assume there are "realistic profits" to be made? For all we know there will be the same climate for local markets to make the same types of profits as there are now for all of High sec.

Trade and business stabilize themselves. They don't need to be optimized by anyone. Currently there are things that make different regions better at different things, such as faction LP, ice and ore composition. There's nothing stopping anyone from traveling between them or anything incentivising them not to travel. Having empires right now is basically just arbitrary. The empires mean absolutely **** outside of lore. We don't really care about player mobility, we just care about people having choices to make.

These points of yours are all just pure speculation and assumption. They are not backed up with anything resembling facts.

The idea that high sec will become a group of impoverished ghettos is literally Fox News. That comment is literally just doomsaying to scare people instead of coming up with a good arguement against the point.

Maybe i can say that if we don't get the separation of High Sec into it's empires split by Low Sec, then the game will become just one big high sec impoverished ghetto. Bad for the players and bad for the game.

But what i said can actually be seen today as true so i guess it's not the same....
zen zubon
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1395 - 2014-05-06 06:29:07 UTC
MORE lowsec that is not in FW would be nice, more cruisers in low would be nice.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1396 - 2014-05-06 06:35:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Erutpar Ambient wrote:
Text.


And since we play EVE, every doom-saying is more likely then not to happen.

Besides, with denying (and yes, for many people it is a denial) free travel between empires (Amarr and Caldari are even allied, so low sec would not be easily explained anyways, your ignorance for the lore gracefully ignored.) you take away a lot of choice and force people to take a permanent choice and then live with it.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

eliminator2
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1397 - 2014-05-06 08:08:37 UTC
i do like this idea low-sec is fairly dead and allways has been, this would bring low-sec a new life and it would allso bring new jobs or help jobs in eve such as


anti-pirates: these would be more useful in eve as there would be a increase of pirates across one plain

Hauler protection: with the new skiff buff coming people payed to protect a group of miners etc wont be needed much anymore this would give them a new lease on life as protectors

like you mentioned indy pilots have blockade runners that are very easy to break through camps very easy, freighters would have to be guarded and made worth the haul meaning they would fill to top instead of 1 item or so in a freighter because it is that safe, each trade hub would be more specialized making buying things more "ohhh i need this dodixie/amarr/jita/rens" does it for cheaper ill go there instead" instead of the current "ohhhh i need this ill go jita".

would allso mean that players would be more scattered around eve instead of in the set systems making ganking harder and releasing stress on servers for the allready crowded systems
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1398 - 2014-05-06 08:29:10 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:


And since we play EVE, every doom-saying is more likely then not to happen.

This makes absolutely no sense..... please cite an example where some doom-saying came to pass in EVE.
Rivr Luzade wrote:

Besides, with denying (and yes, for many people it is a denial) free travel between empires (Amarr and Caldari are even allied, so low sec would not be easily explained anyways, your ignorance for the lore gracefully ignored.) you take away a lot of choice and force people to take a permanent choice and then live with it.

So are you saying that I ignored my own ignorance? what?

If lore is coming into question, then i hope you've been keeping up with everything. There have a been a lot of things in the last couple of years to start putting strain on relations with each other. I linked all the pieces earlier in this thread, maybe i'll dig them out later if you decide you cannot live without them.

Either way, If you don't keep up with the Lore then you shouldn't try to use the Lore to make a point when it clearly contradicts the point you are trying to make.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1399 - 2014-05-06 09:19:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Doom-saying: m0o

Cite me events that strained the relationship between Amarr and Caldari. I don't care for the others, to be honest, but give me a couple of examples for deteriorating relations between Amarr and Caldari. Blink

No, I ignore your ignorance for the lore.

--

eliminator2 wrote:
i do like this idea low-sec is fairly dead and allways has been, this would bring low-sec a new life and it would allso bring new jobs or help jobs in eve such as


Nothing would change. The Low sec, which is dead today, is also going to be dead after such a change; nothing would change for Aridia, Solitude, Devoid, Derelik, Molden Heath, Khanid or other not important Low sec areas. Only a very select few systems between the empires would be busy with gankers looking for easy kills.

Blockade Runners are far from invincible and with properly set up gate camps and smartbombers, they die like flies. You can also not protect freighters from ganks, because the gankers would just alpha or 2-shot the freighter with Nados. Loading it to the brim is already been done, and values then range from 400M for Veld to several double-digit billions. Low value freighters would cost more to defend than the transport is worth, and moving double-digit billion freighter through Low sec, even with a seizable protection fleet, is prone to attract really big fleets, which you can hardly defend against.

Jumpfreightering the stuff around is also risky because of bumping pilots on stations, who either bump you off station when you jump in or when you align to the gates (Just look at Ignoitton). Insta-undocks don't work because then they combat probe you in seconds and POS on a near insta-undock moon in popular cyno systems would be very likely hostile or, of you dare to set one up, removed and replaced.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1400 - 2014-05-06 10:09:53 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Doom-saying: m0o

The chances of another m0o happening would be slim, chocking down one system is a lot different than chocking down hundreds of systems across the entire universe.
Rivr Luzade wrote:

Nothing would change. The Low sec, which is dead today, is also going to be dead after such a change; nothing would change for Aridia, Solitude, Devoid, Derelik, Molden Heath, Khanid or other not important Low sec areas. Only a very select few systems between the empires would be busy with gankers looking for easy kills.

Only the shortest routes would be camped, just like it is right now, but with more low-sec some players might be mroe inticed to venture into low sec because the chances of being cought are lower.

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