Player Features and Ideas Discussion

If they leave because they lost a frigate, then they should leave. I believe CCP is all for having noobs learn to die often.




Good. Make space big again.



I have no idea what you're babbling about here.



Jita /= only moons. Don't be naive. Jita is also the place for phat loots, T3 and everything else. At the very least this would help distribute the T1/T2/faction market a bit. Perhaps even the niche markets.



NC held that space long before the dyspro/prom nerf and subsequent Tech buff. Again, you show a lack of full understanding of the situation.

I can't quote anymore, so lastly I'll address your point about it making transit for null sec easier. This isn't true at all. Bigger low sec in between high sec and null would mean more jumps necessary. This would put a strain on logistics as well as increase opportune moments to destroy these logistic caravans.

All in all, your assessment simply shows that you are a high sec bear that really has little to no understanding of the game outside of your bubble.

Sweet post bro.

1. Supers are getting nerfed.

2. Thats ******** - there aren't even permacamps now despite what high sec pubbies perceive.

This entire posts reads as "The game would be harder for me and that's not fair."

Also, its mostly wrong.

Balancing around lore is stupid and half of your reasons do this. Promoting pvp in low sec is a good thing. Numbers 7 and 8 reasons don't make any sense at all.

This is all fine and I agree with all of it.

I also think those that are willing to go to low sec (or at least through it) should have be rewarded for it.

Putting low sec between high sec areas like this idea suggests would reward those willing to leave their bubbles and explore the game a bit more.

Well personally (on top of what has already been posted), after almost 6 years of playing the static environment that is EVE NPC space is geting boring. It feels like the whole environment is dead or lacking a dimension since nothing ever changes. I would much rather live (play) in environment that changes according to what server population does. It's difficult to stay interested when nothing you do really leaves it's mark.

Sure 0.0 implements some of what Im talking about, but in order to enjoy that today, you need to be a part of some huge coalition and sit endless hours in lagged systems and that simply isnt for everyone.

In short I think that empire would really benefit from dynamically changing security levels since it would bring more depth into the world and help make the environment a lot more interesting as you could get a sense that things you do in highsec actually matter... (and everything else already mentioned)

PS: Obviously I think it's essential that security level-system would be dynamic. In this case it would be possible to keep highsec routes open or expand highsec areas, but this would be done by players and not by some imaginary space police (Concord) without us never ever seeing them do it.

This would only be an expected condition between hostile empires, such as the Gallente/Amarr borders. Such zones would not exist along the Gallente/Minmatar boarder.

This does not need to be implemented in a single fell swoop. A few planets at a time (per week) could have their security downgraded by 1 level. These downgrades could be tied into storyline issues. Major downgrades could be the result of incursions. There are many ways to implement it without sweeping through the whole map at once.

Also, they could leave a few his-sec corridors that would require long routes to get through, but still have them available for those that wish to take the time and avoid the risk.

Flying a cov ops over a few low sec jumps shouldn't be this big of an issue. I mean come on. If someone was so upset by the adreneline of possibly getting their ship blown up by another player in an mmo, they could just install jump clones in the regions.

If they could never *ever* muster up the courage to try it even once. Well then they would never see the other parts of eve. But we shouldn't set the bar on this sort of extreme computer game cowardice.

Let me start by saying that dynamic sec status evolution, and territory swapping, sounds really awesome. This is what FW should be.

Now, let's look at some nay-saying and see if we can make some valid arguments:



1) Who says this has to be true? NPCs have stations in lowsec as it is, and we all assume they are supplied in some form. NPC factions also have capital ships that show up from time to time, so we can presume they probably have some JF's to move stuff around too.

2)Isn't this the entire point of FW? Don't FW plex battles lead to system occupancy changing hands? This also would give players a feeling that their actions in a particular battle/event actually caused something in the game to change, which is good for player retention. Players can log off at the end of the day and think: "I WAS THERE! I BLEW THOSE CALADARI SCUM OUT OF THE AIR!! I FREED THE INTAKI PEOPLE!!!"

3) A lot of this stuff is actually just built in the territory to begin with. Even if it makes it slightly harder to get a CNR to Dodixie, if there is a market, players WILL find a way to make it work.

4) There are plenty of people in Sinq Laison building Amarr BS. These don't have to be brought. All it takes is one blueprint to make it and there is a limitless supply of the ships. Same goes for T1/T2 mods. Meta2-4 mods drop from the rats killed in missions and go up on market. You'll find there is absolutely no need to go back to Amarr space to buy/fit an abaddon.

5) The faction controlling the space would be dynamic, changing based on the actions of the FW groups that fight for such things. Contested systems already exist, and have caused no major problems like the ones you are suggesting.

6) How would this result in harder for bears easier for campers? Please back up your statement. If anything, this makes it easier to dodge camps, since there will be many ways/pipes/routes to get from one area to another. They can't camp them all at once. If they try, they will be spread thin, and their camps will be continuously getting ruined by anti-pirate/FW/competing-pirate roams.

7) Since this wouldn't really create any additional scarcity, as addressed in my response to #4, I don't think this would actually be the case.

8) Pirate faction ships/ship-bpcs already have to travel through lowsec to get to highsec anyways. I don't see this creating any major change in the way this part of the system functions.

9) This point counters several of your own arguments, especially in that you are now implying that this would benefit carebears who do occasionally slip into lowsec. Welcome to the dark side. Since you now believe that gate camps won't be too huge a problem we can scratch 3, 4, 6, 7, and 8 off the list.

10) Game changing? Yes. Game busting? No. There will still be plenty of ways to get stuff moved. It's not like anyone is saying that bubbles should be allowed in lowsec or anything. Train your transport alt up to use.... transport ships! Cloak warp jump, cloak warp jump. You're nearly invincible! And hey, if you want to go to another area just to do missions or something, you can always just jump clone over there.

I think the plan involves having tons of different gates, and tons of different routes, by which to reach another area, thus meaning that they realistically won't all be camped all the time.

You can figure out which ones are camped in the same fashion people get that intel now. Scouts.

I really hate that people afk around freighter loads to begin with. Having the option to autopilot everything to Jita while you go to pick the kids up from karate is the reason why things are the way they are. If there's no risk in doing it, why not?

Not everywhere would be separated. You could still afk move stuff between gallente and minnie space. You could still afk move stuff between amarr and caldari space. You'd just have to be worried about going between the two joined areas. You could have a JF for those movements, or you could pay a merc corp to scout you through. Heavens forbid you interact with other players to accomplish your goals.

Either way, maybe I'll sound like a **** saying this, but I can't help but roll my eyes when someone says "this will ruin my afk gameplay experience!"