Player Features and Ideas Discussion

-24/7 dreadnought or Super Capital gate camps on Region to region trading?

-Concord taxes all trade.

Very, very old topic that is being brought up here.

To give a brief rehash of the previous threadanaught on this subject (yes, it was a threadanought);


- support was mixed
------ some REALLY hated the idea
------ some REALLY liked the idea
------ some were in the middle

- those that hated the idea argued that it would...
------ effectively remove the ability for groups (especially small groups) to operate in all areas of high-sec
------ it would be too high of a "barrier"/"risk" for traders whose gameplay depends on access to all trade hubs
------ certain areas that have certain skillbooks, BPOs, and/or LP items would effectively be "stuck" in certain areas of high-sec
------ there would be too many gatecamps and/or it would encourage more gatecamping
------ it would be a problem for newbies to get around
------ Freighters could never survive such a journey

- those that liked the idea argued that it would...
------ create **real** variances between goods at different trade hubs
------ create ** real** value in certain items (especially faction items)
------ it would give low-sec an actual "thing" that it can call its own (besides Faction Warfare)
------ more points of entry and more reasons to transverse through low-sec means more potential for conflict
------ it would potentially create "professions" and/or revive the merc market because there would be an actual reason to move Freighters through low-sec


- those that were in the middle argued that...
------ they would like to see more (A LOT MORE) connections and "pipes" be made between high-sec and low-sec... so there are less chokepoints and thus more room to "maneuver" around
------ gate guns on high-sec gates should be powerful... very powerful... so that it would be impossible to maintain a gatecamp for an extended period of time. Within low-sec itself, anything goes
------ Jump Freighters and Blockade Runners would be mandatory and no one would use anything else... something else would have to be given to other hauling ships to make them more "palatable" for low-sec use

More like it *might* make him a super-awesome uberfish, will most likely kill him, and has a good chance of getting water ******* everywhere either way.

It may not seem like it at first, but this is seriously one of those "why don't we have realistic physics"-level ideas that might as well be a different game entirely.

This point should be called out on it's own. I see a constant failure to appreciate this point. If the risks get high enough, you just stop...move on to something less risky and that's that. Same thing with firms, "Oh, your costs went up, well raise your prices." Thing is people react negatively to that price increase and the marginal firms...their optimal response is shut down and let those resources be moved to other activities.

Freighters will not attempt to cross those LS border zones. So the idea of catching and killing them will not happen.*

*The exception being the odd idiot who does not fully understand the differences between LS and HS.

Having it in place would actually be really cool. Putting it in place would suck and probably kill the game. Maybe the proposal this topic needs isn't a yes/no, but a how-to-roll-it-out. Come up with ideas that would make the transition smooth. Ripping off the band aid in this case might kill the patient.

***Sure, i love bad ideas.***

Interstellar trade tax at border system gates. .01% of cargo value fee funding the combat of excessive piracy.

Most freighter pilots will pay. Jump freighters will jump across boarder tolls adding additional jumps into low security space. Blockade runners and Deep space Transports will divert through low security space to avoid toll fees. Creates a new ISK sink and moves some people through low security space.

For added pressure, Sansha Nation can implement a divide a conquer campaign in which these boarder systems are extensively targeted for incursions.

As traffic reduces through these systems the taxes progressively increases until they reach a point where they are abandoned to low security space.

***Que tears and applause.***

Actually, I think it would be possible to separate the factions with FW zones that are connected to the rest of low and null sec and this way make it faster to leave hi-sec (Couster is a good example, it's literally in the middle of hi-sec, you need to jump a lot to get out) while not cutting the factions completely, only reducing the number of routes where you can move through hi-sec without leaving it.

So you want more Niarja's where Freighters simply can't avoid it and if they want to gank you they can kill your webbing alt one jump out, and then the freighter at their leisure?

Yup, exactly this.

Also idiots who don't understand how Low Sec works generally either figure it out long before they can fly or afford a Freighter, or they fly through Rancer as things are now. In either case you don't need walls of Low Sec to see them die to their own stupidity.

I think you'd find it is just like the rest of LS for the most part. Nobody is going to move through LS border systems in anyway you are probably considering. People will move with Blockade runners and use pings to avoid even smart bombs. JFs will become much more of a thing as well. Not sure where cool comes into this...but maybe you can elaborate.