Assembly Hall

Ignore this post.

This is exactly the sort of gameplay I want to encourage with a system like what I propose.



Fair enough.



I agree it certainly leaves some questions open. To an extent, I feel like some of this design would have to be done by CCP: they know what their vision for Eve is, they know exactly what kind of mechanics they can and will produce, and frankly it's their jobs :) I *thought* somewhere in here I addressed some of that. I'll check back.

edit: I'm no expert on faction warfare, but it's my understanding a corporation involved in FW can withdraw at any time. Dropping deputy status would work the same way. I feel like maybe there's a small hole here somewhere that I need to fill in on how a corp/alliance takes up deputy status and how to make it all work well.

Tangential thought: there needs to be something to encourage cooperation between deputy corps so they don't bicker over territory and that sort of thing.

As for taking control from other deputies: I *think* I said somewhere in here that attacking the CRS would not incur a GCC, and from there it would be like if someone can flipped you: if they're shooting your CRS you can shoot them, but they can't shoot you UNTIL you shoot them. Sounds like I need to go back through the thread and pull my ideas together a bit more. I'm already over 6,000 characters on my write-up on this idea now.

I agree that holding status should require a level of activity. There would have to be some way of monitoring levels of patrols and enforcement, similar to sov levels I suppose.



For the roleplaying aspect, because Concord is deliberately staying out of the Empire wars. They have no interest in attempting to enforce law in a war zone, for obvious reasons. It would be left to the local militias to patrol systems in which they've gained control.

I thought the presence of the Concord bunkers and the activities relating to that would detract from the faction wars. Also, the inability to take out a neutral scout without risking the faction militia getting access to a GCC beacon on you for the next 15 minutes would be a bit too much. The two systems need to be exclusive so they don't interfere with one another.

Here's an idea to prevent docking to escape the deputies. You said yourself that we may as well accept Incarna and start incorporating it in our ideas. I recall a dev saying something to the effect of "there will be no combat in stations, for now." That leaves me to believe that at some point there will be that possibility.

How about, if you're currently under a GCC, deputies can dock and incapacitate/arrest you and, if you resist, kill you. Would be a tough decision there. Keep warping and risk your ship, or dock and try to hide from deputies with stun guns and rifles. There would have to be something done to make the risk of docking at least somewhat appealing, say having no beacon on you in station and your GCC expires faster. Deputies would only get a photo of your face, like a mug shot, so you could hide in some dark corner or something to that effect.

Just throwing it out there.

The entire concept is of low-sec enforcement is probably one of the most compelling ideas posted here in, well, ever and I fully and completely endorse it. My hat is off to the OP for coming up with the first REAL idea for rejuvenating low-sec.

+1

I sincerely hope that CCP notices this post and seriously considers implementing this or similar systems. Lowsec really is just a joke.

On another note, LP concord store anyone? Concord battleship blueprints... yummy.

Ever wondered about how boring lowsec can be and how it could be changed. That's in fact a very good idea. Would like to see that coming. Thumbs up!

It's not destroying anything. if you feel that this is one-sided against the pirates, then how about some ideas on how to balance it?

Right now all the advantage in lowsec goes to those who don't care about their sec status...the pirates. They can dictate the fight because the "good guys" can't engage just anyone. There is no incentive to go out to lowsec other than purely wanting to get involved in PVP at the cost of security status. Even then it's hard to get a fight that isn't horribly one-sided or just run into a gang running disco on a gate or station. I'm trying to find a system which creates enough feeling of balance for all parties that more people go out into lowsec, creating MORE fights.



I do understand lowsec. I've spent a fair bit of time on PVP roams and exploration there. I learned the hard way how to live out there for extended periods of time and got to know some of the people who live there. I'd wager that 95% of the lowsec occupants I met were pirates. They spent all their time fighting each other and ganging up on any passersby they didn't know and like. Hell, half the "friends" I made out there I made because I successfully evaded their traps and stuck around in local to chat.

This isn't just about killing pirates. This has always been about getting ships into lowsec, creating fleets, starting fights, and creating a "stepping stone" for younger/smaller groups that want a taste of fleet battles and sov without getting dragged into the politics and sheer scope of nullsec. I really think if SOMETHING like this mechanic existed more carebear corps might venture out of high.

(troll) That is, unless you're saying that you can't deal with a fleet of pubbies coming out to lowsec and trying to take you one. I understand. Not everyone is up to that.(/troll)

:D

This subject should be discussed in full detail, but the initial idea is worth supporting.

+1

What you want is called Null. It is a region located all around the edges of New Eden, head in any direction and you'll get there eventually. You can own the systems there, the rewards are very high and it is full of BATTLES all the time.

Enjoy.

low sec is most dangerous place for pirates

being under -5 sec is great risk like having gcc at gates or stations, counting out ship maintenance bay / rr exploiting.

what low sec needs is not safety or more risk for people who actually have balls to aggro someone.

i could agree with more severe sec hits everywhere but then everyone would just pvp in 0.0 or suicide gank in hi sec and sec rat in 0.0... so...

low sec used to be somewhat viable place for catching logistic transports to 0.0 but since ccp gave them near immunity to everything (jump bridges, jump freighters, covert ops haulers, blackops, titan bridge, general rage logoffski, web warp) go figure why no one hangs around in low sec anymore. Not to mention that missioning and plexing in low sec became less good plan. Doing anything at low sec belts has been pretty useless like forever.

I like the idea, but as has been mentioned before in the thread, it shouldn't be so one-sided. GCC beacons following pirates through warp makes life really easy for the prospective bounty-hunters... and thus, should probably not exist unless they've done a lot to 'lock-down' the system and make it 'safe'. At lower levels of 'security', it'd probably just be fine to have GCC beacons lighting up at the location the criminal was at when he committed the crime, only updating with each new criminal act; that way, vigilantes have somewhere to start, but still might have to do a little work to track down their targets, especially if the guys show a little caution and have safespots in-system.

As for the rest of it, I'd be inclined to reference that 'Corruption' idea The Mittani had back when, though that strays a little beyond the point of the thread. My point here is, that if the vigilantes can set up shop in a system, doing things to make it safer for travellers and honest folk, the pirates should be able to do the same thing, setting up shop in a system to make it more dangerous for the lawmen and more appealing to outlaws.