These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

The X'th thread about low sec
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon
Goonswarm Federation
#101 - 2012-09-11 11:55:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Eugene Kerner
Shidhe wrote:
If low sec was worth going to, people would go. That's what used to happen. Scouting before valuable loads, risking less valuable ones, because you knew the area. Unofficial residents discussion channels where the latest warnings were traded... It all works, you lose a few, but it is worth it.

The problem is the economics makes the losses not worth it - call it the Prom/Dyspro effect, call it the Nanoribbon effect - some bottleneck resources and too many virtually valueless resources. Resource chains too uniform, too little movement of materials required (see post a page back for detailed suggestions). Wealth becomes concentrated in big 0.0 alliances, many others opt for risk free level 4s, and there is little incentive for innovation, freelancing or piracy.

I am fed up of everyone focusing on camping - it is seriously not the problem! Gate camp whatever - I don't care - if it is worth my time and risk, I will get round it. (Most of the time at least Smile )

Low sec is worth going to...and you do not even have to produce and mine there...you can already loot the finished moduls...even T2 drops in the gate anomalies.

TunDraGon is recruiting! "Also, your boobs [:o] "   CCP Eterne, 2012 "When in doubt...make a diȼk joke." Robin Williams - RIP
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#102 - 2012-09-11 12:05:36 UTC
Indeed.

CCP has tried times and times again, REWARD DOES NOT GIVE PEOPLE MORE INCENTIVE TO GO TO LOWSEC,
simply because they are too afraid of going there ! No amount of money will change that, because they have no
guarantee to actually gain it and not lose anything !
Sabrina Solette
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#103 - 2012-09-11 12:06:10 UTC
Solstice Project wrote:
*shakeshead*

I don't understand why nobody sees the obvious.

Even IF gatecamping was somehow nerfed and more people would enter lowsec,
there'd still be pirates in lowsec hunting these people.

Now what would happen then ?

They'd start crying about the pirates shooting them and then *that's* the reason why nobody enters lowsec.

Nerfing gatecamping will not change anything !


The issue is the peoples attitude, not the game mechanics FFS.
(and i'd love to see the sentry changes CCP was talking about)




It's both, it's people attitudes and game mechanics, game mechanics in this case being the gates being the only way in or out (excluding possible WHs).

Pure PvE players are less likely to go into low-sec but a lot of players like myself that tend to like doing both are more likely to explore.

If the low-sec pirates are killing very effectively then you expect those that don't need to be there, will not go there. So I guess the reputation of low-sec comes from over hunting especially at the entry points..
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#104 - 2012-09-11 12:12:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Solstice Project
Sabrina Solette wrote:
Solstice Project wrote:
*shakeshead*

I don't understand why nobody sees the obvious.

Even IF gatecamping was somehow nerfed and more people would enter lowsec,
there'd still be pirates in lowsec hunting these people.

Now what would happen then ?

They'd start crying about the pirates shooting them and then *that's* the reason why nobody enters lowsec.

Nerfing gatecamping will not change anything !


The issue is the peoples attitude, not the game mechanics FFS.
(and i'd love to see the sentry changes CCP was talking about)




It's both, it's people attitudes and game mechanics, game mechanics in this case being the gates being the only way in or out (excluding possible WHs).

Pure PvE players are less likely to go into low-sec but a lot of players like myself that tend to like doing both are more likely to explore.

If the low-sec pirates are killing very effectively then you expect those that don't need to be there, will not go there. So I guess the reputation of low-sec comes from over hunting especially at the entry points..


No. You just underline the myth. Not every high->low gate is camped. There are easy ways to check if a gate is camped !

People lack knowledge and skill *! It's not the camps, it's the people ! Whatever you do to change camping will not
change peoples attitude, because then they'll still cry about pirates being able to shoot them down in midspace !

If we want more people in lowsec, we have to teach them how to go there and survive !

*and the right attitude.
Shidhe
The Babylon5 Consortuim
#105 - 2012-09-11 12:23:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Shidhe
Wrong. Low sec economy cannot rely on a few items, it must have a serious and diverse base to get enough non-pirates into low sec to make life viable there - one reason I want to see sec status penalties reduced. It is the economy, it is always the economy. You will never get the people who want to level 4 all day into low sec, but there are plenty of others who would. They just do the sums and decide not to. At the end of the day, losses bigger than profit = people don't do it. All I see here is an argument between shooting the last dodos or putting them in a reservation. That argument has been going for years, and has achieved nothing. In the meantime the low sec economy has deteriorated, though that area should reflect the true spirit of EvE. Can you see Han Solo dealing with endless diplomats and petty regulation in 0.0?
Sabrina Solette
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#106 - 2012-09-11 12:27:33 UTC
Solstice Project wrote:
No. You just underline the myth. Not every high->low gate is camped. There are easy ways to check if a gate is camped !

People lack knowledge and skill ! It's not the camps, it's the people ! Whatever you do to change camping will not
change peoples attitude, because then they'll still cry about pirates being able to shoot them down in midspace !

If we want more people in lowsec, we have to teach them how to go there and survive !



I guess the reputation is the myth.

My experience of low-sec although limited is 50% gate camps and 50% almost deserted systems. But level 5 missions are no use to me and I'm not worried about high end minerals either. So other than stations for research there's not much reason to go there other than sight-seeing. That's not to say I won't go there as I like exploring, but only if what I stand to lose is not too great.

I used to like 0.0 before the Sov mechanics so there used to be a reason to travel through low for me.


Then when you train people up to be able to survive there, you'll get the pirates moaning they can't kill anyone.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#107 - 2012-09-11 12:34:48 UTC
Shidhe wrote:
Can you see Han Solo dealing with endless diplomats and petty regulation in 0.0?

If han solo was our friend, this probably wouldn't be a problem.

Unless he went to Delve to shoot our other "friends". Which aren't blue, oddly.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#108 - 2012-09-11 12:38:33 UTC
Shidhe wrote:
Wrong. Low sec economy cannot rely on a few items, it must have a serious and diverse base to get enough non-pirates into low sec to make life viable there - one reason I want to see sec status penalties reduced. It is the economy, it is always the economy. You will never get the people who want to level 4 all day into low sec, but there are plenty of others who would. They just do the sums and decide not to. At the end of the day, losses bigger than profit = people don't do it. All I see here is an argument between shooting the last dodos or putting them in a reservation. That argument has been going for years, and has achieved nothing. In the meantime the low sec economy has deteriorated, though that area should reflect the true spirit of EvE. Can you see Han Solo dealing with endless diplomats and petty regulation in 0.0?


Even if there were greater rewards, the fact that people could lose their stuff will prevent them from going there.

Lowsec economy could flourish if traders acknowledged the fact that there's money to be made there.
I've sold shuttles at 1.2 Million ISK a pop. I've sold dozens of items for combatants who would rather buy in lowsec
than having to use an alt or a shuttle to go to highsec, even if it's more expensive.


Anyway ... if i sum all this up, there's nothing CCP can do to get more people into lowsec,
except encouraging them to kill eachother ... but that's what lowsec is about anyway.

I don't see the point in keeping this going anymore, because it's of no use anyway.

They can make the sentry changes, but pirates will still find a way to gatecamp.
The sentry changes *could* encourage noobs to stick at gates and camp themselves,
but otoh nobody would teach them to do so anyway.

Oh btw ... i just noticed, quite late tbh ... nobody ever said that it's about getting carebears to lowsec.

Maybe we should instead try to encourage more people to go life the pirates way of life. hm...
Brooks Puuntai
Solar Nexus.
#109 - 2012-09-11 12:41:35 UTC
Personally I would move back to low, if they removed GCC and sec loss. Otherwise there really is no point. It's more a annoyance then anything with very little gain.

CCP's Motto: If it isn't broken, break it. If it is broken, ignore it. Improving NPE / Dynamic New Eden
TharOkha
0asis Group
#110 - 2012-09-11 12:44:07 UTC  |  Edited by: TharOkha
Solstice Project wrote:
*shakeshead*

Even IF gatecamping was somehow nerfed and more people would enter lowsec,
there'd still be pirates in lowsec hunting these people.


So? I think this is the goal of this debate. Let ppl in, at least. And if they are not careful in asteroid belts or doing missions - well its their fault - adapt or die. But we are talking about gatecamps. Instalocking, smartbombing gates and flooding gates with drones (so cloaky ships cannot pass) are the problem. Some players dont give a chance to enter ppl in.

And yes, i know that most of the lowsec entrys are empty but those lowsec systems are sh*tty. Important systems (like L4 hubs for example) are camped nearly 23/7. Those are the systems where isks are.

"They'd start crying about the pirates shooting them and then *that's* the reason why nobody enters lowsec."
"Nerfing gatecamping will not change anything !"

Thats just your opinion unsupported by anything. I say, lets nerf lowsec gatecamps and we will see.

"The issue is the peoples attitude, not the game mechanics FFS."

Now i completely agree with you. Eve is a sandbox, and even lowsec dwellers are the part of the situation of the lowsec. On one side, there is big cry that lowsec is nearly empty and lacks of targets, on the other hand, those ppl are camping the gates.

CODE. Venture hunt contest in a nutshell
Minmatar Citizen160812
The LGBT Last Supper
#111 - 2012-09-11 12:46:06 UTC
Solstice Project wrote:


Even if there were greater rewards, the fact that people could lose their stuff will prevent them from going there.




That and there are many ways to make tons of isk semi-afk in high sec. Once you introduce d-scan and danger most carebears just give up. Nothing will change that because you're asking people to think in order to play. Good luck.
Corriel
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#112 - 2012-09-11 13:47:26 UTC
Kult Altol wrote:
Corriel wrote:
Low-sec needs more traffic which I believe could be greatly boosted with small tweeks. I propose one of these two ideas to get increased traffic.

a) Locked acceleration gates into missions this stops the "gank me " aspect of low-sec missions. Make acceleration gates shut down if the Gate is scrammed, this would make warping in and out of missions very dangerous due to a new form of "gate camp". You can still be caught at gates but mission could be completed by competent pilots.

OR

b) Change agro in missions to "last ship on grid". A ganker can still warp into mission but knows he will get agro of entire room as well as agro from his target. Ganking is still possible but not the sure thing that todays mechanics create.

These changes seem simple and an easy way to create more targets but not easy targets.

Corriel


Decent Ideas, how ever what are the unforeseen consequences of this changes?



I don't know the consequenses, I posted here in order to get other peoples oppinions. My goal is to simply increase traffic (which means more targets for the PVP crowd) while not creating a gankers paradise (which would stop that traffic).

Corriel