These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Low Sec is beyond broken

Author
Sarah Schneider
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#21 - 2012-10-03 08:36:07 UTC
Nullsec is not safer than lowsec, it's just easier to secure and even with all those logistics support (JBs, POSes, etc.) there are places in nullsec where you --will-- die if you pass through if you don't have enough numbers, proper exit points or flying something bigger than a destroyer. There are also places that's on many cases safer than even hisec because of the existence of intel/local + stations/poses, but that's it, even a non-threat can force people to abandon their activities and go station spinning. There's the difference. If you discounted all of the logistic support and the effort people took to put them in place, nullsec are, on it's root, far more dangerous than lowsec (bubbles? bombs? bigger rats that actually hurts?), just look at npc null.

In lowsec, the mechanics doesn't allow security measures/logistic networks to be put in place, there's also that problem with not enough incentives for bigger entities to organize and secure spaces in lowsec.

Stop comparing those two. They're different, nullsec can be safer because people make it so.

"I'd rather have other players get shot by other players than not interacting with others" -CCP Soundwave

Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#22 - 2012-10-03 08:53:53 UTC
FW is an incredible success for low sec. The next winter FW expansion will remove the farmers and increase the pvp and intensity and low sec FW area will be crazy good. I think more low sec should have similar mechanics to that of FW, change some things up and get more population into low sec.
dethleffs
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#23 - 2012-10-03 09:34:34 UTC
We can manage here in losec. Why can't you?
Inxentas Ultramar
Ultramar Independent Contracting
#24 - 2012-10-03 09:40:45 UTC
People often forget obtaining a sense of safety in null, and keeping it, is what makes investment in nullsec more dangerous then in lowsec. The safety nullbears enjoy was earned or bought at some point. Lowsec might be more dangerous in terms of immediate player threats, but nullsec is more dangerous in terms of losing entire systems, docking rights, and inventories.
Sisohiv
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2012-10-03 09:42:59 UTC
Vaal Erit wrote:
FW is an incredible success for low sec. The next winter FW expansion will remove the farmers and increase the pvp and intensity and low sec FW area will be crazy good. I think more low sec should have similar mechanics to that of FW, change some things up and get more population into low sec.


LOL

No

Once the ISK is gone, the herd will move on. As for the people who stay and do so for FW I do think they deserve something worth doing. I just don't see it being popular as long as EVE is an ISK grind first and foremost.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#26 - 2012-10-03 09:45:57 UTC
Vaal Erit wrote:
The next winter FW expansion will remove the farmers

Sure it will.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Acac Sunflyier
The Ascended Refugees
Lord of Worlds Alliance
#27 - 2012-10-03 09:54:50 UTC
Cipher Jones wrote:
Quote:
The reality: Null Sec is both safer and more rewarding than Low Sec with high sec even safer and more (most?) rewarding.


Lol.


It's true. I've lived there. Hulk fleets of 10+ with orca support. Any Rorquels (which there usually are) stick in a pos all day. Add in system upgrades and stations that give super yield bonuses. The mining people I knew out there had way too much zydrine and not enough pyrite. And lots of the mining areas are so remote, nobody will even bother to harass them. Lowsec has none of that.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2012-10-03 10:02:09 UTC
Because mining is more rewarding than FW farmville, and doesn't require huge expenditures of time and money to haul the minerals out of there, compared to just doing this in, say, hisec.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

marVLs
#29 - 2012-10-03 10:18:38 UTC
Maybe for mining in LS just remove all asteroid belts, and give a loooots of gravis with veery good rocks.
No more afk mining, and profit if they give new only for LS mining ship with big bonus to yield and cargo.

For PVP i don't know it's a real hard to do it right, maybe divide each system to lots of sectors (shape of the honeycombs, give minimap for navigate), some sectors have rats, some strange effects buffing/nerfing stats, normally You can jump from first sector to even last, but if there's a player ship (no cloacked) on sector that is in straight way to Your next sector You just stop in it. New tactics, cool flanking, surrounding. Just quick idea without to much thinking, maybe stupid Roll
Brooks Puuntai
Solar Nexus.
#30 - 2012-10-03 10:26:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Brooks Puuntai
marVLs wrote:
Maybe for mining in LS just remove all asteroid belts, and give a loooots of gravis with veery good rocks.
No more afk mining, and profit if they give new only for LS mining ship with big bonus to yield and cargo.

For PVP i don't know it's a real hard to do it right, maybe divide each system to lots of sectors (shape of the honeycombs, give minimap for navigate), some sectors have rats, some strange effects buffing/nerfing stats, normally You can jump from first sector to even last, but if there's a player ship (no cloacked) on sector that is in straight way to Your next sector You just stop in it. New tactics, cool flanking, surrounding. Just quick idea without to much thinking, maybe stupid Roll


Agree with all this. Though you still want beacons in lowsec to instigate fights, so add in static gas clouds to lowsec, and boost grav sites in low. The splitting of systems is an interesting one, possibly divide them with acceleration gates.

As for the initial argument. Mechanic wise 0.0 IS MORE DANGEROUS than low, however because of player influence(intel channels and scouts) makes it seem safer, not to mention the low player count. Revert the anomaly nerf and buff 0.0 to make it worth it to live in and it won't be as safe.

CCP's Motto: If it isn't broken, break it. If it is broken, ignore it. Improving NPE / Dynamic New Eden

Sugar Kyle
Middle Ground
#31 - 2012-10-03 11:41:40 UTC
The OP is reading to me as buff low by evicting its current resident. Aka nerf pirates. The only place one can be an outlaw in is empire. The current residents of low accept the aspect of their out law status. To evict them to null would only cause them to gain shiny sec status because null sec space gives the best sec gain.

The residents of low live there because they like it. They have to deal with the sake dangers that everyone else does. Each other. Yet, the complaint is that they are too good at this and sometimes get along so they need to go so that a peaceful group can come in and make a mini null?

No.

Member of CSM9 and CSM10.

flakeys
Doomheim
#32 - 2012-10-03 12:32:34 UTC  |  Edited by: flakeys
Sarah Schneider wrote:
Nullsec is not safer than lowsec, it's just easier to secure and even with all those logistics support (JBs, POSes, etc.) there are places in nullsec where you --will-- die if you pass through if you don't have enough numbers, proper exit points or flying something bigger than a destroyer. There are also places that's on many cases safer than even hisec because of the existence of intel/local + stations/poses, but that's it, even a non-threat can force people to abandon their activities and go station spinning. There's the difference. If you discounted all of the logistic support and the effort people took to put them in place, nullsec are, on it's root, far more dangerous than lowsec (bubbles? bombs? bigger rats that actually hurts?), just look at npc null.

In lowsec, the mechanics doesn't allow security measures/logistic networks to be put in place, there's also that problem with not enough incentives for bigger entities to organize and secure spaces in lowsec.

Stop comparing those two. They're different, nullsec can be safer because people make it so.



I can see what you mean and agree to a certain degree however having lived in sov null , npc null and low-sec i would allways say the same as OP regarding safety in null being higher.Simply because npc null lacs the same 'measures' you can take as low-sec yet much easier to fly/pve in.Difference is basically only in bubbles and gates not firing back .


That said i find it funny how easy the OP goes about pirates having an easy life.Tell you what OP , try pirating for a few months then see if it is a walk down the beach.

We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.

Xen Solarus
Furious Destruction and Salvage
#33 - 2012-10-03 13:08:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Xen Solarus
I agree with the majority of the OPs views here. Lowsec is a wasteland of the pirates own creation. Its quite obviously more dangerous than null, especcially considering how everyone is blue these days. When you're in the depths of alliance space, there is no risk. I used to rat for days on end and not see a single hostile. There is zero incentive for highsec players to make the transition to low as the rewards don't meet up with the insanely high risks. And yes, the pirates there are the ones that decide when and where the engagements happen, they they do their upmost to insure that its a fast and extremely one-sided battle. The newer and inexperienced players, as well as industrialists, have learned the hard way that lowsec is to be avoided on pain of death. The result? Lowsec is a barren wasteland, not fullfilling its function.

Personally, i still think CCPs suggestion of upgraded gateguns is the best solution. This way, cowardly gatecamps will be reduced, effectively allowing players to get a "foot in the door" into lowsec. So instead of an insta-death-camp, they can at the very least get to something in system that they can mine/shoot for profit, and have a chance to be able to react to hostiles. This in turn increases lowsec populations, giving cowardly campers more targets to explode. Literally a win-win.

The only problem is that aforementioned cowardly campers can't accept the idea of actually having to hunt down their targets the traditional way. I can only assume that its something they've never actually had to do. I guess not having their victims march lemmings-style single file into their gatecamp is simply unacceptable!

Post with your main, like a BOSS!

And no, i don't live in highsec.  As if that would make your opinion any less wrong.  

Sugar Kyle
Middle Ground
#34 - 2012-10-03 13:17:21 UTC
Xen Solarus wrote:
I agree with the majority of the OPs views here. Lowsec is a wasteland of the pirates own creation. Its quite obviously more dangerous than null, especcially considering how everyone is blue these days. When you're in the depths of alliance space, there is no risk. I used to rat for days on end and not see a single hostile. There is zero incentive for highsec players to make the transition to low as the rewards don't meet up with the insanely high risks. And yes, the pirates there are the ones that decide when and where the engagements happen, they they do their upmost to insure that its a fast and extremely one-sided battle. The newer and inexperienced players, as well as industrialists, have learned the hard way that lowsec is to be avoided on pain of death. The result? Lowsec is a barren wasteland, not fullfilling its function.

Personally, i still think CCPs suggestion of upgraded gateguns is the best solution. This way, cowardly gatecamps will be reduced, effectively allowing players to get a "foot in the door" into lowsec. So instead of an insta-death-camp, they can at the very least get to something in system that they can mine/shoot for profit, and have a chance to be able to react to hostiles. This in turn increases lowsec populations, giving cowardly campers more targets to explode. Literally a win-win.

The only problem is that aforementioned cowardly campers can't accept the idea of actually having to hunt down their targets the traditional way. I can only assume that its something they've never actually had to do. I guess not having their victims march lemmings-style single file into their gatecamp is simply unacceptable!


I'm still looking for these gatecamps on every gate full of rabid noob eating pirates. Are there some? Sure. It's not every gate.

Member of CSM9 and CSM10.

Idris Helion
Doomheim
#35 - 2012-10-03 13:19:54 UTC
These pirate-whine threads are always entertaining. The concern-trolling is hilarious. "You high sec carebears can make it in low sec! Trust us! We definintely won't blow up your ship the second you enter a system! We definitely won't ambush your mining barge in the belts or scan you down while you're running anoms! We won't pop your indy when you're trying to run PI mats or manufactured items back to a trade hub! Trust us!"

Pirates are causing the very problem they're whining about. By making it impossible for non-PVP players to survive in nullsec, they guarantee that the only population of low sec space is e-peen queens. Hence the content-free dead-zone that low security space is right now.

Industrials and PVE-fit combat ships die in PVP -- that's a fact. And it's not just a matter of fits: the skills a pilot needs for PVP are different than the ones needed for industry or even PVE. The "rewards" that low security space offers PVE'ers and industrialists aren't even close to offsetting the virtual certainty that they will lose their ship and probably their pod (and implants) in fairly short order. The "rewards" remain uncollected because it's just too difficult to acquire them. High security space may offer lower absolute rewards, but they can be collected much easier and in far greater amounts. The only way to get more PVE/industrialist players into low security space is to extend CONCORD protection, and that would cause a flood of pirate tears that would drown the world.

The main problem is that CCP can't quite figure out what low security space is for. It's certainly not meant for industry -- it's suicide for an industrial toon to try and make ISK in low sec. It's not missions or incursions or other PVE content -- incursions in lowsec and null usually wither and die without ever being run at all. Pirates themselves actually PVE far more than they PVP simply due to lack of targets, and the need to make ISK...and even then many pirates spin up an Empire alt to actually make ISK while the pirate toon roams the deep with the other sharks.

I've often thought that a good way to open up low security space to non-combat toons is to allow a corp to "rent" CONCORD protection for a given amount of time. Or have some lows sec version of the US Marshals -- an extension of CONCORD that only operates in systems where a "rent" has been paid by an owning corp. "Renting" this service wouldn't be cheap (hence the risk vs reward thing), but it would provide an incentive for industrial corps to put down roots in low sec systems. The low sec Marshals service would otherwise operate like CONCORD in high sec.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2012-10-03 13:21:23 UTC
Xen Solarus wrote:
Personally, i still think CCPs suggestion of upgraded gateguns is the best solution.

This is a terrible solution, and it should be binned as far away from greyscale as possible.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Idris Helion
Doomheim
#37 - 2012-10-03 13:25:56 UTC
Sugar Kyle wrote:
I'm still looking for these gatecamps on every gate full of rabid noob eating pirates. Are there some? Sure. It's not every gate.


It's every pipe system, or the ones on the way to a trade hub. And even on gates that aren't perma-camped 24x7, you'll get targeted by a roam within 2 jumps, guaranteed. There is no system remote enough or dead-end enough to escape roaming gangs of bored pirates. And when the gates aren't perma-camped, the stations are. The hoops you have to go through to safely dock and undock are ridiculous: insta-warp undock bookmarks, having a scout alt in system to see if the station is camped before your main undocks, etc...it's just a stupid and pointless waste of time for most players. It's not fun, or rewarding, or educational. So why do it?
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#38 - 2012-10-03 13:28:31 UTC
Funny how I've never had any issues getting from hisec to deklein without any incident every time I've travelled by gates. I guess the secret is to just not use the most obvious routes, or having a bit of patience.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Karl Planck
Perkone
Caldari State
#39 - 2012-10-03 13:33:10 UTC
Xen Solarus wrote:
I agree with the majority of the OPs views here. Lowsec is a wasteland of the pirates own creation.


yup, that is totally why 4 of the top 15 corps in battleclinic are pirate corps based in lowsec. Totally a wasteland with nothing to do Roll

On another note. There are numerous lowsec indy groups. However, they a) don't advertise it and b) are well protected and c) have connections to null to call in the batphone when necessary.

Could lowsec use a population boost or a better reason to be there for the little guy? Sure, both low and null need it. Is it as dire as failpirates and butthurt carebears make it seem? Of course not, otherwise no one would be there now.

I has all the eve inactivity

Idris Helion
Doomheim
#40 - 2012-10-03 14:01:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Idris Helion
Lord Zim wrote:
Funny how I've never had any issues getting from hisec to deklein without any incident every time I've travelled by gates. I guess the secret is to just not use the most obvious routes, or having a bit of patience.


What ship are you doing this in? I'd wager it's a rig that anyone with less than 5M SP would be unable to fly (or afford). I've lost track of the pimped-out BC's and BS's I see out in lowsec chasing down some humble little T1 frigate or cruiser. And the attitude is always, "What? Why don't you fly a hugely expensive combat rig fitted with T2 and deadspace modules?" If I have to skill up a bunch of completely useless (to me) combat skills just to survive in low sec, and dump a billion plus on a pimp combat ship or transport, then what's the point or purpose to the whole thing? I can just stay in high sec and use my capital to more useful purpose.

About nullsec:

I lived in nullsec for about 2+ years, and I can assure you that it's pretty safe unless you're close to the borders or in a contested system. I've gone weeks in null without ever seeing a red in-system. As a poster above mentioned, the reason nullsec is safer is infrastructure: sovereignty allows players to perform the same basic security functions as CONCORD in high sec. If you get in a jam, you batphone your alliance and a combat fleet will exact revenge. Deep blue alliance space is about as quiet and boring as EVE gets (though the belt rats are significantly tougher).