Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Well, the stats for Ammamake suggest that it is very lively, Rancer is indeed a lot less active kill-wise than what I was expecting, but you still remember the older days, so you know what I mean. As replacements for this I would then suggest Tama and Aunenen or Hier (also a year ago or so when it hosted insta locking T3 camps with drones/cans spread around both constellation gates in the system).

My point, however, stands: People already camp low sec dividers and popular low sec entry systems and unavoidable passing through systems a lot and very effectively. These systems, however, are by far not as active as low sec systems would be that are then the only route between the empires.

Furthermore, I don't believe that every empire should be divided by low sec (has probably been stated already and often, but anyways): Amarr and Caldari are allies, no point for low sec there, Gallente and Minmatar are allies, but most of their direct routes are already lowsec routes.

This change benefits losec players yes? Not hisec players. Where is the risk reward in this change for hisec players? They already get ganked, and it takes skill in trading and bulk hauling to make the profits that are being mentioned. If it was so easy then every hi-sec player would be a multi-billionaire.

Reading between the lines this is a nerf to hisec trading and a buff to losec hunters. I ask again if it is more targets that you want why not run into null and find them there?

To pick up on an earlier point I agree that newer player need to be taught that losec isn't necessarily as bad as the general feeling is. The key there is that they need to be *taught* this. This would need to be through tutorials and missions in the first instance hence my suggestion for missions from hisec that drop you into losec via cyno and then leave you to make your own way back.

After this players can choose to join a corp or go it alone but they would then be making a choice based on learning and accepting the consequences. This proposal would force players into jumping through losec to do anything other than play in their own back yard.


As I have said this change would actually benefit me, but I would never want that to come at the expense of unbalancing the market or wrecking others playing style.

There was an alternative I posted many posts ago:

Yes, separate then main four empires with low-sec zones but retain a selection of high-sec "corridors" as someone mentioned before. The catch is that when using the regional gates (in the high-sec corridors) that mark the border between the empires, the player is charged a fee that is relative the ship size/class/type.

I don't have exact numbers but the idea is that it is "unprofitable" for smaller ships to go back and forth between empires, but less so as ships get larger. Plus it would be a good excuse to add content for drug runners; avoiding theses "policed gates" in favour of other, less secure entrances through low-sec.

It's not forcing big lumbering giants (like freighters) to wade through low-sec, but it should encourage smaller, more agile ships to use alternative routes to avoid having to pay the fee, and thus help expose people to the environment of low-sec.

However I know that there could be some issues with this, it would have repercussion in the marker, no getting around that, and I have no real place in that discussion, but I would think change is always a good thing. Another issue could be for newer or current players that have no experience with low security systems may find it frustrating, or not understand what happened when they get caught. So people need to be made aware of the repercussions that coincide the actions that they take.

So I would add a second topic to this if implemented, In that new players be introduced to low-sec systems, PVP situations and losing your ship, early on during the tutorial so that they can understand what's happening, why it happened and how to avoid it. They need to be show that low-sec is not as scary as they think.


TL;DR
Don't force people into low-sec, give them a reason to go there; give people the choice and make them weigh up the risks/rewards for each path.

Come counterpoints:

1. Trasporting high value goods without first sending a low-value pathfinder is simply asking for trouble. You can go around a gate camp if you know it's there, so send a scout first.

2. Just put pos fuel in each regional trade hub - we'll find it. We'll happily travel 6 jumps for it. Any more and it's too much of a chore - we'll wait for the next empire access. (Yes we do transport pos fuel through low sec and w-space frequently, amazingly without losing any ships - how do you think we manage that?).

3. Market forces will take care of collateral/reward ratios. People demanding too high a collateral for too low a reward will find that their stuff does not move. They will reconsider and raise the rewards eventually.

4. I see no difficulty with the idea that 0-sec dwellers are able to make more money than hi sec. They are after all taking on considerably more risk. This is as it should be.

5. PVPers who want their stuff moved will have to pay the going rate. If that rate rises due to increased perception of risk, that can only benefit haulers.

6. Avoiding hulkageddon is extremely simple. Live in 0-sec, low sec or w-space for a while and you learn to be vigilant. In w-space particularly there is no local, so you really do have to have scouts and be intelligent about what you do and when you haul and mine. In 0-sec or low sec its very easy. If there's anyone else in local you warp to a safe spot (previously made) or dock. Once in a safe you can check d-scan for probes while waiting for the threat to move on. It's a free, easy early warning system. Too easy. People who get ganked during hulkageddon, in 0-sec or lowsec were just being lazy.

You will remember that the purpose of hulkageddon is purely economic in nature - it's to drive up mineral prices to the benefit of those alliances who have been *stockpiling* excess resources. i.e. they have planned ahead. You as a privateer can benefit too. Simply stockpile your minerals until the next hulkageddon. Then release them onto the market. I fail to see the problem here, other than an inability to act in ones own long term interests.

All in all, with respect, you see problems because that seems to be your nature. This kind of thinking leads to a life of poverty and misery, both in eve and real life.



Couldn't agree more. In my view the incoming ships should not land on the cyno, but some random (possibly large) distance from it.

Gate spawns:
Unless you drop people 100km+ from a gate (and thereby eliminate the chance to get back to it) increasing the distance won't help because of the presence of arazus. What you need is a scout with a cloak. Nothing more, nothing less.

Scanning:
30 seconds is more than enough to see the probes on d-scan and move somewhere else. Scanning is fine.

PVE/PVP Disparity:
You can do this yourself by doing pve in a pvp squad. Take some logistics along (2 exequerors or ospreys would be fine).
The problem is actually that the mission rewards in low sec are not very much higher than hi sec so it does not feel cost-effective to do this. The other problem is that a hi-sec mentality stifles creativity in gameplay. Lowsec/w-space dwellers think up ways around the challenges. Since running w-space (cat 3) sites in a pvp squad for 2 years I have *never* lost a ship doing this, and have *often* been able to engage and kill trespassers. The most recent being a 2Bn isk tengu that was in a gang of 3 100mn tengus and a falcon operated by experienced pilots.

In general though, I agree that fewer NPC ships with better fittings and AI would be preferable, and less boring.

I personally think that missions could be improved in a number of ways:

1. Server spawns each mission at a given interval with a base reward. Available to everyone on a "mission market".
2. every hour, the reward is increased to reflect the NPC corp's growing concern over the threat.
3. first capsuleer to claim the mission in given it, with the reward set to the current price. At this point the mission is removed from the mission market. It can be returned to the mission market if the capsuleer fails it.
4. some missions could be "track down this guy and blow up his ship/get some stuff" where "this guy" can be anything from an autonomous NPC frigate to an NPC fleet - able to jump and warp at will to evade/attack you.

Upshot of this?
1. easy hi sec missions will attract low bids because there are many takers.
2. same missions in low sec will have fewer takers, so pay more rewards as the timers tick up.
3. better hunter-killer missions offer more rewarding play for experienced players who like a challenge
4. capsuleers can always choose their favourite mission, leaving the less desirable ones until they pay enough to make it worthwhile.

They used to be, but then people started complaining that they couldn't gate camp in low sec anymore.

AGAIN and AGAIN, nobody is being forced through low sec. Why should everyone be given free passage between each empire? What do you possibly need in each empire that you can get from one empire alone? Shouldn't going between each empire be a reward for traveling through low sec? What other MMORPG has all it's cities in safe walking distance between each other? The idea is really rediculous.

The worst thing that can happen to EVE Online is to "leave the game as is."


We're not getting rid of high sec, High sec will still exist. Nobody is being forced into low sec, it's still a choice you make to go into low or not to go. The carrot is visiting each empire, and the differences in markets at each place.

The only people this might significantly affect are high sec incursion runners. And seriously, high sec incursions just need to die anyways.

I find it hilarious that some people are against this idea for the perceptions that "only jump freighters will be able to do hauling safely" and someone else is against this idea for the perception that "Jump freighters are going to be blown away constantly and null sec players will move back."

It's amazing, and shows you how bad the points are that you're trying to make.

I think the OP and I would argue that by creating a disparity of supply, this creates market pressures which bring about opportunities for those who wish to take them.

Re cloaky haulers - my corp often takes fuel through lowsec and w-space in nothing more than a T1 industrial.

There are no barriers to human endeavour other than fear.

You are not going to convince these lazy ambush predators that what they want will not have the results they wish for. All they want is more meat delivered effortlessly to their own table, and it tastes better if it comes from someone else's plate.

They are fully aware they are talking out both sides of thier mouth. On one hand nobody will be adversely affected, on the other hand profits go up because risk (and obviously adverse occurances to prove that risk) goes up. Except profits dont come from empty space, but rather from the pockets of everyone now purchasing goods at a premium. Even locally produced goods will see a rise in pricing, despit no logical reason, because of general inflation.

Nevermind that in doing this they will hand the game entirely to the large alliances who will now cheaply and easily control all enter empire trade by closing off the pipes whenever they feel like it. They have the manpower and coordination to do it, and only a fool would think they wont when it serves their purpose.

Why should anyone be given free passage between empires? Because Sandbox? Thats the way it is now. By what reasoning should freedom be removed from those who wish to travel beween empires for whatever reason? Thats what this thread is about, removing freedom and options from the sandbox to suit a few lazy people who cant be bothered to create thier own opportunities despite all the tools to do so. You want to hunt juicy freighters you can... But there is a price of admission, you dont get to destroy the livelyhood of others for free.

At every turn, any objection is simply met with the attitude that other playstyles simply do not matter, and only being prey for pirates is sandbox. Haulers? Screw haulers, their money comes to easy and their time is worth less than ours. High sec incursions? Screw those guys, they make too much and high sec incursions should just die. Tourists? Screw those guys, they arent doing anything important anyway. Missioners? They dont need to travel who cares if they want to. Again and again... Anyone who disagrees is marginalized and discarded.

This thread has been functionally dead for ages. Its a poorly thought out, self serving and greedy idea that gets necro posted from the bottom of the heap where it belongs every so often, and hopefully will never get implemented without serious and sober thought put into how things will actually work out for the vast bulk of players

Ceptors? You are dead in an insta lock camp that flourish lately.

Except for they don't; they get carrier or JF jumped out of 00 to the closest low sec to Jita ... and die there.

Except for they don't; they just wait for or find a suitable WH connection to high sec and move it out savely ... and die there to gankers in their Herons.

It might not be interesting to you, but there are numerous people out there who don't do anything else ... for various reasons.

They are in more danger because of certain camps. In high sec you only have to worry about gank squads, in low sec systems you have a plethora of other things to worry about.