Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Burn Jita, anyone? PL gate camps in Amamake? The former glory of Rancer? Tama? Oulley? Hier in Aridia when TEST was in Fountain? PF-? Torrinos? Even Niarja and Uedama... There are countless examples of what is already happening and what would see a massive increase with this change - for the worse of the game.

Plus, there ARE NO hundreds of systems to camp, that is a lie to make your dream seem more feasible. There are and would not be hundreds of ways to traverse Low sec to get from one hub to another. Because if that was the case, it would to a large extent defeat the purpose of the Low sec as a border between warring nations; and for the players it would not provide sufficiently easily accessible PVP choke points.

Apparently you missed the part where new systems and regions should be added to minimize the amount of choke points. Esay to miss when you only want to look at one aspect of this.


Again most all of your examples are camping one system, not systems all over the universe at the same time.

Hundreds of systems would not defeate the purpose, there would allways be a shorter way through; which would cause some to take the extra risk for a shorter trip.

CCP please note that this is the #1 most wanted feature in EVE and would improve the game immensely.

First, you will always have the choice to live in high-sec. What in the world makes you believe that this choice is being taken away?

Second, does it really give a disadvantage to players in Caldari space to do this? Wouldn't they initially have an advantage that would slowly fade and normalize throughout new eden as the markets spread out?

Then please train your reading comprehension to IV, at least. For the time being, I highlighted the part where I not missed that point.

--



The Empress is silent on a lot of matters, also due to her particular nature. It may be a sign of less support for Caldari politics, but economically both empires are more entrenched and active than any other. The strain that you describe - compared to the hostile relationships between Gallente-Caldari and Amarr-Minmatar - is not yet nearly enough for destabilizing and removing security from the borders between the historical allies.

But as I know CCP and as it is just fiction anyways, they can easily spin something into your favor's direction anyways.

Interesting read in any case.

no, it wouldn't.

This change would deny players current playstyle to them and would require them to either invest much more time in traversing space (which many don't have) or they would have (yes that is have as in 'be forced to') to travel losec. Those players averse to doing so simply never would. Such a change would be a nerf to hisec profits for no good reason. All this change would do is ';incentivize' those players who have no wish to use losec into losing more ships (i.e. losing profit which they simply won't choose to do) or the lesser evil of greater travel time.

Those who do travel losec (which I do often) will simply switch to BR's (and that isn't BS which I don't deal in) and you would simply never even see them in losec barring any mistakes.

I know exactly where my profits come from thanks, they pay for 3 alts already so I'm doing well enough I think. This change would simply be to present more targets for losec gatecampers since trade ships are unarmed. Maybe the change should be to add more incentive for *combat* ships to go to losec. Or does that not fit with the easy trader target model people seem to want? It wouldn't work anyway as those who send afk haulers would just send more to deal with the extra journey time, those who are active pilots will just use BR's instead to hop across the losec divide. Pointless waste of devs time, they should work on more pressing things instead.

Edit: Even if this change improved the market (which I doubt) I would actually benefit from it. I am not arguing this point to protect my interests as it has no impact on them at worst, I am fighting for the playstyle of many others who do not pay attention to the forums because of the attitudes and behaviours of many here or simply because they have no interest in them. I do as I choose to interact and make suggestions in an attempt to improve gameplay as a whole rather than for single regions and styles of play.

I have argued previously that hisec should be the home of trade and science, losec should be the home of moongoo and T2 production and such, null for raw material production and WH's for T3/gas. This would really make people be more mobile and increase trade in all areas for different reasons. I have also argued that missions and PvE should be used to 'incentivize' players to move into other regions. This would have a far greater effect at enticing those on the brink of the jump to other sec regions to do so whilst leaving those with absolutely no wish to do so with a valid and valuable role in the game. The attraction of Eve to me was the multitude of paths and roles available. Pushing all real isk generating activities into one region because of risk/reward is counter-productive in this sense.

And what about financial risk? Those trading in hisec have to risk larger sums comparatively to make the same profits as the amounts risked by those in losec or null. Is that not risk too? PvP trading is just as brutal as firing anti-matter, just there's no graphics for it. Risk/Reward is always referred to in terms of shooting each other, but that is far from the only risk in Eve. All should be catered for and rewarded.

I like the idea for being free to shoot those with -ve sec rating. Thinking more into this I simply don't think that this would increase losec traffic as people believe. If there is a hisec route open between hubs the people who already afk freight stuff will simply accept the longer flight as they don't care, those who fly manually would probably switch to red frog instead aas that is a more profitable use of their time since they don't want to fly losec. That's the key point I think, those who do not wish to fly losec absolutely will not do it and if you completely split the hisec areas with losec then those players would resent it and rightly so as it is an arbitrary destruction of their playstyle for no reason.

Those who do venture into losec would be manual pilots, and they would now fly BR's as standard so you would never even see them and so still no more targets in losec. Pilots need incentives to enter losec, I really like the CONCORD capsuleer proposal in another thread. Give capsuleers the option to provide 'private security' ops for concord in losec and I think you'll find many hunters giving it a go. Ideas like thia and improved PvE aspects would much better serve losec in my opinion.

This is a really very narrow slice of the population. This idea is not good because it narrows things down even further. What do you even mean by "raw material production" for null sec?

The real difference between High sec and Null currently is required activity. If you're in High Sec, you don't have to do anything if you don't want to, you can be lazy as much as you want. You have no obligations. Null sec on the other hand, either you have rent to pay so you have to spend a minimum amount of time doing stuff, or you have to protect your sov by participating in pvp activites which are generally mandatory. With high sec incursion income, that's really the only disparity between the 2 places. Low sec is either FW or effectively empty. And WH space is still T3 heaven.

The big question really is, what is low sec? Is it really just a buffer between high sec and null sec?[/quote]

By raw materials I mean that null has the best ore resources, the best PI output, and moongoo in the greatest quantities (not even available in hisec/WH's). I would model things along the lines of RL, Hisec being the stable industrial countries producing goods, losec being areas under contention and dangerous to enter. Good resources can be gained due to the breakdown in law and order, but the risk is there if you choose to go for those resources. Null would be the wild areas full of goodies to gather for those brave enough to do so. These areas would be anathema to stable industry though as nobody would place multi-billion research centres etc there as a business decision. Those who do would need a private army to defend the area and even then the instability would be a huge handicap. Wh's are just crazy places, navigable Bermuda triangles of space with valuable stuff to find if you know how.

The problem I see is the fact you point out, hisec is used by those with little available playtime (not necessarily lazy, just time constrained). Those players deserve a playstyle choice that can provide them a valuable income just as much as those with more spare time. As for risk/reward those players who choose AFK options *are*taking risk that their ships will go pop. The CODE monkeys pop miners all the time. The rewards are income for little effort, though low rewards at the best of times compared to that which an active player can earn. Is this somehow invalid risk? Not in my mind.

I agree completely that losec needs some incentives adding to draw players in, I just don't see that this idea would do that in any significant way. losec would be the perfect place to work as a staging and proving ground for players before they move to null, currently it seems to b skip

Like most of the people, still CCP will not do it.

lol hardly