These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Separate the four empires with low security space.

First post
Author
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1481 - 2014-05-19 08:48:32 UTC
King Fu Hostile wrote:
Game design doesn't revolve around your imaginary hisec folk
If highsec folk were imaginary, so would be the affects of this change.
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1482 - 2014-05-19 08:54:18 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
All of this is academic if people don't actually want to fly through losec which is pretty muchthe case for most in hisec. If you don't break hisec apart completely then they won't care, just work around it. If you put losec between the hubs they simply won't fly across it. It simply wouldn't increase the number if hisec pilots choosing to fly into losec. Those already willing to do so already will be flying losec, and if it becomes mopre dangerous they will simply switch to using BR's more often.

I really don't see that any effort expended on such an idea would benefit any area. There need to be reasons to enter losec above and beyond those that exist now. Breaking hisec apart wouldn't introduce those reasons, just put losec averse pilots off even more. I would much prefer to see the effort expended on giving more and better incentives to enter losec.

All of my eve career low sec has been nothing more than just a middle ground between high sec and null sec. The only time i fly through low sec is when i'm traveling between the two. Which doesn't really happen that often.

What does happen often is people flying from high sec to high sec. And if there was opportunity to be gained then i too would fly from high sec through low sec to high sec. Because why not just let Low sec continue to be a transitional area only with greater utilization. In this way that is stated in the original post it would create a very dynamic and diverse atmosphere in low sec and in high sec. Two of the very most stagnant areas in eve.

People don't fly to low sec now because there's no reason to. Give them reason to and they will.
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1483 - 2014-05-19 08:56:41 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
King Fu Hostile wrote:
Game design doesn't revolve around your imaginary hisec folk
If highsec folk were imaginary, so would be the affects of this change.

What he means is, the high sec folk he's referring to are imaginary. Not high sec folk in general.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1484 - 2014-05-19 08:59:03 UTC
Erutpar Ambient wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
King Fu Hostile wrote:
Game design doesn't revolve around your imaginary hisec folk
If highsec folk were imaginary, so would be the affects of this change.

What he means is, the high sec folk he's referring to are imaginary. Not high sec folk in general.

His imaginary highsec folk are the ones not wanting to go through lowsec, or to put it differently, the ones who your ideal trade profits would come from. If no one has lowsec aversion, the idea becomes meaningless as it would have minimal affect on travel.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1485 - 2014-05-19 09:02:20 UTC
Erutpar Ambient wrote:


People don't fly to low sec now because there's no reason to. Give them reason to and they will.


My point though is that those who won't fly losec now wouldn't do in future either, they would simply resent the change and work around it or quit if that didn't suit them. I agree entirely that losec feels transitional but it isn't. I operate their mostly for my profits and many others do too for FW, PI etc. The reason why hisec folks don't use losec is because it is more time intensive to do so. If a player has the time required for losec then why bother? Just go straight to null for better profits.

There needs to be some better reason to live and play in losec. For this end I love the idea of CONCORD as a career option in losec as defined in another thread. If players begin to prvide greater security inlosec through PvP then more players will move there to live which then requires more capsuleer police etc but also increases higher value targets for pirates with consequently greater risk to those pirates. This is the kind of change that losec needs, not more space but more reason to be in the existing space.
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1486 - 2014-05-19 09:03:11 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Erutpar Ambient wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
King Fu Hostile wrote:
Game design doesn't revolve around your imaginary hisec folk
If highsec folk were imaginary, so would be the affects of this change.

What he means is, the high sec folk he's referring to are imaginary. Not high sec folk in general.

His imaginary highsec folk are the ones not wanting to go through lowsec, or to put it differently, the ones who your ideal trade profits would come from. If no one has lowsec aversion, the idea becomes meaningless as it would have minimal affect on travel.

High sec folk are not all lowsec adverse. Many of them just lack reason to go to low sec. As do most people in eve most of the time.
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1487 - 2014-05-19 09:08:12 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Erutpar Ambient wrote:


People don't fly to low sec now because there's no reason to. Give them reason to and they will.


My point though is that those who won't fly losec now wouldn't do in future either, they would simply resent the change and work around it or quit if that didn't suit them. I agree entirely that losec feels transitional but it isn't. I operate their mostly for my profits and many others do too for FW, PI etc. The reason why hisec folks don't use losec is because it is more time intensive to do so. If a player has the time required for losec then why bother? Just go straight to null for better profits.

There needs to be some better reason to live and play in losec. For this end I love the idea of CONCORD as a career option in losec as defined in another thread. If players begin to prvide greater security inlosec through PvP then more players will move there to live which then requires more capsuleer police etc but also increases higher value targets for pirates with consequently greater risk to those pirates. This is the kind of change that losec needs, not more space but more reason to be in the existing space.

I don't believe it will ever work out with lowsec continuing to be just an aside place. It really needs to be at the center of the game to exist. Seriously what is the point of low sec (excluding the recent revamp of FW).

And the people that quit because of this kind of change. They were going to eventually anyways, either from getting bored of leveling their raven or getting suicide ganked and loosing all of their officer modules they worked their whole career to save up for. For the new people that join the game, this will be in their face, and they can't avoid it. It will be a much better representation of what EVE is really about. Risk and Rewards.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1488 - 2014-05-19 09:16:28 UTC
Erutpar Ambient wrote:

I don't believe it will ever work out with lowsec continuing to be just an aside place. It really needs to be at the center of the game to exist. Seriously what is the point of low sec (excluding the recent revamp of FW).

And the people that quit because of this kind of change. They were going to eventually anyways, either from getting bored of leveling their raven or getting suicide ganked and loosing all of their officer modules they worked their whole career to save up for. For the new people that join the game, this will be in their face, and they can't avoid it. It will be a much better representation of what EVE is really about. Risk and Rewards.


I agree entirely about losec being the centre, the fulcrum between hisec and null with WH sitting as a 4th dimension outside the other areas. For it to be more populated it needs to be policed but I wouldn't want hisec style CONCORD there, leave that for hisec. Players policing the area would make a real difference *if* they can be enticed into doing so as a viable alternative career to piracy. Make them empire privateers much like Britain did with Francis Drake and such. CONCORD agree to let them loot any ship destroyed alongside paying out bounties etc on pirates.

I really hope that Eve isn't just about PvP combat and the twisted representation that ganking and the like present of this. My first view of Eve was of the rich and diverse number of playstyles, curtailing these by nerfing any region, or even constructive coercion of players diminishes the game that is Eve and that would be ultimately bad for the game.
King Fu Hostile
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#1489 - 2014-05-19 09:23:19 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Erutpar Ambient wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
King Fu Hostile wrote:
Game design doesn't revolve around your imaginary hisec folk
If highsec folk were imaginary, so would be the affects of this change.

What he means is, the high sec folk he's referring to are imaginary. Not high sec folk in general.

His imaginary highsec folk are the ones not wanting to go through lowsec, or to put it differently, the ones who your ideal trade profits would come from. If no one has lowsec aversion, the idea becomes meaningless as it would have minimal affect on travel.


Some people obviously have all sorts of aversions, but in reality these people are minority and most people would just adapt. New kind of culture would develop, bears would learn to traverse lowsec and in the end everyone's gameplay simply got more dimensions.

Well, the ones who'd gain most would be the hiseccers who'd open their minds tbh.

Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1490 - 2014-05-19 09:25:07 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

I agree entirely about losec being the centre, the fulcrum between hisec and null with WH sitting as a 4th dimension outside the other areas. For it to be more populated it needs to be policed but I wouldn't want hisec style CONCORD there, leave that for hisec. Players policing the area would make a real difference *if* they can be enticed into doing so as a viable alternative career to piracy. Make them empire privateers much like Britain did with Francis Drake and such. CONCORD agree to let them loot any ship destroyed alongside paying out bounties etc on pirates.

I really hope that Eve isn't just about PvP combat and the twisted representation that ganking and the like present of this. My first view of Eve was of the rich and diverse number of playstyles, curtailing these by nerfing any region, or even constructive coercion of players diminishes the game that is Eve and that would be ultimately bad for the game.

With this kind of a change, there's bound to be an increase in pirate activity. Because there's going to be places where people will most likely be wanting to cross (the shortest routs). And at the same time other players will know that pirates will probably be camping these places so there would be a sort of back and forth of pirates and anti-pirates. Gankings and counter-gankings. It would be great. And it would definitely go along great with another change i have proposed https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=345662&find=unread

As for the PvP stuff, eve is first and foremost a PvP game. The only time you're safe from any pvp activity is when you're docked up. Unless you're playing the .01 isk game, then even when you're docked up you're playing against other players. This is what eve is. It should be embraced.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1491 - 2014-05-19 09:26:11 UTC
Erutpar Ambient wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Sorry to disappoint you (Nah, not really sorry), but Jita IS the only source for a lot of stuff, beginning with moon goo to T2 components, booster gas, T3 production materials, faction and deadspace items over to certain ships and rare minerals. Good luck trying to get that sort of stuff in Amarr or Dodi or Rens for an affordable price, if you can find it at all there. And this is not going to change with this change, quite in contrast, it's only bound to get worse.

What about racial faction modules? What will happen to those from Amarr, Gallente and Minmatar? Will people stop using them because everyone is going to live in Caldari space?

What these items will really do is create the climate for consistently profitable cross-empire hauling. (assuming what you're saying is true about moon goo, gas and T3 mats. I know the rest not to be true already.)


The racial faction modules will be traded where it the most revenue comes from, not where the most profits are.

And if you really think that this would incite cross-empire hauling, where your profits are consumed by hauling costs or die on the way, you sure have nice lucid dreams.

Erutpar Ambient wrote:

High sec folk are not all lowsec adverse. Many of them just lack reason to go to low sec. As do most people in eve most of the time.


And this reason is certainly not going to appear with this kind of change.

However, I have to admit that, if this Low sec came to be, other Low sec areas would lose a lot of appeal and would empty out again, making it easier for me to go there and have my kind of fun in the game, without having to worry too much about PVP and other irritating stuff. So, in a way I am indifferent towards this change.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1492 - 2014-05-19 09:37:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Corraidhin Farsaidh
Erutpar Ambient wrote:

With this kind of a change, there's bound to be an increase in pirate activity. Because there's going to be places where people will most likely be wanting to cross (the shortest routs). And at the same time other players will know that pirates will probably be camping these places so there would be a sort of back and forth of pirates and anti-pirates. Gankings and counter-gankings. It would be great. And it would definitely go along great with another change i have proposed https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=345662&find=unread


Here I would point out that people can already make more profit from their time by running through losec from hub to hub now. They don't because they either don't have the time or inclination to do so and nothing would change this for those players. Those players have absolutely no interest in ganking and counter ganking or indeed any form of ship combat PvP. They are in it for the trading PvP, the outmaneuvring an opponent in the market, outproducing the opposition, undercutting and other such isk based skullduggery. Others simply actually like to build and sell things, they enjoy the process of gathering goods, making something else from them and then selling the finished product. Those players know full well they could make more isk from other playstyles and don't care as the other styles don't interest them. This change would simply make those players less likely to bother which can only be a bad thing.

Erutpar Ambient wrote:

As for the PvP stuff, eve is first and foremost a PvP game. The only time you're safe from any pvp activity is when you're docked up. Unless you're playing the .01 isk game, then even when you're docked up you're playing against other players. This is what eve is. It should be embraced.


Every action in Eve is pretty much PvP. Grabbing the best rocks before others or simply ignoring them to gather up resources you need from lower end rocks in greater safety are PvP actions. The player using hisec is defeating the objective of the losec player by simply not going there. The losec player can go and defeat the hisec miner objective by ganking him. I regularly sell large investment items above other players in the same region which is again another PvP action as I get the sale I want before they do. I gather PI goods without being shot to bits this defeating the gankers by evading them.

Everything comes down to these small personal victories in Eve and that's what makes it fun. Sometimes I have much more fun breaking through a 10 ship gatecamp in an unarmed ship than if I were to jump in and attack them with a bigger fleet. Othert times if the mood took me I'm sure I could have an equal kick from dropping a fleet on top of the same gatecamp but mostly that isn't my thing. Currently there are a multitude of options for PvP actions, trying to turn everyone towards ship to ship combat is counter-productive. Giving people more reasons to enter combat (which most likely would still be avoided by the combat averse one way or another) is far better than making it the only option to maintain a viable profit.
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1493 - 2014-05-19 10:04:08 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

Here I would point out that people can already make more profit from their time by running through losec from hub to hub now. They don't because they either don't have the time or inclination to do so and nothing would change this for those players. Those players have absolutely no interest in ganking and counter ganking or indeed any form of ship combat PvP. They are in it for the trading PvP, the outmaneuvring an opponent in the market, outproducing the opposition, undercutting and other such isk based skullduggery. Others simply actually like to build and sell things, they enjoy the process of gathering goods, making something else from them and then selling the finished product. Those players know full well they could make more isk from other playstyles and don't care as the other styles don't interest them. This change would simply make those players less likely to bother which can only be a bad thing.

No amount of time will make up for the risk of going through low sec instead of high sec. That's why that doesn't happen now. Like i said before, Low sec will never be anything as long as it's off to the side. Once it's in the center things will be different. The choice won't be safe or fast, it will be safer or faster (longer route less traveled or shorter route more likely to encounter pirates). Now that is a decision worthy of being made. Safe or fast is not a decision.
Goatman NotMyFault
Lubrication Industries
#1494 - 2014-05-19 19:05:15 UTC
to devide all empires by lowsec, would create a more healty and luctrative trade and remove Jita as a main trading hub for all empires.

As ive mention before, a war betwene the empires that results in closed borders, gates that og offline, will force the usuall traders to think New ways to bring in og aquire goods. And as a bonus to trade, if a big war errupts, the different empires will have an direct impact on the marked, demanding high amounts of ships and equipment.... and the war will be vsible at borderlines, where u see empirefleets clash... even see systems fall and become owned by the victorious empire.

(Even the oh so borring incursions could get a boost, when Sansha makes their move, their effect would be reduces or strangled gate activations, even closed gates.... and reduces sec status for the effected systems.)
XMaxan
The Legion of X
#1495 - 2014-05-19 19:14:32 UTC
I can see the reason why this idea would be nice, but I would rather see one or two safe routes left through high sec that take significantly more jumps than a dozen low sec routes.

This prevents the empires from becoming completely isolated while still allowing more pirating options. If you do not want to risk anything take the twenty-five jump route all in high sec, or if you need to get there this week go through the five jump low sec route and have some risk.

Perhaps have a few null sec systems that have even less jumps between empires.


I would not like to see the empires cut off from each other entirely or at least without significant gate support from local armies (not CONCORD).
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1496 - 2014-05-20 04:20:50 UTC
XMaxan wrote:
I can see the reason why this idea would be nice, but I would rather see one or two safe routes left through high sec that take significantly more jumps than a dozen low sec routes.

This prevents the empires from becoming completely isolated while still allowing more pirating options. If you do not want to risk anything take the twenty-five jump route all in high sec, or if you need to get there this week go through the five jump low sec route and have some risk.

Perhaps have a few null sec systems that have even less jumps between empires.


I would not like to see the empires cut off from each other entirely or at least without significant gate support from local armies (not CONCORD).

This is basically what we have now. And guess what, everyone chooses to go the 25 jump high sec route.

The choice between safe or fast is really not a choice. The choice needs to be between safer or faster meaning there is no perfectly safe route.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1497 - 2014-05-20 07:09:41 UTC
Erutpar Ambient wrote:
XMaxan wrote:
I can see the reason why this idea would be nice, but I would rather see one or two safe routes left through high sec that take significantly more jumps than a dozen low sec routes.

This prevents the empires from becoming completely isolated while still allowing more pirating options. If you do not want to risk anything take the twenty-five jump route all in high sec, or if you need to get there this week go through the five jump low sec route and have some risk.

Perhaps have a few null sec systems that have even less jumps between empires.


I would not like to see the empires cut off from each other entirely or at least without significant gate support from local armies (not CONCORD).

This is basically what we have now. And guess what, everyone chooses to go the 25 jump high sec route.

The choice between safe or fast is really not a choice. The choice needs to be between safer or faster meaning there is no perfectly safe route.


And how is this (the last paragraph) different from now?

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1498 - 2014-05-20 09:00:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Corraidhin Farsaidh
Erutpar Ambient wrote:
XMaxan wrote:
I can see the reason why this idea would be nice, but I would rather see one or two safe routes left through high sec that take significantly more jumps than a dozen low sec routes.

This prevents the empires from becoming completely isolated while still allowing more pirating options. If you do not want to risk anything take the twenty-five jump route all in high sec, or if you need to get there this week go through the five jump low sec route and have some risk.

Perhaps have a few null sec systems that have even less jumps between empires.


I would not like to see the empires cut off from each other entirely or at least without significant gate support from local armies (not CONCORD).

This is basically what we have now. And guess what, everyone chooses to go the 25 jump high sec route.

The choice between safe or fast is really not a choice. The choice needs to be between safer or faster meaning there is no perfectly safe route.


There is no perfectly safe route through hisec. If you believe this then maybe you could prove it by putting 10 PLEX in a t1 hauler and autopiloting it through the trade hub routes. It would be interesting to see how it fared.

For this idea to work (in the sense of force people into losec) would require hisec to be broken apart entirely. That would utterly destroy a large chunk of the player bases chosen style of play. There must be a good reason why CCP hasn't implemented this change (it is after all a simple database change to amend system security levels).

Lets also consider what happens to empires when they are cut off from one another by hostile forces. Consider WWII with the great european empires at each others throats. Once the sealanes were a submarine free for all what happened to trade in those empires? Did it suddenly flourish as a few enterprising merchants risked all to get across through those channels? Or did it take a huge investment in naval power to even get a small percentage of those goods safely through? Guess what happened to those old empires as trade got ground into the dust...
Gejja Tokan
Lighting the blight
#1499 - 2014-05-20 13:09:06 UTC
Easily the best idea since sliced bread and my thanks to all the people who take time to argue this out: keep fighting the good fight explanation squad.
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1500 - 2014-05-21 05:18:03 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:

And how is this (the last paragraph) different from now?


Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

There is no perfectly safe route through hisec. If you believe this then maybe you could prove it by putting 10 PLEX in a t1 hauler and autopiloting it through the trade hub routes. It would be interesting to see how it fared.

Ok, i'll concede these points, there is no perfectly safe place. However High sec does have a major deterrent to hostility where as low sec has basically none. In high sec you can fly a ship around of sufficiently low cargo value and not get ganked. However in low sec it doesn't matter if you have your cargo over loaded or completely empty, you will still be ganked.

So what i said is still mostly true, if you're hauling within reason of course. The fact is that you have a choice between very very safe and slow, or very very unsafe and fast. It's like the choice is jump off a waterfall to get down quick or walk around the safe way. That's about how much difference there is in the choice viability as of right now.


Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

For this idea to work (in the sense of force people into losec) would require hisec to be broken apart entirely. That would utterly destroy a large chunk of the player bases chosen style of play. There must be a good reason why CCP hasn't implemented this change (it is after all a simple database change to amend system security levels).

Lets also consider what happens to empires when they are cut off from one another by hostile forces. Consider WWII with the great european empires at each others throats. Once the sealanes were a submarine free for all what happened to trade in those empires? Did it suddenly flourish as a few enterprising merchants risked all to get across through those channels? Or did it take a huge investment in naval power to even get a small percentage of those goods safely through? Guess what happened to those old empires as trade got ground into the dust...

What play style is this that contains a "large chunk" of the player base that lives solely in high sec space that requires constant travel between all the empires? Who are these people???

Well, unlike WWII, the Empires in eve are just a fantasy place that actually do not consume any goods. The Empires are not impacted at all by player trade. If they were then the Caldari would have taken over most of the game.