These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Vincintius Agrippa
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
#1581 - 2014-09-12 15:25:59 UTC
No.
Only YOU can prevent internet bullying!
Haakaa PaaIIe
Holey Rolling Empire
#1582 - 2014-09-12 16:45:51 UTC
Vincintius Agrippa wrote:
No.

yes.
Inevitability
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1583 - 2014-09-12 17:33:29 UTC
Yes.
Maenth
The Thirteen Provinces
#1584 - 2014-09-12 18:27:03 UTC
I like the idea! While I believe the empires would have protected borders (for continuous hisec) I do like the idea of borders changing and becoming dangerous to cross ... the lore angle I'd like is if - seeing the rise of power of capsuleers and pirates - the empires would make a move to increase their power likewise, exploiting new technologies to secure their place ... they certainly have funding with populations and taxation, and they develop advanced technologies also (what and where exactly is that gate in "The Prophecy"?)

Drones. Drones are a means to an end. An end to the ruthless Caldari 'progress' machines. An end to the barbaric 'redemption' proposed by the Amarr. What they see as chaos shall be my perfect order, merely beyond their comprehension.
Kalicondoin
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1585 - 2014-09-12 19:54:36 UTC
I LOVE this Idea... IMO High Sec is as big a problem to this game as the **** that is Null Sec SOV.

This can cause a massive mix up for the current "meta" and stagnation!
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#1586 - 2014-09-12 20:19:01 UTC
You are looking at a surface issue and not the core problem. The big problem facing EVE isn't "can we get served more freighters to gank each day", it is:

The bone-deep cowardice we find in nullbabies with respect to fighting against ships that can actually fire back.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
Oxford Blue
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1587 - 2014-09-12 21:22:47 UTC
Do it Do it now!

I want this!
Vincintius Agrippa
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
#1588 - 2014-09-13 00:29:55 UTC
No. They aren't at war technically. Its a proxy war fought by militia, only occasionally breaking out into conflict. Its more like a cold war. (Also, didnt all empires donate tech to create concord, cross faction police?) Also, why separate all four from each other? If its a war as you say it is, then gallente are allied with minmatar and caldari with amarr. Also, technically speaking its amarr vs minmatar and caldari vs gallente. Citizens from each faction can freely travel between the four major empires.

Worth noting:
eve populace: Caldari>Gallente>Amarr>Minmatar space. Separating the empires would mean most people would be in caldari space because well that's were the most people are. Whether or not they are caldari.

Quadrupling the alpha gank fleet systems will just force people to just settle in certain regions more than others.
This does one thing and one thing only: increase cash flow to pirates. For a little while at least. People would eventually get tire and the majority will just stay in the forge or essence.
Only YOU can prevent internet bullying!
Liam Inkuras
Furnace
Thermodynamics
#1589 - 2014-09-13 00:37:08 UTC
Vincintius Agrippa wrote:
This does one thing and one thing only: increase cash flow to pirates.


I see nothing wrong with this conclusion Pirate

I wear my goggles at night.

Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone
The Ironfist
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1590 - 2014-09-13 08:25:12 UTC
Rather dumb idea because its not going to chance anything at all. Jumpfreigthers will bridge the gap. Only thing it will do is feed dumb pubbies to lowsec scrubs.
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Red Sky Morning
The Amarr Militia.
#1591 - 2014-09-13 08:57:07 UTC
Rather than separate the empires I think it would be more suitable to do the following:

1. Link Jita to Amarr with three stationless low sec superhighway systems
2. Link Dodixie to Hek with three stationless low sec superhighway systems
3. Link the two central super highway systems to eachother.
4. Link the Amarr side superhighway low sec system to an Amarr FW station system (Sahtogas perhaps?)
5. 6. & 7. Link likewise systems for Caldari, Gallente & Minmatar
8. All of the superhighway systems have zero moons.

The old superhighways through Yulai caused problems because the server could not cope. However Jita proved that CCP had to find a way to cope with the numbers. There is, however, one difference here. This would be low sec superhighway. There is likely to be a lower population and thus lower server load.

This would create an excellent choice for those wanting to trade quickly between the hubs but would not force the hand of industrialists who want to stay HiSec safe.
Jump Freighters would be usable for quick transit but at a risk. There would be no POS and no stations to cyno in to. Cynos would have to be raised at gates that would be likely camped by Pirates.

There would be no easy option for Pirate camps a this would be (hopefully) be a hot-bed of conflict between FW militias and those capable of hot drop of multiple caps. No easy life for Pirates.

FW capture sits and ihubs could e placed in these systems. Asteroid belts of various richness could be spawned in these systems.

I would make them 0.3 systems and the central 0.1 sec status.

Only downside I can initially see is that it might draw an already shrinking population all to one small area of New Eden. Well, all of those that like to interact.

"Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1592 - 2014-09-13 09:12:50 UTC
A High way through low sec. Fun joke. Systems linked to remote areas, labeled as High ways. Funnier joke. Limited camping potential (and he even adds "hopefully"). Funny joke. Make it hard to avoid camps on gates without ping spots. Good one.

I get myself another JF and don't care anymore. Roll But all in all I had a good laugh with the last post. Lol

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.
Wolf Incaelum
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1593 - 2014-09-13 16:59:47 UTC
Daak Elibrium wrote:
I like this idéa a lot.
I feel that Highsec is to secrure as it is. I think people that start playing the game don't really need so much space to learn the ropes of EvE. And those that only likes PvE, could just stay in one section of Highsec and have enough to do. Even if they have to travel to other HighSec-regions there would only be a couple of jumps. Its not THAT hard to survive jumping through LowSec.

I think the Factions will feel more like "real" Factions, with some separation between them. More like "countries" and between them "no mans land."

The possibilites that some corporations will become full-time pirate and that some will be full-time "protectors/merc" etc. sounds exciting, and it would bring some more reason to PvP.
The regions between the HighSec regions will probobly fill up with people wanting to PvP, Pirate or defend. Sounds great.
It even brings people to communicate more with other players, if you need to haul something you probobly want to hire some protection etc.

Maybe a total of 3-4 jumps tops to get through to another HighSec would be enough, longer than that people might not even want to try.

The idéa is great I believe. Just some details to sort out first.

ANARCHYFOREVAAARRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!
Wolf Incaelum
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1594 - 2014-09-13 17:02:58 UTC
Well that didn't work the way I wanted it to. Does anyone else have a problem where they type up a reply, then click post and the stupid thing doesn't post? I typed up an entire reply and the only thing that got posted was the quote. Evil Anyway, I'm not going to type up the whole thing again. Basically, I like the idea.

ANARCHYFOREVAAARRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!
Vesess Ond'as
Sinntha Family
Synnatha
#1595 - 2014-09-13 17:35:16 UTC
Love this idea; the notion that security status is set at a certain point forever is foolish.

Real life examples of security status changes: http://www.ijreview.com/2014/06/145906-watch-city-detroit-fall-apart-eyes/

In general, this change is no different from some past content creation. Long ago in eve the Elder fleet blapped a Concord Station, a Nyx crashed into a station, Kador attacked Gallente, sanshas attacked in live events in random high sec areas (not incursions; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vro8SepqkIo and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9fug9akMI0 ), and we see trailers with the Amarr Empire attacking some player alliance over some gate they made. I want to play that game.

Now Incursions are nothing more than an area some IS Boxers can make a few billions doing. Corcord cant control them yet these systems remain 'high sec'...if Concord is overwhelmed and cant stop Sanshas, then why do these areas not become 'temporary low sec' areas as well?

Overall, its about content creation and creating conditions that allow for fun stuff to happen. While the 'sandbox' is a great principle, having events in eve that create content (as propsed here in altering high sec connection systems) is a great way for eve to stay fresh and fun. Just as people debate the nul sec changes, the same notion applies: the promoting the conditions for content creation. Only then can players add their own contributions. If high sec is boring, nul sec is boring, and there is no reason to log on...its hard for eve to stay healthy and grow. The game has a great storyline...use it (just as this proposal hints).
Vincintius Agrippa
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
#1596 - 2014-09-13 19:07:38 UTC
Wolf Incaelum wrote:
Well that didn't work the way I wanted it to. Does anyone else have a problem where they type up a reply, then click post and the stupid thing doesn't post? I typed up an entire reply and the only thing that got posted was the quote. Evil Anyway, I'm not going to type up the whole thing again. Basically, I like the idea.


Yes, particularly with long replies. If your using google chrome just click back to last page before you hit post and repost. If using explorer just click on saved draft.
Only YOU can prevent internet bullying!
Vincintius Agrippa
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
#1597 - 2014-09-13 19:40:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Vincintius Agrippa
Vesess Ond'as wrote:
Love this idea; the notion that security status is set at a certain point forever is foolish.

Real life examples of security status changes: http://www.ijreview.com/2014/06/145906-watch-city-detroit-fall-apart-eyes/

In general, this change is no different from some past content creation. Long ago in eve the Elder fleet blapped a Concord Station, a Nyx crashed into a station, Kador attacked Gallente, sanshas attacked in live events in random high sec areas (not incursions; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vro8SepqkIo and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9fug9akMI0 ), and we see trailers with the Amarr Empire attacking some player alliance over some gate they made. I want to play that game.

Now Incursions are nothing more than an area some IS Boxers can make a few billions doing. Corcord cant control them yet these systems remain 'high sec'...if Concord is overwhelmed and cant stop Sanshas, then why do these areas not become 'temporary low sec' areas as well?

Overall, its about content creation and creating conditions that allow for fun stuff to happen. While the 'sandbox' is a great principle, having events in eve that create content (as propsed here in altering high sec connection systems) is a great way for eve to stay fresh and fun. Just as people debate the nul sec changes, the same notion applies: the promoting the conditions for content creation. Only then can players add their own contributions. If high sec is boring, nul sec is boring, and there is no reason to log on...its hard for eve to stay healthy and grow. The game has a great storyline...use it (just as this proposal hints).



Im all for highsec incursions and live (un tidi'd) events. They should add continuous content that is more in depth then 3000 people trying to get into one system to kill CCP "whatever" in his paper thin fit machariel. Of which 95% get smartbombed or alphad by pirates camping every gate en route. Seriously. Gosh, how about a jove incursion or invasion? Or maybe some of those wormhole drones coming through into highsec, something..... Forcing people into gatecamps is not content creation, its tipping the balance ever more to pirates and giving them a higher k/d profit ratio. They wont have to suicide gank in highsec anymore. Your not adding content. Your just serving people on a platter. Most will just say **** it and stay in or around jita or their respective highsec. Nullsec is more boring than highsec. You cant force everyone out of highsec.

The common argument is that highsec is unorganized and/or full of wardeccors. Add more content, customization options, and features that spur corp and alliance development and player interaction to encourage organization. Wheather new pve or pvp activities and/or revamped old ones. It wouldn't hurt to look to other games either...... What exactly these features are would be discussed in a separate thread.

EDIT: Please, Start from the top with High sec, > Low sec, > 0.0. Don't cherry pick.
Only YOU can prevent internet bullying!
Vincintius Agrippa
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
#1598 - 2014-09-13 20:07:55 UTC
Oh yeah, in case I didn't make the last edit clear,.... I was stating that highsec should be used as the building block or platform that would be the Launchpad for people to go venture into lowsec. And then low to null. A tiered system of profits that increases as one mores into lower security space with increased complexity for operations. Highsec should be quite profitable enough to support x number of people in a corp for x amount of income, lowsec 2-x profitable or some other multiplier, null is x times as profitable, meaning that each tier has increased resources that require more advanced tactics and gear to survive or make a profit.

Make highsec better. Give us better a corp interface.
Only YOU can prevent internet bullying!
thatonepersone
Black Jack 0-1
#1599 - 2014-09-13 22:23:57 UTC
I like this idea.
Fleder Uitoh
Higurashi no Naku Koro ni
#1600 - 2014-09-13 23:59:01 UTC
I heartily support this idea, though being two years old it could use a revisiting.