Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Yes please. Highsec is too convenient.

Then that would be their loss. Currently there is very little risk ( provided you fit your ship properly and don't haul bling in a freighter) in hauling everything you have to jita, a gigantic trade hub that stifles all real competiton and makes everything available at one price, less 0.01 isk ever 5 minutes or so. Yes, through emergent gameplay that CCP has let gankers and griefers become very powerful, with high DPS cheap hulls. Well the pendulum swings, Do you think CCP will let this continue? There will always be ganking, but right now the risk is very low for the OCD routines gankers have developed. There have been changes made to be a little more inconvenient to gankers, and probably more on the way.

Nullsec has just had its board shaken,the rest of eve should not be left stagnant, and highsec is stagnant.
Nullsec has had more changes to space than any other "area" ( highsec, WH's, Lowsec). Highsec has been left entirely alone for fear that it might disturb the bears.

Running an epic arc? have to travel through lowsec to get a craploads of isk/mods/lp? Have some risk for your payout, if you read eve guides, they cover everything quite nicely, risk is absolutely minimized.

Trading? local markets trade hubs will dissapear? oh noes, jita will dissapear! But jita has ALWAYS been the trade hub!!!!!! /massive sarcasm
Market(s) will continue to exist, just splintered and the local price variance will stimulate the people willing to take the risk for the isk to haul from one market to the other.

Missioners will likewise have no problems, I see most of them staying close to their mission hubs, as i they do currently.

Manufaturers will still have markets. The game will change, and surprise surprise, people will adapt.

Same old complaints, same old knee jerk arguements. I'm surprised that "terror" and "think of the children" haven't been thrown in here.

Funny, i recall the existence of blockade runners, and Black ops battleships. More than that, and it has been pointed out, just because empires would be separated does not mean there would be low sec choke points. Likely the choke points would still be high security, but a good selection of low systems to go to, and not just one route/choke point to get to other empires.

The cloaking is a non-issue, its already in the rules you are not allowed drop cans/ litter for de-cloaking purposes, CCP can and have done their best to make sure people have a good chance to run away from a poorly run gate camp, and at least a chance from a good camp.

You are correct that the separation would have to be total, or it would not affect AFK traffic nearly to the degree of someone at the keyboard. However its simple logic that a total separation would benefit a player ATK rather than AFK for the reasoning you were kind enough to point out.

In order to make a reasonable profit among the competition that would be crossing lowsec, it is reasonable to expect to have to cross lowsec. If noone is crossing lowsec, then the competition is at a common level. If competition is importing across lowsec, and a player adheres to the self imposed limitation of not crossing lowsec, then they bear the responsibility of that choice.

Missions do not require you to cross empires. Traders trade plenty in stations, niches, and islands within an empire. Manufacturing is unaffected, only the trading/importing component of material aquisition.

There are 7 epic arcs, two of which are pirate arcs picked up in null, and they can only be completed once every 3 months. Of the 5 remaining, the majority of their arcs stay within their empire. I'm not convinced that crossing lowsec to complete them would be an overly negative repercussion. As to the level 1 SOE arc designed for the less experienced, a tour of the 4 empires and the lowsec separating them sounds like an educational and gratifying experience for those with a lot to learn and little to lose. This could be expanded upon to guide a player into awareness of and how to use the tools at their disposal.

Not going to lowsec is their choice, they get to make it easily because there is no reason, currently, to go to or through low. Your argument is tautological. It makes no sense.

I don't think you understand the meaning of choke point, so from merriam-webster:

Definition of CHOKE POINT
: a strategic narrow route providing passage through or to another region

so, if the "choke point" is highsec ( .5 or above), and has multiple choices of initial direction through lowsec, and multiple choices after that, as long as every route from A to B has more than one choice per jump through lowsec, that route through lowsec does not contain a "choke point" in lowsec.

Do. You. Understand. Now?

This assumes that hisec traders will travel through losec, they won't. Every hisec player who has responded here has stated this.



See above, for attacking gatecamps to be viable they have to be there. To be there they have to have people to hunt. Which they won't.



Refer to points 1 and two above :D

Pilots can use losec now but they don't because they do not want to. This is not about it being an easy or hard decision to make, it is a 'Will they or won't they' question. We already know the answer to that so to try to mess around so fundamentally with an area of space where the majority of characters are played would just be silly.

A narrow route is very relative. A low sec area between Caldari space and Amarr space with 3 entrances and 3 exits, which have each routes between 3, 5 and 7 jumps in between them is a choke point. Why? Because only the short route is viable, because only the 1 entry and the 1 entry/exit which requires 5 jumps from Amarr is viable as the other require 10, 15 jumps, or 7 jumps from Jita while the others require 11,13 jumps to get to that other Low sec. Furthermore, a choke point is an area which people must pass to get to another area, meaning it does not matter if there are 1 or 3 or 5 entries/exits, it is an unavoidable area and therefore a choke point. Besides, I am very generous with the assumption that these Low sec areas have 3 entries/exits: the more they have, the easier it is to avoid the camps for the intended victims and the harder it is to spark PVP; henceforth, in order to not make these Low sec areas unattractive hunting grounds they cannot have too many entries/exits and 3 already imposes a significant amount of effort on pirates to find targets.

Let's look at an example: The route from Amarr in Domain to Lisudeh in Devoid. Let's further imagine that Domain is Amarr and Devoid Minmatar, so 2 empires that needed to be cut off by Low sec, therefore the border gate Yuhelia-Hati is cut. Instead, the route now inevitably brings you through The Bleak Lands.

• That's the fastest route already today, so the closure of Yuhelia has not caused changes. Entry is Huola, exit is Raa.
• Let's avoid Huola because it's a popular entry system on the route and camped. Entry now is Kamela, exit is still Raa. You might also notice that the 3 systems before Raa have not changed, so they are very nice camping systems as people must pass through there. Despite 2 different entry points. Next.
• Since Kamela is also a nice entry system and one of the core systems in TBL, we do not want to enter from their either. Entry now is Saikamon, exit still Raa, still a very good camping systems. You might also notice that this route is already 20 jumps long, up from 12 in the first and 13 in the second example. Now:
• We do not want to go via Raa anymore, instead we avoid it and take another route. Entry now is Sosala, exit is Sosala. Or Kamela, but then we are back in a very popular system for camps.

So, effectively we have 5 different routes. 2 lead through the same systems, 3 have the same entry point, 3 the same exit. The last 2 examples with the single Low sec system will be among the prime camp systems as they obviously require the lowest Low sec exposure, however, I doubt that the newly introduced Low sec areas had such short Low sec bridges. Even if, they'd be completely out of question to use. That leaves me with 3 routes, all via very similar or the same systems. And these systems are easily campable by a limited number of people. Now tell me that this is not a choke point or that it requires too much effort to shut these systems down.

My theory is that this change would provide that incentive. There are plenty of people who would transport goods across low-sec if it was necessary, as a result almost everything would still be available in the local trade hubs. People would have to pay a little more to buy imported goods (unless they're willing to risk the trip) but it's not like they would be totally locked out of any of the current high-sec activities.

Those that are willing to take the risk would make more isk than those who aren't. Those who aren't willing to take the risk would still have all their regular high-sec activities available to them, albeit at a potentially higher cost. It's a carrot and stick approach, but I doubt it would take anything away from anyone completely.

If they are happy where they are, then this change doesn't affect them at all.

But it will reward those who are willing to take the risk. Separate markets in the four faction spaces will create more price gaps, fluctuations in supply and therefore more opportunities.