These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

What would happen if CCP finally nerfed hisec?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1501 - 2014-01-27 21:23:36 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

Would we? Most of the ideas for fixing it seem related directly to simply reducing content or income for under the goal of spreading pilots elsewhere. Essentially trying to reduce it to a deadzone and/or true de facto new player only space. That's not going to generate stories there.

Though, if your suggesting this go another direction, I'd love to hear it.


I think we would, yeah I agree just increasing install costs and increasing concord response times won't make highsec the place stories come from. They are the first step to rejuvenating highsec, decrease the reward or reintroduce risk to highsec. A revamp of war decs, a greater fleshing out of industry/trade, and more content creation tools are needed. However that is step two of solving the highsec problem and it needs a good foundation to build on, which step one provides.


Basically this.

Nerfing highsec is the start, not the end. But it's a step that has to be taken for genuine progress to be made. Otherwise you just have the elephant in the room eclipsing anything else introduced.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
E-2C Hawkeye
HOW to PEG SAFETY
#1502 - 2014-01-27 21:32:31 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Anslo wrote:
Everyone is biased but you, huh Jenn?



Not everyone, just posters from high sec.

More serioulsy, some people can put aside their own self interest, i can. I make a MINT doing SOe missions, incursioning with ISN and tvp and throwing away caracals in FW (which I started doing after I saw this last year). But being able to profit from something doesn't make that something the right way to go.

This is the right wayfor combat pve to go (in descending order):

-Wormholes
-Sov null
-npc null
-low sec
-FW low sec
-high sec (most automated security so the trade off should be least income)

And this is what actually happens for individual income via combat pve:

-Wormholes
-FW
-High sec (incursions and "pirate" missions)
-NPC null
-SOV null
-regular high sec (damn near tied with sov null, TEST it)
-Low sec (still dead last)

The only place that works right is wormholes (mega risk, mega isk). Can you people not see this?

Where are your numbers? Where is your test standard? What control conditions did you use to come to this conclusion?

Its easy to say what you feel or hope and have NOTHING to support it except your hate for hi-sec.

Here it is in a nutshell again. I really dont care where has the best isk/hr. Should I want to get what I call the best isk/hr then its on me to go get it not for CCP to give it to me. I have read several threads where you yourself have refferenced the same thing.

Stop looking for CCP to hand it to you and go get it.


So you've missed the dozens of threads where I speak about incursioning with TVP and ISN, and doing SoE and Trust Partner missions of throwing away caracals in FW lvl 4 missions (FW needs REAL lvl 4 missions btw)?

That's the point, I should not be able to do this, nor should anyone else, The kind of isk I make doing those things should be reserved for high end wormholes or sov null space that needs defending. Sure, a high sec dude should be able to make a living doing combat PVE, but this ins't a living, this is getting RICH. Don't you know I plex 4 accounts off noting but high sec isk now? The FW isk is just for when i don't feel like spending too much time (getting popped every 5th jump can get annoying after a while, but it's just a caracal lol).

CCP needs to totally rethink combat pve, and I mean from the floor up, because it's rewards are out of whack everywhere except wormholes. I don't know why these concepts are hard for anyone to understand.

What CCP needs to do is ignore the forums and the haters and develope the game in its own best interest, not what you think it should be or what you think is best for your wallet. Thats what CCP gets paid for not you or I.

The change is coming.....you dont have to like it but you do have to accept it.

Adapt or unsub.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1503 - 2014-01-27 21:38:09 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

This seems a noble goal at first glance, but is still opposed to what highsec is. I'd venture that the reason so many stories happen outside of highsec is entirely related to the fact that the range of possibilities there are intentionally broader that those inside highsec. Highsec that is the same old highsec, just slower cops and higher NPC costs won't provide unique reasons or scenarios that rival other spaces any more than it does now (and in a way is just a kick in the nuts to those of us who fit mission ships sensibly and tank barges by reducing cost:EHP for ganks).

And fundamentally highsec is just space with a more limited tool set to create relative safety, and as a result inhabitants that are less likely to engage or respond to aggression, so how do you make that something.

Basically, the income tweak is debatable and at a level probably needed, but how do you transform the intentionally safer area into a place that creates comparable content while still serving that purpose?


I wouldn't say its limited, I would say its different. As an example you can still shoot people you either need a wardec, a gank, or one of the many flag tricks versus just being able to shoot them.

For starters:

-More contract mechanics like freeform contracts, mercenary contracts, bounty contracts, loan contracts,

-A use for stock other than to steal CEO from corporations I awox,

-More deployables that rely around suspect timers yet have a benefit to industry/trade. Think like a deployable shipyard or deployable npc miners,

-Revamp of wardecs and bounties,

-A highsec ESS,

-More interaction for FW via highsec,

-Player run incursions,

-Player given missions,

-POS revamp,

-Procedurally generated scaling missions. So each mission is different and for each of your friends the mission will get more difficult as well as more rewarding,

-L5s in highsec with the caveat that they are 0.0 pockets.

All of that would add content and more tools for highsec.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1504 - 2014-01-27 21:38:19 UTC
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:

What CCP needs to do is ignore the forums and the haters and develope the game in its own best interest, not what you think it should be or what you think is best for your wallet. Thats what CCP gets paid for not you or I.

The change is coming.....you dont have to like it but you do have to accept it.

Adapt or unsub.


I recall a lot of people saying stupid s*** like you just posted before Incarna, too.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1505 - 2014-01-27 21:59:04 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

This seems a noble goal at first glance, but is still opposed to what highsec is. I'd venture that the reason so many stories happen outside of highsec is entirely related to the fact that the range of possibilities there are intentionally broader that those inside highsec. Highsec that is the same old highsec, just slower cops and higher NPC costs won't provide unique reasons or scenarios that rival other spaces any more than it does now (and in a way is just a kick in the nuts to those of us who fit mission ships sensibly and tank barges by reducing cost:EHP for ganks).

And fundamentally highsec is just space with a more limited tool set to create relative safety, and as a result inhabitants that are less likely to engage or respond to aggression, so how do you make that something.

Basically, the income tweak is debatable and at a level probably needed, but how do you transform the intentionally safer area into a place that creates comparable content while still serving that purpose?


I wouldn't say its limited, I would say its different. As an example you can still shoot people you either need a wardec, a gank, or one of the many flag tricks versus just being able to shoot them.

For starters:

-More contract mechanics like freeform contracts, mercenary contracts, bounty contracts, loan contracts,

-A use for stock other than to steal CEO from corporations I awox,

-More deployables that rely around suspect timers yet have a benefit to industry/trade. Think like a deployable shipyard or deployable npc miners,

-Revamp of wardecs and bounties,

-A highsec ESS,

-More interaction for FW via highsec,

-Player run incursions,

-Player given missions,

-POS revamp,

-Procedurally generated scaling missions. So each mission is different and for each of your friends the mission will get more difficult as well as more rewarding,

-L5s in highsec with the caveat that they are 0.0 pockets.

All of that would add content and more tools for highsec.

I can get behind some of the stuff on that list, though some I have doubts about.

- Contracts: How does the contract system evaluate successful completion of a freeform contract and furthermore, for all the contracts how does the system enforce it or provide penalty for failure?

- Stock: What other uses did you have in mind?

- Highsec ESS: The more I think about this, the more I have issues seeing any unbroken version of it coming into being.

- Player run content: This seems like it would be rather tricky to balance. It would need to provide some benefit to all involved at some level in order to be used yet not be able to be horribly gamed.

- L5's in 0.0 pockets: No one who is actually interested in doing lvl 5 missions will do these. Considering that you are looking at aggressors needing to have 0 risk to get to you and instant safety should they manage to disengage and leave the pocket, the only people who do these will be people setting traps and people looking to intentionally walk into those traps.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1506 - 2014-01-27 22:13:21 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

I can get behind some of the stuff on that list, though some I have doubts about.

- Contracts: How does the contract system evaluate successful completion of a freeform contract and furthermore, for all the contracts how does the system enforce it or provide penalty for failure?

- Stock: What other uses did you have in mind?

- Highsec ESS: The more I think about this, the more I have issues seeing any unbroken version of it coming into being.

- Player run content: This seems like it would be rather tricky to balance. It would need to provide some benefit to all involved at some level in order to be used yet not be able to be horribly gamed.

- L5's in 0.0 pockets: No one who is actually interested in doing lvl 5 missions will do these. Considering that you are looking at aggressors needing to have 0 risk to get to you and instant safety should they manage to disengage and leave the pocket, the only people who do these will be people setting traps and people looking to intentionally walk into those traps.


Difficulty of fixing highsec is no excuse for leaving it in the horrible state it is in now.

Contracts give more option for player interaction, add more accountability, and for specific contracts there should be automatic enforcement. Like for a loan contract it would automatically remove the amount and send the payment to the lender as long as everyone was in highsec.

Stocks could openly be traded on the market and have more tools for the owners to enforce things, like being able to extract dividends, restricting access to the wallet, and showing a portion of the corporations value.

Highsec ESS it would be part of the mission revamp and tied into faction warfare.

Balancing can be done if its difficult oh well it can still be done, I leave the specific design up to CCP.

With scaling procedurally generated missions it would allow safety in numbers as well as a good return so players can control their risk. Which is basically the main appeal of highsec, the area where it is the easiest to control their own risk.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1507 - 2014-01-27 22:13:22 UTC
Quote:
- Highsec ESS: The more I think about this, the more I have issues seeing any unbroken version of it coming into being.


Oh, I agree that it shouldn't exist, period.

But if what's good for the goose isn't good for the gander, then you have an imbalance.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Marie Trudeau
Trudeau Industrie SA
#1508 - 2014-01-27 22:16:45 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

This seems a noble goal at first glance, but is still opposed to what highsec is. I'd venture that the reason so many stories happen outside of highsec is entirely related to the fact that the range of possibilities there are intentionally broader that those inside highsec. Highsec that is the same old highsec, just slower cops and higher NPC costs won't provide unique reasons or scenarios that rival other spaces any more than it does now (and in a way is just a kick in the nuts to those of us who fit mission ships sensibly and tank barges by reducing cost:EHP for ganks).

And fundamentally highsec is just space with a more limited tool set to create relative safety, and as a result inhabitants that are less likely to engage or respond to aggression, so how do you make that something.

Basically, the income tweak is debatable and at a level probably needed, but how do you transform the intentionally safer area into a place that creates comparable content while still serving that purpose?


I wouldn't say its limited, I would say its different. As an example you can still shoot people you either need a wardec, a gank, or one of the many flag tricks versus just being able to shoot them.

For starters:

-More contract mechanics like freeform contracts, mercenary contracts, bounty contracts, loan contracts,

-A use for stock other than to steal CEO from corporations I awox,

-More deployables that rely around suspect timers yet have a benefit to industry/trade. Think like a deployable shipyard or deployable npc miners,

-Revamp of wardecs and bounties,

-A highsec ESS,

-More interaction for FW via highsec,

-Player run incursions,

-Player given missions,

-POS revamp,

-Procedurally generated scaling missions. So each mission is different and for each of your friends the mission will get more difficult as well as more rewarding,

-L5s in highsec with the caveat that they are 0.0 pockets.

All of that would add content and more tools for highsec.



These are all good ideas.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1509 - 2014-01-27 22:18:46 UTC
Basically any changes after risk : reward is addressed need to facilitate player interaction whether cooperative or antagonistic, highsec should focus on cooperative to keep with the low risk theme, and it needs to be heavily encouraged. The exception to this are quality of life changes like adding a deployable that has NPCs mine for you while you are off doing other things.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1510 - 2014-01-27 22:33:07 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

I can get behind some of the stuff on that list, though some I have doubts about.

- Contracts: How does the contract system evaluate successful completion of a freeform contract and furthermore, for all the contracts how does the system enforce it or provide penalty for failure?

- Stock: What other uses did you have in mind?

- Highsec ESS: The more I think about this, the more I have issues seeing any unbroken version of it coming into being.

- Player run content: This seems like it would be rather tricky to balance. It would need to provide some benefit to all involved at some level in order to be used yet not be able to be horribly gamed.

- L5's in 0.0 pockets: No one who is actually interested in doing lvl 5 missions will do these. Considering that you are looking at aggressors needing to have 0 risk to get to you and instant safety should they manage to disengage and leave the pocket, the only people who do these will be people setting traps and people looking to intentionally walk into those traps.


Difficulty of fixing highsec is no excuse for leaving it in the horrible state it is in now.

Contracts give more option for player interaction, add more accountability, and for specific contracts there should be automatic enforcement. Like for a loan contract it would automatically remove the amount and send the payment to the lender as long as everyone was in highsec.

Stocks could openly be traded on the market and have more tools for the owners to enforce things, like being able to extract dividends, restricting access to the wallet, and showing a portion of the corporations value.

Highsec ESS it would be part of the mission revamp and tied into faction warfare.

Balancing can be done if its difficult oh well it can still be done, I leave the specific design up to CCP.

With scaling procedurally generated missions it would allow safety in numbers as well as a good return so players can control their risk. Which is basically the main appeal of highsec, the area where it is the easiest to control their own risk.

I'm not arguing on technical complexity, I'm not really qualified to argue that, but rather workable mechanics. Contracts in particular, how do they work, what kind of restitution do they give for being broken, can they be gamed? If they can be gamed, do they add value or are they dead weight? As I understand freeform contracts once existed and were removed for that reason. Sure it added an option, but it was a useless option.

Also, I'm not arguing highsec shouldn't be changed. I've several times conceded a nerf may be in order and the ideas I didn't directly address were because they seemed fine and good on their own, though maybe lacking in details to be later debated should we ever get to that point.

But as to balancing, I mention that because it's going to be a big one for player generated content in a formalized mechanical setting. The closest thing we have is FW which as many will recall had a glaring exploit upon it's revamp, and further imbalances which while largely addressed still has detractors saying that it's a farm rather than a battlefield.

Also it wasn't the procedural generation of mission I had issue with, but rather the implications for pockets of 0.0 in highsec for lvl 5's as that actually removes the ability manage risk that distinguishes highsec. Procedural missions in general is something I want but have lost faith in getting as no one seems to think CCP should devote any serious time to rebuilding PvE.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1511 - 2014-01-27 22:34:31 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Basically any changes after risk : reward is addressed need to facilitate player interaction whether cooperative or antagonistic, highsec should focus on cooperative to keep with the low risk theme, and it needs to be heavily encouraged. The exception to this are quality of life changes like adding a deployable that has NPCs mine for you while you are off doing other things.


One of my thoughts had been for a while to make research projects cooperative.

Basically you would have a variety of specific research skills, but could only use one on a job at a time. You would be able to post it publicly or privately to ask for assistance, with potentially offering a isk reward to another player for adding another research topic to the job.

This would require a revamp of the entire research and production mechanic and skills however, so I don't forsee it ever occurring.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Kimmi Chan
Tastes Like Purple
#1512 - 2014-01-27 22:53:57 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
I wouldn't say its limited, I would say its different. As an example you can still shoot people you either need a wardec, a gank, or one of the many flag tricks versus just being able to shoot them.

For starters:

-More contract mechanics like freeform contracts, mercenary contracts, bounty contracts, loan contracts,

-A use for stock other than to steal CEO from corporations I awox,

-More deployables that rely around suspect timers yet have a benefit to industry/trade. Think like a deployable shipyard or deployable npc miners,

-Revamp of wardecs and bounties,

-A highsec ESS,

-More interaction for FW via highsec,

-Player run incursions,

-Player given missions,

-POS revamp,

-Procedurally generated scaling missions. So each mission is different and for each of your friends the mission will get more difficult as well as more rewarding,

-L5s in highsec with the caveat that they are 0.0 pockets.

All of that would add content and more tools for highsec.



I know you believe that F&I is where ideas go to die but, with a little fleshing out, some of these ideas you might have some things that will, if nothing else, provide some serious discussion on the matter rather than a lot of screaming and bitching from both highsec and nullsec.

Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
One of my thoughts had been for a while to make research projects cooperative.

Basically you would have a variety of specific research skills, but could only use one on a job at a time. You would be able to post it publicly or privately to ask for assistance, with potentially offering a isk reward to another player for adding another research topic to the job.

This would require a revamp of the entire research and production mechanic and skills however, so I don't forsee it ever occurring.


This too is a good idea. I could sell my expertise in Quantam Mechanics or Mechanical Engineering to anyone looking to research/invent BPOs requiring those skills.

Would this be true in Nullsec research as well?

"Grr Kimmi  Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide

www.eve-radio.com  Join Eve Radio channel in game!
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1513 - 2014-01-27 22:58:41 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

I'm not arguing on technical complexity, I'm not really qualified to argue that, but rather workable mechanics. Contracts in particular, how do they work, what kind of restitution do they give for being broken, can they be gamed? If they can be gamed, do they add value or are they dead weight? As I understand freeform contracts once existed and were removed for that reason. Sure it added an option, but it was a useless option.

Also, I'm not arguing highsec shouldn't be changed. I've several times conceded a nerf may be in order and the ideas I didn't directly address were because they seemed fine and good on their own, though maybe lacking in details to be later debated should we ever get to that point.

But as to balancing, I mention that because it's going to be a big one for player generated content in a formalized mechanical setting. The closest thing we have is FW which as many will recall had a glaring exploit upon it's revamp, and further imbalances which while largely addressed still has detractors saying that it's a farm rather than a battlefield.

Also it wasn't the procedural generation of mission I had issue with, but rather the implications for pockets of 0.0 in highsec for lvl 5's as that actually removes the ability manage risk that distinguishes highsec. Procedural missions in general is something I want but have lost faith in getting as no one seems to think CCP should devote any serious time to rebuilding PvE.


Most of that is all in the balancing the devs would have to do and this time if our evil genius economic guys say its broken I highly suggest CCP listen to them.

Freeform contracts in addition to player crafted missions would be the best way to do this with ways for players to add notes to them, I think CCP was in error in removing them. The best I can think of at the moment with the contract suggestion but not freeform is that players select the boundaries and as long as everyone is in highsec players and npcs enforce it. For example A and C take loans from B for 1b isk at 10% interest for 6 months. They agree on payment terms noted in the contract. A defaults on the payment and remains in highsec so the amount is automatically deducted from their wallet by concord or whatever magic space collection agency gets made up. C defaults but flees to lowsec, now its up to B to get the money from C unless they come back to highsec.

The 0.0 pockets allow risk mitigate the same as risk mitigation for a suicide gank. You control the area, the people your with and the time you intend to do the mission that's how you mitigate the risk.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1514 - 2014-01-27 23:04:55 UTC
Kimmi Chan wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
I wouldn't say its limited, I would say its different. As an example you can still shoot people you either need a wardec, a gank, or one of the many flag tricks versus just being able to shoot them.

For starters:

-More contract mechanics like freeform contracts, mercenary contracts, bounty contracts, loan contracts,

-A use for stock other than to steal CEO from corporations I awox,

-More deployables that rely around suspect timers yet have a benefit to industry/trade. Think like a deployable shipyard or deployable npc miners,

-Revamp of wardecs and bounties,

-A highsec ESS,

-More interaction for FW via highsec,

-Player run incursions,

-Player given missions,

-POS revamp,

-Procedurally generated scaling missions. So each mission is different and for each of your friends the mission will get more difficult as well as more rewarding,

-L5s in highsec with the caveat that they are 0.0 pockets.

All of that would add content and more tools for highsec.



I know you believe that F&I is where ideas go to die but, with a little fleshing out, some of these ideas you might have some things that will, if nothing else, provide some serious discussion on the matter rather than a lot of screaming and bitching from both highsec and nullsec.

Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
One of my thoughts had been for a while to make research projects cooperative.

Basically you would have a variety of specific research skills, but could only use one on a job at a time. You would be able to post it publicly or privately to ask for assistance, with potentially offering a isk reward to another player for adding another research topic to the job.

This would require a revamp of the entire research and production mechanic and skills however, so I don't forsee it ever occurring.


This too is a good idea. I could sell my expertise in Quantam Mechanics or Mechanical Engineering to anyone looking to research/invent BPOs requiring those skills.

Would this be true in Nullsec research as well?


You're free to ghostwrite those to F&I, I have little faith for forums other than GD and C&P.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1515 - 2014-01-27 23:19:11 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
The 0.0 pockets allow risk mitigate the same as risk mitigation for a suicide gank. You control the area, the people your with and the time you intend to do the mission that's how you mitigate the risk.
Even with that the contract thing still seems pretty reasonably gamable in an imbalanced way.

But that aside, running in 0.0 space and avoiding a suicide gank are pretty different tasks. Specifically, the latter can be done almost entirely passively. Area control isn't really a thing in highsec, and even with this change only becomes possible in the L5 mission area itself. Policing the surrounding areas can't be effectively done and you still have local as a tool being neutralized due to the lack of system control and the general willingness to cohabitate a system with neutrals that comes from highsec living, mainly because you don't have a choice.

Long story short, you see a lot less action idling in a procurer in a belt in a 0.6 than you do in a -0.6.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1516 - 2014-01-27 23:21:35 UTC
Quote:
This too is a good idea. I could sell my expertise in Quantam Mechanics or Mechanical Engineering to anyone looking to research/invent BPOs requiring those skills.

Would this be true in Nullsec research as well?


Of course. Blanket rulechange. I'm sure trickier to implement into a POS, (perhaps the research abilities can create a "data packet" that can be sold to other players), but then the POS system has been a bottleneck against progress in EVE for a long time.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1517 - 2014-01-27 23:56:29 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Even with that the contract thing still seems pretty reasonably gamable in an imbalanced way.

But that aside, running in 0.0 space and avoiding a suicide gank are pretty different tasks. Specifically, the latter can be done almost entirely passively. Area control isn't really a thing in highsec, and even with this change only becomes possible in the L5 mission area itself. Policing the surrounding areas can't be effectively done and you still have local as a tool being neutralized due to the lack of system control and the general willingness to cohabitate a system with neutrals that comes from highsec living, mainly because you don't have a choice.

Long story short, you see a lot less action idling in a procurer in a belt in a 0.6 than you do in a -0.6.


I'm confident with testing CCP could fix the contract system. I agree that avoiding a gank and existing in 0.0 are different tasks but their risk is prepared in the same way. You defend from a gank by not making yourself a target, by selecting the area you operate in and by selecting the people around you. The same can be said of L5s in highsec that are 0.0 pockets.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
#1518 - 2014-01-27 23:58:29 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Quote:
This too is a good idea. I could sell my expertise in Quantam Mechanics or Mechanical Engineering to anyone looking to research/invent BPOs requiring those skills.

Would this be true in Nullsec research as well?


Of course. Blanket rulechange. I'm sure trickier to implement into a POS, (perhaps the research abilities can create a "data packet" that can be sold to other players), but then the POS system has been a bottleneck against progress in EVE for a long time.

yes but why do the oft-requested unfuck of old boring vitally-important fixed structures when you can have prefucked unasked-for new shiny exciting superfluous mobile structures
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1519 - 2014-01-28 00:09:21 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Even with that the contract thing still seems pretty reasonably gamable in an imbalanced way.

But that aside, running in 0.0 space and avoiding a suicide gank are pretty different tasks. Specifically, the latter can be done almost entirely passively. Area control isn't really a thing in highsec, and even with this change only becomes possible in the L5 mission area itself. Policing the surrounding areas can't be effectively done and you still have local as a tool being neutralized due to the lack of system control and the general willingness to cohabitate a system with neutrals that comes from highsec living, mainly because you don't have a choice.

Long story short, you see a lot less action idling in a procurer in a belt in a 0.6 than you do in a -0.6.


I'm confident with testing CCP could fix the contract system. I agree that avoiding a gank and existing in 0.0 are different tasks but their risk is prepared in the same way. You defend from a gank by not making yourself a target, by selecting the area you operate in and by selecting the people around you. The same can be said of L5s in highsec that are 0.0 pockets.

At this point I think we're both speculating beyond what can really be seen when it's just a series of goals so I'll just say that all in all, despite my concerns, it's a good list.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1520 - 2014-01-28 00:18:05 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Even with that the contract thing still seems pretty reasonably gamable in an imbalanced way.

But that aside, running in 0.0 space and avoiding a suicide gank are pretty different tasks. Specifically, the latter can be done almost entirely passively. Area control isn't really a thing in highsec, and even with this change only becomes possible in the L5 mission area itself. Policing the surrounding areas can't be effectively done and you still have local as a tool being neutralized due to the lack of system control and the general willingness to cohabitate a system with neutrals that comes from highsec living, mainly because you don't have a choice.

Long story short, you see a lot less action idling in a procurer in a belt in a 0.6 than you do in a -0.6.


I'm confident with testing CCP could fix the contract system. I agree that avoiding a gank and existing in 0.0 are different tasks but their risk is prepared in the same way. You defend from a gank by not making yourself a target, by selecting the area you operate in and by selecting the people around you. The same can be said of L5s in highsec that are 0.0 pockets.

At this point I think we're both speculating beyond what can really be seen when it's just a series of goals so I'll just say that all in all, despite my concerns, it's a good list.


Good to hear it and I agree.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133