These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Middle Sec - a solution to High Sec constipation?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jenshae Chiroptera
#1 - 2015-03-29 15:16:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
First of all; can we agree that:

- having 75% to 80% of the player base in High Sec with a subscription life of 1.5 years on average opposed to a 5 year life in Null Sec, is less than ideal for the game?
- there is a lack of good space for corps and alliances can grow to challange the larger groups?

Personally, I see Low Sec as a waste land to roam around in with small gangs. Sure there is the odd POS bash and capital fight but not much seems to happen there and it has a tiny fraction of the player base.
As soon as you mention changing it, then a whole lot of those devout followers of the niche groups start screaming.

How about a compromise?

Arrow All 0.5 and 0.4 systems become "Middle Sec."

That is some of High Sec and some of Low Sec.

The next question to ask is, "How do we get High Sec players to move out there and build alliances up?"

My list of things I think would help are as follows:

  • NPCs that help those who are first attacked (including remote repairs) based on standings with the corporation that "owns" the system. (NPCs are destructable and help but don't turn the tables on an encounter).
  • Mining anomolies need to be scanned down.
  • Megacyte is available in quite small quantities via Spodumain.
  • Systems can be enhanced by having high NPC corp standing and activity in the system via indexes.
  • There would be ratting anomolies as a result of the index levels.
  • If you have high standing with the owning NPC corp then you get a greatly reduced security hit for attacking intruders (unless they also have high standing. Knowing this quickly would require an overview setting.)
  • Gates would probably need to be manipulated so that many of these site are in pockets and pipes to make them more defendable.
  • Orcas would be different.
  • A new type of station with two or three exits to curb station camping. Maybe one you can see out of?
  • None of the NPC corps that players join would hold Middle Sec systems.
  • Capital ship restrictions prevent only Supers and Titans from entering this space.
  • Give corporations in NPC systems a value.
  • Team ratting sites with AI that behaves more like players PVP so that bears are more ready to fight more of the time.
  • Ensure that High Sec is still connected by 0.6 space by altering some gates.


A way to improve Null Sec would be team anomolies with the same rate of ISK/hour. Another is Loyalty Point stores controlled by SOV owners to make SRP programs more effective.

Question Anyway - how would you make a middle ground to coax High Sec bears out? Question

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#2 - 2015-03-29 15:16:30 UTC
Other factors to consider:

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#3 - 2015-03-29 15:22:12 UTC
Here we go again.

You have no idea in regards to low sec, let alone the rest of the game. The only boarders in Eve, are the ones we build ourselves.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#4 - 2015-03-29 15:32:54 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
- having 75% to 80% of the player base in High Sec with a subscription life of 1.5 years on average opposed to a 5 year life in Null Sec, is less than ideal for the game?


You're proposing fixing a problem without all the parameters and variables in play. We have no data on WHY they are quitting, thus any solution would be blind luck at best if it worked.

This being said, there is NO amount of stick that will move a gamer to do what they do not want to do, when other games exist.

There are already plenty carrots, but we the players cause the problems with the uptake. Rampant elitism, camping the ass off the higsec/lowsec entry gates, laughing at other players and mocking them because they dare not to research the game and treat it like a religion like many do, forgetting what it means to actually lose a ship and it to matter and much more.

Frankly if we were less of a bunch of utter arseholes on the forums and more helpful, people might poke their nose in more. The problem is so many posters are inconsistent in their attitudes and hostility it's hard to tell if they are being helpful or abrasive. Only by already having the experience can you know - but by then you don't have a problem.

Mags is right, we've built this culture - WE need to reverse it, it is the only way. Sticks will make people quit.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#5 - 2015-03-29 15:33:36 UTC
Low-sec is a lost cause. If it wasn't for Faction Warfare they'd have self-destructed long ago.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Ix Method
Doomheim
#6 - 2015-03-29 15:34:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Ix Method
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
The next question to ask is, "How do we get High Sec players to move out there and build alliances up?"

You give them massive carrots (like say the new structures) which give a reason to organise beyond 'wouldn't it be cool if we had a flag'. We'll see what actually occurs with the new stuff but if you can provide some sort of profitable services in highsec you can reasonably hold with a 50-100 sized corps then that is your nursery for new, upcoming organisations. Successful groups tend to grow and almost inevitably that means eventually getting out of highsec.

On the other hand am unclear how this list of ideas mushed together would encourage people to build well rounded alliances?

Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
SOV is stagnant because Low Sec is not the next step from High Sec and a viable place to grow alliances to the point they can challenge Null alliances.

FWIW this is a ridiculous statement and kinda undermines your OP. Gimping lowsec to fix sov simply ruins lowsec and removes a somewhat unique playstyle for no good reason. It spent years as a middle-ground, still is in a lot of ways, and was largely worthless so why on earth would we want to steer back towards that?

Lowsec as an interesting, flowing environment that appeals to multifaceted, nomadic groups or some sort of contrived Sov-lite? It's hardly a choice,

Travelling at the speed of love.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#7 - 2015-03-29 15:39:13 UTC
another redundant post




IIRC last time this came up people just pointed out how the only thing that would change is LS pilots wold be annoyed you would need a JF to transport anything over 70km3 from hub to hub and all the HS pilots would smash themselves into .6+ and leave the .5s

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Jenshae Chiroptera
#8 - 2015-03-29 16:02:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
Ix Method wrote:
...this is a ridiculous statement and ... blah,
Sig pre-dates this thread, I am trying to find compromises where High Sec bears can feel tempted out of their comfort zone.
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
IIRC last time this came up people just pointed out how the only thing that would change is LS pilots wold be annoyed you would need a JF to transport anything over 70km3 from hub to hub and all the HS pilots would smash themselves into .6+ and leave the .5s
Adding a point about that. Thanks.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Sean Parisi
Blackrise Vanguard
#9 - 2015-03-29 16:11:55 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Low-sec is a lost cause. If it wasn't for Faction Warfare they'd have self-destructed long ago.

I would disagree. However, I will agree this is completely true in regards to industry outside of carrier and dread building and maybe some PI
Iain Cariaba
#10 - 2015-03-29 16:13:28 UTC
Oh look, this thread has already been started, a couple times.

Reported for redundancy.
ISD Decoy
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#11 - 2015-03-29 16:26:51 UTC
Quote:
17. Redundant and re-posted threads will be locked.

As a courtesy to other forum users, please search to see if there is a thread already open on the topic you wish to discuss. If so, please place your comments there instead. Multiple threads on the same subject clutter up the forums needlessly, causing good feedback and ideas to be lost. Please keep discussions regarding a topic to a single thread.

As already linked, this idea has come up in the past with a relatively healthy discussion around it. The linked threads are good examples.

Thread locked.

ISD Decoy

Captain

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department