These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[PROPOSAL] What happens in lowsec stays in lowsec – Lowering the barrier to entry to lowsec PVP
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Orakkus
ImperiaI Federation
Goonswarm Federation
#21 - 2011-12-07 21:36:47 UTC
+1

He's not just famous, he's "IN" famous. - Ned Nederlander
Zircon Dasher
#22 - 2011-12-07 23:38:30 UTC
Looks like lowsec is really doing ok. Lets fix SOV 0.0 first.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=453560#post453560

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
Berendas
Ascendant Operations
#23 - 2011-12-07 23:50:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Berendas
Zircon Dasher wrote:
Looks like lowsec is really doing ok. Lets fix SOV 0.0 first.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=453560#post453560




Low sec is certainly not doing fine. It's been ignored by the devs for years with the pathetic exception of FW. A lot of the kills from that dev blog are just lolcamps in Amamake and Rancer, not actual PVP.
Thredd Necro
Doomheim
#24 - 2011-12-08 00:05:55 UTC
Zircon Dasher wrote:
Looks like lowsec is really doing ok. Lets fix SOV 0.0 first.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=453560#post453560



Lol 0.0 is mostly what CCP worked on since EVE opened...move along...but here's a cookieBig smile

He attacked everything in life with a mix of extraordinary genius and naive incompetence, and it was often difficult to tell which was which. - Douglas Adams
Zircon Dasher
#25 - 2011-12-08 00:48:20 UTC
Berendas wrote:
Zircon Dasher wrote:
Looks like lowsec is really doing ok. Lets fix SOV 0.0 first.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=453560#post453560




Low sec is certainly not doing fine. It's been ignored by the devs for years with the pathetic exception of FW. A lot of the kills from that dev blog are just lolcamps in Amamake and Rancer, not actualy PVP.



The fact that it has been "ignored" is probably a good indication that it is not nearly as terribad as you want to make it out to be. Prioritization of resources and all.

I am not sure what exactly you mean by lolcamps nor the difference between lolcamps and any other type of camps found in other areas. Since you seem think it matters significantly, it would be helpful to clarify exactly what qualifications divide "players shooting other players" from PVP. I am sure that given a sufficiently myopic view you are right... I just dont know how tight I need to pull the blinders in order to see it.

Just in case you are insinuating that its all fluff numbers from smarty camps, structure shooting, and hauler kills I would suggest that you actually read the entirity of the thread.

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
Berendas
Ascendant Operations
#26 - 2011-12-08 01:11:38 UTC
Zircon Dasher wrote:

The fact that it has been "ignored" is probably a good indication that it is not nearly as terribad as you want to make it out to be. Prioritization of resources and all.



There is no good reason for low sec going ignored for so long, that's the purpose of this thread and many other threads that have been asking for some well deserved dev attention. Roll


0.0 has all it needs for the moment with regards to game mechanics. There is plenty to be gained by leaving high sec and going to null. Lots of incentives exists for making money, PVP, PVE, holding territory, ect. The reason people whine about 0.0 and why people don't want to go there is because what players have turned it into. People aren't willing to be worker bees or cannon fodder for big alliances that care little for them.

Low sec on the other hand, has no rewards proportional to the risks for people living there. People go to low sec to get kills against and get killed by pirates. Other than that, there's nothing unique about low sec that you can't easily do in high or null.
Zircon Dasher
#27 - 2011-12-08 02:12:40 UTC
Berendas wrote:
0.0 has all it needs for the moment with regards to game mechanics. There is plenty to be gained by leaving high sec and going to null. Lots of incentives exists for making money, PVP, PVE, holding territory, ect. The reason people whine about 0.0 and why people don't want to go there is because what players have turned it into. People aren't willing to be worker bees or cannon fodder for big alliances that care little for them.

Low sec on the other hand, has no rewards proportional to the risks for people living there. People go to low sec to get kills against and get killed by pirates. Other than that, there's nothing unique about low sec that you can't easily do in high or null.


SO lets see....

People can enjoy shoot-everything PVP without the hassles of 0.0 (ease of logistics,no bubbles, sentry guns making fast lock frigates difficult to use... these were things brought up earlier) and without the hassles of territory holding (CTA's, necessity of huge blobs, etc... your gripes).

But....

There is nothing unique about lowsec.


Now I would love it if I could have all the ISK printing of 0.0 with none of the hassle. Just because I would like it doesnt mean it is a good idea though. More importantly, a discussion of rewards in lowsec have nothing to do with the OP.


Anyway, back on topic.

OP should change the words "barrier to entry" to "barrier to exit". Technically there is very little barrier to entry, something he himself notes.

Second, OP has left out some of the consequences of allowing anyone who is -0.01 to be shot at with no gate aggression. This will decrease the amount of time highsec corps and "weekend warrior" type players spend in lowsec.

Not that I think the OP really cares about that in the first place... but maybe I am just being cynical Lol

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
King Rothgar
Deadly Solutions
#28 - 2011-12-08 03:51:58 UTC
Out of the myriad of "fix low sec" topics I've seen the past year, this is one of the few I actually like. You recognize the appeal of low sec and this idea should improve on what we already have there. I fully support it.Cool

[u]Fireworks and snowballs are great, but what I really want is a corpse launcher.[/u]
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#29 - 2011-12-08 03:59:24 UTC
I thought of something similar just last night.

+1
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
#30 - 2011-12-08 09:50:35 UTC
Zircon Dasher wrote:
OP should change the words "barrier to entry" to "barrier to exit". Technically there is very little barrier to entry, something he himself notes.

If you want to get pedantic, it would be something of a "barrier to staying". Without alts, or the means/time to recover sec quickly, lowsec PVP becomes unsustainable in a short time.

Quote:
Second, OP has left out some of the consequences of allowing anyone who is -0.01 to be shot at with no gate aggression. This will decrease the amount of time highsec corps and "weekend warrior" type players spend in lowsec.

Because some people won't fight if they don't have NPCs on their side? Maybe, but those wouldn't GCC at all, and so wouldn't lose sec. But many would, more than now, and so the pure anti-pirate would have more targets available. Win/win.

Quote:
Not that I think the OP really cares about that in the first place... but maybe I am just being cynical Lol

So, what's my hidden agenda, then?Roll

What happens in lowsec, stays in lowsec, lowering the barrier to entry to lowsec PVP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=476644&#post476644
ComDoggy
Doomheim
#31 - 2011-12-08 15:38:38 UTC  |  Edited by: ComDoggy
+1
over
Mimiru Minahiro
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#32 - 2011-12-08 17:15:40 UTC
There are too many people who stay above -5 just so that frigates cant tackle them on gates. By allowing anyone who is negative to be aggressed without sentry retaliation you have fixed this grevious exploit. Kudos! Even better is that you give a chance for noobs to play in lowsec gangs too. Having barely skilled noobs is fine if 2-3 of them can pin down ships on gates long enough for our Tornados to lock from outside point range. Targets go BOOM, noobs get to contribute, and we stay safely out of point range.

+1 to this idea and anyother idea that lets frigs and t1 cruisers aggress on gates.
Zircon Dasher
#33 - 2011-12-08 19:05:01 UTC
Jack Dant wrote:
Without alts, or the means/time to recover sec quickly, lowsec PVP becomes unsustainable in a short time.


False.

Quote:
Because some people won't fight if they don't have NPCs on their side? Maybe, but those wouldn't GCC at all, and so wouldn't lose sec. But many would, more than now, and so the pure anti-pirate would have more targets available. Win/win.


anti-pirates. srs?Roll

Mimiru has basically pointed to the reason why highsec dwellers will have to spend more time in highsec. They will have to keep thier sec rating positive.

Quote:
So, what's my hidden agenda, then?Roll


I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. I see I was wrong now.

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
#34 - 2011-12-08 19:32:53 UTC
Zircon Dasher wrote:
Jack Dant wrote:
Without alts, or the means/time to recover sec quickly, lowsec PVP becomes unsustainable in a short time.

False.

Explain how. If it involves corp logistics (the only option I left out), that's basically the corp leadership's alts.

Quote:
Quote:
Because some people won't fight if they don't have NPCs on their side? Maybe, but those wouldn't GCC at all, and so wouldn't lose sec. But many would, more than now, and so the pure anti-pirate would have more targets available. Win/win.


anti-pirates. srs?Roll

NRDS Roleplayers, FW from opposite sides teaming up to fight flashies, industrial alliances thinking they are hardcore, or just opportunistic PVPers who only shoot flashies. They are everywhere.

Quote:
Mimiru has basically pointed to the reason why highsec dwellers will have to spend more time in highsec. They will have to keep thier sec rating positive.

No, they won't "have to". They may choose to do so, if they feel they need sentry protection. There's two ways this can go.

Either there are so many new yellows that there are frigs on most gates. Then yes, there's a strong incentive to be part of the positive sec minority, since travel for you will be very safe. But on the other hand, you do have the option to engage those yellows whenever you want, so you won't lack pvp.

Or there is enough of a mix of yellows/non yellows that camps still need to tank sentries. In which case, lowsec trave for the yellows is no more dangerous than it is today for outlaws. And it's not all that dangerous.

What happens in lowsec, stays in lowsec, lowering the barrier to entry to lowsec PVP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=476644&#post476644
Zircon Dasher
#35 - 2011-12-08 21:05:19 UTC
Jack Dant wrote:
Explain how.


Shocked Are you kidd.......... ooooh i see. You got me.Oops

8/10.

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#36 - 2011-12-08 21:31:05 UTC
When I was a carebear, we tried lowsec mining for a while. It wasn't any more profitable than highsec mining, carried a lot more risk, and logistics were a nightmare. Still, we went at it for about two months, and here are some thoughts based on that:

1) Lowsec needs more rare ore. It's currently just not profitable enough to mine lowsec versus highsec. Move all the "medium" ores (everything but ABC and the three most common) to lowsec belts exclusively--grav sites can stay the way they are--to push more mining there. And of course, lots of people have suggested ice be moved entirely from high to low.

2) Get rid of the inefficient refineries in lowsec stations. We lost a LOT of minerals when we finally gave up trying to import ore into highsec for refining and did it out there. There's no point in those penalties and they're just a hindrance to industrial efforts.

3) Make it easier to set up and maintain a POS in lowsec. The empires can't be bothered to patrol out there, yet they can magically prevent you from setting up a POS without the proper standings and licenses?

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Zirse
Risktech Analytics
#37 - 2011-12-08 21:35:39 UTC
Zircon Dasher wrote:
Jack Dant wrote:
Explain how.


Shocked Are you kidd.......... ooooh i see. You got me.Oops

8/10.


You are terrible at presenting any sort of point.

Have to agree about the barrier to entry.

Supported.
Zircon Dasher
#38 - 2011-12-08 22:20:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Zircon Dasher
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:

2) Get rid of the inefficient refineries in lowsec stations. We lost a LOT of minerals when we finally gave up trying to import ore into highsec for refining and did it out there. There's no point in those penalties and they're just a hindrance to industrial efforts.


This.

Quote:
3) yet they can magically prevent you from setting up a POS without the proper standings and licenses?


lolWut?

Zirse wrote:
You are terible at presenting any sort of point.


1) Glad to see I have such articulate company.
2) NO U (in case the presentation of point 1 was too hard to understand)

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
Zirse
Risktech Analytics
#39 - 2011-12-08 23:44:58 UTC
Zircon Dasher wrote:
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:

2) Get rid of the inefficient refineries in lowsec stations. We lost a LOT of minerals when we finally gave up trying to import ore into highsec for refining and did it out there. There's no point in those penalties and they're just a hindrance to industrial efforts.


This.

Quote:
3) yet they can magically prevent you from setting up a POS without the proper standings and licenses?


lolWut?

Zirse wrote:
You are terible at presenting any sort of point.


1) Glad to see I have such articulate company.
2) NO U (in case the presentation of point 1 was too hard to understand)


You edited my post to create a spelling error. Congratulations.
Berendas
Ascendant Operations
#40 - 2011-12-09 00:51:25 UTC
Don't bother responding to Zircon, he's made it clear he's just a mindless nullbear who thinks EVE is all about his playstyle.

That, and he's really really bad at presenting arguments (does he even have one?).