These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Zirse
Risktech Analytics
#41 - 2011-12-09 00:58:02 UTC
Berendas wrote:
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.
.


I live in nullsec. I simply think that this is a good idea. Where someone resides in a vidya game has zero weight on their opinion. Zircon is a moron on his own accord.
Pere Madeleine
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
#42 - 2011-12-09 01:48:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Pere Madeleine
Cool, I see this thread has found its troll. I guess that's a sure sign it's a good idea ;) I especially like the fact he still hasn't explained why he claims lowsec is sustainable without alts or recovering sec, despite being asked to.

About the lowsec mining stuff, I'm not so sure it would entice many miners to lowsec, certainly not the casual miners that do a large amount of highsec mining anyway. What it would do is make lowsec mining an absolute necessity for production, which will lead to the price of everything going up, since the only people able to produce this ore are those that are capable of defending mining operations. In my experience of miners, very few have the ability or the inclination to do that. I'm not so sure that's a good idea, unless of course you're in the minority that reckons they are able to successfully defend lowsec mining operations, and fancy some higher profits :P

As for negative sec people being shootable without gate aggro, I really don't think that'll be a problem for the average highsec dweller who goes to lowsec occasionally. If you live in highsec, and are into shooting stuff, chances are you spend most of your time PvEing. If the lowest your sec could drop from lowsec PvP was -1.99, then highsec PvE being your main activity will quite quickly work off that hit, even if you go on a total bender. Since part of the proposal was that shooting someone with negative sec has no repercussion, the only reason your sec would ever drop would be if you were shooting people with positive sec anyway. Basically this would be turning anti-piracy from a bit of RP fluff into a semi-profession that's actually supported by game mechanics.
Berendas
Ascendant Operations
#43 - 2011-12-09 02:04:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Berendas
Zirse wrote:
Berendas wrote:
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.
.


I live in nullsec. I simply think that this is a good idea. Where someone resides in a vidya game has zero weight on their opinion. Zircon is a moron on his own accord.



I'm not saying people who live in 0.0 do not have valid opinions, but Zircon is just one of those bleating lambs who wants the devs' attention to be on all null sec, all the time. He came into a thread about a low sec fix trying to champion 0.0 buffs Roll
Dro Nee
#44 - 2011-12-09 03:24:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Dro Nee
As being someone who lived 2+ years as -10 it isnt hard to supply yourself without an alt. Yes I had a hauler, but I can count the number of times I used it to bring me supplies on one hand. Maybe I was lucky though. I was able to keep stocked from loot, the occasional foray onto the market, and working out deals with friends. Then again, I set up some nice relationships after ransoming a few haulers.... not everyone honors ransoms though so maybe they don't get that benefit.

When I decided to leave low it sure was a PITA grinding up sec. Would not having to bother with that been nice? Sure. If I had not been lazy I would have never been in that position in the first place. It is pitifully easy to keep your sec up if you are not camping gates for haulers and you work solo. The sec hit you get from fights where the other person shoots back is minimal. That is why I am not sure there is any real incentive for weekend warriors. Those players tend to be running around solo or in 2-3 man gangs.

The people I do see this helping are those corporations who want to engage in POS-centric activities without living in low, and those corps who need highsec access so they can shoot WT's (but who want to go to low when things get slow). The first group I may have some sympathy for. Defending a POS will result in sec hits. Making things easier for them to mitigate those hits is something I am on the fence about. The latter group I have no sympathy for.

TBH I think there are two questions I have not seen brought up though.First, why would making more people flashy boost PVP when people can't or won't shoot red flashies already? The gate guns wont shoot you if you make a move on a red flashy, nor do you get a sec hit. But almost nobody engaged me when I was -10 that wouldn't have engaged me if I +5. Making a mechanic that nobody takes advantage of seems kind of pointless so maybe I am missing something.

Second, why does everyone insist that low sec needs more pvp? It already accounts for 30% of PVP in the game, hotzones already rival the 0.0 hotzones in terms of average kills/day, and even the quiet systems see more traffic than the quietest 0.0 systems. All the verifable data says that low is doing just fine, even though all the forum warrior data tells a different story.

Until someone can answer the last question I won't support any BOOST LOW SEC!!!111 thread.
Berendas
Ascendant Operations
#45 - 2011-12-09 05:48:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Berendas
Dro Nee wrote:
Second, why does everyone insist that low sec needs more pvp? It already accounts for 30% of PVP in the game, hotzones already rival the 0.0 hotzones in terms of average kills/day, and even the quiet systems see more traffic than the quietest 0.0 systems. All the verifable data says that low is doing just fine, even though all the forum warrior data tells a different story.


I've spent about 2.5 years in Metropolis/Sinq Laison low sec, and from my experience a lot of people don't necessarily think that low sec needs more PVP, its just that the PVP that exists needs to be less of a hassle to maintain. As things are now if you want to play EVE as an exclusive (or almost) PVPer it is very hard to sustain yourself. Without good corp logistics an alt becomes a necessity even for things like spare mods and ammo, much less ships. Then there is the issue of income. The way player loot drops can either make your day or ruin your week depending on how the loot fairy is feeling so it can't be relied upon for consistent income. If there was a way an PVPer could make isk just through PVP then I think you'd see a lot less low sec whines. It could be something like a pirate corp getting sponsored by NPC pirates that places bounties on positive sec players. That is just an example ofc, there are a great many ways CCP could make piracy and more casual low sec PVP a self sustaining activity. People don't like being shoehorned into a play style in order to sustain the one they enjoy.
Anna Lynne Larson
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#46 - 2011-12-09 07:02:16 UTC
+1 Supported, this would be amazing. agree with 5 minute GCC in lowsec too.
Ashley Judd
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#47 - 2011-12-09 10:11:30 UTC
Some that seem concerned this idea prompts inexperienced pilots to dip their toes in PvP waters en-masse. Others voice their worries that low sec will be transformed from the tranquil, occasionally hostile backwater it is now in to a zoo of space-weapon-firing activity.

To them I say: good.

Yes, I'm biased towards small gangs, but what I'd really like to see are more fights. I'm fully behind any mechanic that encourages PvP. Let the low-sec arena begin.
Tsubutai
Perkone
Caldari State
#48 - 2011-12-09 11:10:06 UTC
On the whole, I think this is a good idea. However, it does feel like a bit of a slap in the face for those who are currently -10 as a result of actions that would be effectively decriminalised under the new system.
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
#49 - 2011-12-09 12:13:54 UTC
Dro Nee wrote:
As being someone who lived 2+ years as -10 it isnt hard to supply yourself without an alt. Yes I had a hauler, but I can count the number of times I used it to bring me supplies on one hand. Maybe I was lucky though. I was able to keep stocked from loot, the occasional foray onto the market, and working out deals with friends. Then again, I set up some nice relationships after ransoming a few haulers.... not everyone honors ransoms though so maybe they don't get that benefit.

It's easy for the dedicated player, not so much for the more casual ones. I have no problem with it myself, even when I'm not outlaw, I use hauler alts to bring me the stuff for the most part. But when I was running corp logistics, you'd be surprised how many people complained about having to bring their own mods in, when we already provided the hulls. And a 100k sp alt in a frigate can bring fittings for several ships.

Quote:
When I decided to leave low it sure was a PITA grinding up sec. Would not having to bother with that been nice? Sure. If I had not been lazy I would have never been in that position in the first place. It is pitifully easy to keep your sec up if you are not camping gates for haulers and you work solo. The sec hit you get from fights where the other person shoots back is minimal. That is why I am not sure there is any real incentive for weekend warriors. Those players tend to be running around solo or in 2-3 man gangs.

That's a different point, but the way sec and aggression works is unbalanced. It only works in 1v1. With two gangs shooting each other, only 2 primaries will be taking fire at any given time. So anyone who is not primaried will get the full sec hit.

Quote:
TBH I think there are two questions I have not seen brought up though.First, why would making more people flashy boost PVP when people can't or won't shoot red flashies already? The gate guns wont shoot you if you make a move on a red flashy, nor do you get a sec hit. But almost nobody engaged me when I was -10 that wouldn't have engaged me if I +5. Making a mechanic that nobody takes advantage of seems kind of pointless so maybe I am missing something.

People do it. Ok, yes, there's a lot of puzzling people who go to lowsec in pvp fit ships, but don't engage anything. It's a mystery. But others are happy to.

In any case, the main point of the proposal is the cap on sec loss, so people can dip in and out of lowsec without having to rat their brains out. The second part, making more people "flashy" was actually to keep the one advantage being -10 has now, the chance of getting the occasional sentry-free fight.

Quote:
Second, why does everyone insist that low sec needs more pvp? It already accounts for 30% of PVP in the game, hotzones already rival the 0.0 hotzones in terms of average kills/day, and even the quiet systems see more traffic than the quietest 0.0 systems. All the verifable data says that low is doing just fine, even though all the forum warrior data tells a different story.

That only tells me that 0.0 needs some fixing, too Smile But I'm curious about the distribution of those kills. How many of those kills are from pure gatecamps? How many are concentrated in the FW areas?

Lowsec is not as broken as other people want you to believe. I enjoy it more than I do 0.0 gangs. But the fun, memorable fights, are not common enough. I just want to turn it up a bit, get more random small gangs coming through.

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
#50 - 2011-12-09 14:39:49 UTC
Man I love it when the ladies gush on and on about me after I leave.

<3 to you all too but it is not meant to be.

My space-boyfriend would be really mad.

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#51 - 2011-12-09 15:08:53 UTC
Zircon Dasher wrote:
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
3) yet they can magically prevent you from setting up a POS without the proper standings and licenses?

lolWut?


Last I heard, lowsec still required starbase charters and empire standings to anchor a POS, the same as 0.5 - 0.7. I've always wondered...who enforces that, since there are no patrols by the empire?

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Zircon Dasher
#52 - 2011-12-09 15:10:12 UTC
Zirse wrote:
Berendas wrote:
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.
.


I live in nullsec. I simply think that this is a good idea. Where someone resides in a vidya game has zero weight on their opinion. Zircon is a moron on his own accord.


I live in empire and think all 0.0 logistics should have to be done with frieghters. Derp.

Ignorance makes it easy to think bad ideas are really good.

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
Zircon Dasher
#53 - 2011-12-09 15:11:45 UTC
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
Zircon Dasher wrote:
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
3) yet they can magically prevent you from setting up a POS without the proper standings and licenses?

lolWut?


Last I heard, lowsec still required starbase charters and empire standings to anchor a POS, the same as 0.5 - 0.7. I've always wondered...who enforces that, since there are no patrols by the empire?


They do not require standings and charters.

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
#54 - 2011-12-09 15:12:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Jack Dant
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
Last I heard, lowsec still required starbase charters and empire standings to anchor a POS, the same as 0.5 - 0.7. I've always wondered...who enforces that, since there are no patrols by the empire?

This was only in 0.4, not in deeper lowsec, and it was removed 2-3 expansions ago.

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
#55 - 2011-12-09 15:23:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Zircon Dasher
Berendas wrote:
but Zircon is just one of those bleating lambs who wants the devs' attention to be on all null sec, all the time. He came into a thread about a low sec fix trying to champion 0.0 buffs Roll


Maybe if you read the the link you would have figured out the obvious. Low sec doesnt need to be fixed. All this thread wants is consequence free pvp without going to 0.0.

If this thread asked for something reasonable, like decreasing the granularity in the multiplier, I would have supported it. This idea is ******** though. It is not in keeping with EVE philosophy, it does nothing to incentize the groups it claims to incentivize, and gives the "I want EVE to be FPS" crowd cookies.

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
#56 - 2011-12-09 15:47:21 UTC
Oh, finally you gave something ressembling a reasoning.

Zircon Dasher wrote:
Maybe if you read the the link you would have figured out the obvious. Low sec doesnt need to be fixed. All this thread wants is consequence free pvp without going to 0.0.

There is no consequence free pvp in eve. Ship losses take care of that. But ignoring that, I'd argue why lowsec should have those consequences, and not highsec wardecs or 0.0 ratter ganks.

Quote:
If this thread asked for something reasonable, like decreasing the granularity in the multiplier, I would have supported it.

Do elaborate, please.

Quote:
This idea is ******** though. It is not in keeping with EVE philosophy,

Why does EVE philosophy apply to lowsec, but not highsec or 0.0?

Quote:
it does nothing to incentize the groups it claims to incentivize,

Removing a punishment is pretty much the same as adding an incentive.

Quote:
and gives the "I want EVE to be FPS" crowd cookies.

Mmm... cookies.

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
#57 - 2011-12-09 16:36:43 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Phantom
Jack Dant wrote:
Oh, finally you gave something ressembling a reasoning.


With the exception of me calling troll the reasons are there. Are you suggesting that I need to spoon feed more? I still call troll btw. Plenty of people live/ PVP in lowsec without relying on alts to feed them ships and modules.

Quote:
I'd argue why lowsec should have those consequences, and not highsec wardecs


If you are shooting WTs then there is no consequence in lowsec either.

Quote:
Do elaborate, please .


What part is unclear?

Quote:
Why does EVE philosophy apply to lowsec, but not highsec or 0.0?


Shoot non WT's in highsec. What happens to your security? The gradual diminuation of severity as system security decreases is constant. So what are you on about?


Edit: Inappropriate part removed, CCP Phantom

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#58 - 2011-12-09 16:47:41 UTC
Jack Dant wrote:
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
Last I heard, lowsec still required starbase charters and empire standings to anchor a POS, the same as 0.5 - 0.7. I've always wondered...who enforces that, since there are no patrols by the empire?

This was only in 0.4, not in deeper lowsec, and it was removed 2-3 expansions ago.

Figures. It was a 0.4 I was trying to set up in, and it probably got patched away shortly after and I missed it in the patch notes.

Still, some documentation I read somewhere gave me the idea it was all lowsec that needed charters.

Another case of Eve utterly lacking good, clear documentation and relying on fan sites to provide users with information.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
#59 - 2011-12-09 17:05:55 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Phantom
Zircon Dasher wrote:
With the exception of me calling troll the reasons are there. Are you suggesting that I need to spoon feed more? I still call troll btw. Plenty of people live/ PVP in lowsec without relying on alts to feed them ships and modules.

You still haven't said how. I have given the reasons why it's not feasible. Prove me wrong.

Quote:
What part is unclear?

Let's start with the granularity of which multiplier.

Quote:
The gradual diminuation of severity as system security decreases is constant. So what are you on about?

It's not really constant. In highsec, you lose ship and sec, in lowsec you lose sec and risk losing your ship (try engaging in a frig under sentries), in 0.0 you get neither.

So if you remove the punishments from PVP, you won't get carebears to PVP, but some of the closet PVPers who run back to highsec every time they approach -2 will stay in lowsec.

Edit: Inappropriate part removed, CCP Phantom

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
#60 - 2011-12-09 18:07:03 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Phantom
Jack Dant wrote:
I have given the reasons why it's not feasible. Prove me wrong.


You replied to a post that showed how ffs. Loot, market, industrial corps and traders, friends.

Quote:
Let's start with the granularity of which multiplier


This thread is about sec status right? Might I be speaking of the multiplier to sec loss?

Quote:
It's not really constant. In highsec, you lose ship and sec, in lowsec you lose sec and risk losing your ship (try engaging in a frig under sentries), in 0.0 you get neither


Well since you stated you were ignoring ship losses and a generous context to the entire thread is sec status, it is constant. SO again.... what are you on about?

Quote:
but some of the closet PVPers who run back to highsec every time they approach -2 will stay in lowsec.


This seems like a strange justification. If they are running back to highsec because thier sec status is low, but would stay if thier sec status was not in danger, then I can only surmise that you think they are going back to highsec to gain sec. No doubt some people will, but only because they do not know it is faster to grind in lowsec. It seems more probable that they are going back to highsec because they think they can make more ISK there. If this is correct, then they will not stay in lowsec any longer than they already do.

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.