EVE General Discussion

The problem, is not so much with LS in an of itself, but with the sectors it is sandwiched between as polar opposites, in relation to LS for and from their own ends.

NS has zero permeability restraints on entering LS.
They can jump past the gates, or force an entry through gates with their greater wealth/assets/population.
They can drop a fleet on you in LS if you so much as glance at one of their haulers.
NS JFs, super/caps can enter/exit LS with impunity, and operate within it and past it in both directions by jumping/warping to citadels/stations.

What can HS do from the other direction? Nothing.
Once the NS entity makes it through LS, they are under HS rules, and as safe as can be.
In HS, only a meticulously planned, scouted, complicated and organizationally intensive effort involving many players can hope to even attempt to kill that single target, via suicide gank.

LS is not fulfilling its barrier purpose between HS and NS.

NS owns you in LS, whether you know it or not.

The only reason they havent wiped you out, is because they have greater profits back home in NS, and because they can bypass you entirely.

This is nonsense, NS has been buffed throughout all changes.

THAT is the problem.

While I don't entirely disagree with you, I'd say that there are a fair number of HS players who would move into low sec if it was worth their time to do so. Especially casual players.

From the point of view of a casual ( which I am) HS offers reliable income at low risk, so with limited time to grind it makes earning enough isk to recoup losses far easier. LS may be more fun and interesting, but the isk earning is not as reliable in the short term. I'm ok with that, but a lot of people aren't. If LS PvE didn't put a player at a ridiculous disadvantage against a determined attacker I honestly think more players would do it.

However, with only a few simple changes this could be tested. The first step could be to completely do away with the requirement to dock in order to interact with agents. This gets around the inherent dangers of predictable behavior. The missions themselves ( combat at least) could be tuned towards faster completion, with an emphasis on the use of smaller ships. Mining missions could have the drop-off locations be a "company" Orca/ hauler at a warpable location etc. Same for delivery missions.

I'd even go so far as to be able to accept missions from an agent anywhere within low sec belonging to that agents faction, with the mission spawning in the system which the player is occupying. All this aimed, obviously, at making it trickier to locate a PvE player, but still possible for roaming Pv'P'ers to find, probe and attack if they are quick enough.

It's not always about risk in LS, but about exposure. This is partly why exploration seems to be one of the most popular LS activities, even among new players. Even in a T1 frig with basic fittings exploration can be done, as the players vulnerability windows are relatively small, and with practice can be made smaller still. Yet explorers do get caught and killed regularly, but most come back again. Lvl 4 missions though...unlikely anyone would spend too much time on them as they are now, the exposure factor is just too high to be overcome without a fair bit of support.

As far as mining goes, that would need some serious looking at....far beyond my knowledge to deal with all the potential ramifications. I would like to see a move towards making the mining frigs, T1 and T2, far more profitable in low sec without having to multibox/ refit a prober. This would probably require a complete re-think of the ore distribution, volume and refining though. Extreme care would have to be taken with anything like this.

What about logistic ? No cyno = no jump freighter, am I right?



Comet mining - option to improve mining in low sec without removal of ice from other parts of the universe.

Planet rings mining another option for the same purpose.

Do not break high sec or null sec to push people onto low sec. It will not work. Make low sec more interesting. Make it place to find solo / small gang fights quicker.

Null has seen is good few nerfs too and I expect nerfs to both isk income and exploration fairly soon.

Exploration nerfs are to a vast spread of people, not NS entities themselves.

When I say NS has been buffed throughout all changes, I mean by extension of NS interests, not NS specific nerfs.
Malcanis' Law has not been observed to its fullest.

As an example, you talk about exploration nerfs.
Only noobs run data/relic sites in NS.
The real money is in super/cap ratting and some top level DEDs, and in uninterrupted mining fleets, not to mention the occassional officer modules.

According to Malcani's Law, you should be vociferously against exploration nerfs, as they harm noobs more than super/caps or mass miners

Yet here you are, "expecting them", as somesort of argument that NS would be nerfed by it.
NS wont be nerfed by it (if it happens), only the wide diaspora of small-time players incidentally running relic/data sites in NS, whether blued, or not.

Ok, no cyno in low sec will defenetly mean more fights on gates, probably more fights overall. If that logistic nerf will not also mean less players in low sec, cause no one will want to play in space with such logistic problem.

CCP changed belts in null in sence of asteroid size. Why not change the ice belts size in high sec? Make them hundred of km big, full of very small (like 5-10 ice blocks) ice asteroids. Just make those asteroids unwarpable to. So ship will always have to burn to the next one.

HS incursions may get pay out nerf, but I would not remove them all together. They make high sec more interesting. But of cause they do not need to be that much lucrative.

Both incursion and ice mining nerfs are attempt to make high sec less profitable or even less interesting. I am strongly against complete removing any of implemented and used features, cause it will make game more dull.

Once again - make low sec more interesting, do not make other sec less interesting. There are options, IMHO, how to make low sec source of almost insatnt solo / small gang PVP. That is the place of low sec in EVE universe, IMHO. Not a ISK printing machine. High sec is where you relax, null is where you "work" and fight large blobs for soverenity and low sec for quick fun in small teams, where you do not need to wait hours to get into action.

The reason for exploration nerfs is we need to drastically cut down the number of BPC's dropping as well as mods. Right now there is a huge oversupply. NS would be nerfed in that pirate battleship fleets would no longer be an option.

Ok, so you mean combat exploration in NS.

Yes, I agree with nerfing module/BPC drops in Player NS.

Albeit I would suggest NPC Sov is not affected.
This granulates developed Player Sov, from undevelopable NPC Sov.
(Which as differentiated NPC Sovs, obviously should be the primary source of modules/BPCs related to that regions NPC Sov, as well as LP rewards for running pirate missions)

Ratting will remain lucrative in Player Sov, and combat exploration will be better in NPC Sov.
This is a good friction, equity and choice which also helps populate NPC Sov, as well as distancing contract sale of BPCs to more markets.

None of the proposed changes here make LS more lucrative than NS.