These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Low-sec Hopes and Changes

Author
Henry Plantgenet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#41 - 2017-03-10 15:24:49 UTC
How i would fix lowsec:
Make gate guns remember who they were shooting at and give them smarter AI.
Dissentivize bigger blobs somehow.
Dissentivize kiting with snake set mordus ships.



PVE wise lowsec is the best in eve. (with exception of sov anomalies, truesec burners in -1.0, and
They get all the ore anomalies you can get in NPC high,low and null with all the ores., they get 4-6/10s (cruiser deadspace mods are best); the difficulty is high but meh balans.
The belts have no high end ores but they have faction, hauler, mordus, and clone soldier spawns which is lots of farming opportunities.
Level 5 missions.
Faction warfare farms. (the PVP aspect is sov lite.)

Overcrowding is a player issue and can be very hard to balans because you're trying to balans features with utility functions that vary from individual to individual and may not always be logical, efficient or something like that.
Trying to balans for players always ends in disgruntled players.
Can always get worse with bubbles :) Imagine lowsec with bubbles. Now forget about it.
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#42 - 2017-03-10 15:33:30 UTC
Henry Plantgenet wrote:

Dissentivize kiting with snake set mordus ships.



This is accomplished by just nerfing mordus ships. From the day it was designed, it was obvious it would be a WTFKITEPWNMOBILE.
Pleasure Hub Node-514
Pleasure Hub Hotline
#43 - 2017-03-10 15:43:48 UTC
Hir Miriel wrote:
I've never been much good at all the different types of sex, safe sex is the best I'm told, others say that's too boring.

All the different types makes me very confused, just build a wall and leave the undesirables on the other side.

At the moment it doesn't really matter though, playing Alpha because I don't really like paying for secs.

Do you like aggressive engagement? I enjoy red safety lights and golden pod debris showers.Oops

'One night hauler' The tell all story of a pleasure bot in Jita 4-4

nezroy
Nice Clan
#44 - 2017-03-10 16:06:48 UTC  |  Edited by: nezroy
End-game HS content (i.e. L4 agents & incursions) should be moved exclusively to high-sec islands. The LP payouts from these activities should be converted to the equivalent of sleeper's blue loot. NPC orders/LP store agents that will buy/convert that loot will only exist in contiguous high-sec space, requiring it to be moved across the low-sec pipes. EDIT: This also has the added benefit of allowing direct market trading of LP, for those that don't want to figure out the current optimal cash out.

Meanwhile, disallow cynos in 0.4 systems. Make every low-sec system a 0.4 system if it is directly next to a high-sec system, and all other low-sec systems 0.3 or lower. No more perfectly invulnerable JF's logistics to high sec. This will help fix null too, while we're at it. Risk free JF logistics has been a bane on EVE for a while now...
Torin Corax
Iron Inquisition
Hisec Miners
#45 - 2017-03-10 16:32:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Torin Corax
Personally I'd like to see the following in low sec.

Create more "fast" content in low sec. By this I mean basic PvE that is relatively quick to complete and which can give a (semi) reliable return on the time invested. In my experience one of the most popular activities ( outside of FW) in low is exploration, this is primarily because it can be done with small, fast and cloaky ships, which allows for reasonable survivability. This is an area I think could be built upon in low sec to encourage PvE activities....the more PvE in low, the more oportunity for PvP.

Moving Lvl 4's to low sec is largely pointless, way too much risk involved to be worthwhile in most areas. Add in the predictability of location ( agent location/ stations etc.) and it's just going to be too much hassle...may as well run lvl 3's in HS. Perhaps moving all Burner missions to low sec could be looked at though, again this would be more in keeping with small fast ships, possibly in gangs, with slightly improved rewards.

Base-line mineral changes- I'd go for nerfing HS mining across the board, with perhaps only Veld/ scor available in high sec.
This however would only be useful if ore size was looked at for the rarer ores (only available in low/ null) to, again, allow for more efficient mining in smaller ships ( looking straight at the mining frig family here). I'd even go so far as to ask for Mercoxit spawns in low sec, in small quantities, to make for a more exciting/ interesting mining experience in low sec. Low-sec mining could then be a get in- get out fast activity with a decent pay-off, even after lost time due to dodging hunters is factored in.

Ultimately I enjoy Low sec at the moment, but I'm fully aware that my decision to base (most) of my isk making there is hampering my efficiency....this is a decision that I made to allow for a more interesting and engaging PvE/ PvP experince....However, that choice is not for everyone. I am fully aware that I could very easily earn considerably more isk/ hour in high sec with almost no risk or effort whatsoever beyond the need to stave off boredom.

That is the problem, HS is just too profitable for the safety it affords. There is no incentive to got to low sec, with the possible exception of dedicated explorers, to make isk.... this needs to be changed. HS PvE should be the worst isk source in the game, not amongst the most reliable and effective.

Focusing on activities that allow for greater profits for small, fast and survivable ships is imo the way to go for low sec. Newer players may then decide low sec is worth a go because they don't need a blingy BS to make decent isk, or to exceed HS Lvl 4 income with relative ease.

Oh, if CCP want to remove Capitals from low sec ( except JF's) I'm ok with that...I hate caps P
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#46 - 2017-03-10 16:44:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
After thinking about it some more, in hindsight I'm not necessarily opposed to some of the changes being suggested. Relocating L4 agents, Incursions and Ice belts to low-sec might be what is desperately needed for EVE. The active player count is moving in the wrong direction and this could very well be due to players becoming complacent in high-sec. You can literally match null-sec ratting income and easily exceed low-sec income through Incursions and L4 blitzing/Burners.

I do think that in order to work supercapitals and possibly even capitals (excluding industrials) need to be restricted or banned from operating in low-sec. Transit might be ok but this could also be heavily abused.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#47 - 2017-03-10 16:53:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
After thinking about it some more, in hindsight I'm not necessarily opposed to some of the changes being suggested. Relocating L4 agents, Incursions and Ice belts to low-sec might be what is desperately needed for EVE. The active player count is moving in the wrong direction and this could very well be due to players becoming complacent in high-sec. You can literally match null-sec ratting income and easily exceed low-sec income through Incursions and L4 blitzing/Burners.


I've never supported such ideas, trying to force people who are in a voluntary situation (in this case, a video game) to do somehting never works and just builds resentment. High Sec needs adjusting not killing.

I've said it before when talking about Incursions. It's not a problem that high sec incursions exist, it's a problem that they are so good that many incursions runners are in fact alts of low sec and null sec players who use it as a safe way to generate a huge income instead of generating income in their own space where they would at least be vulnerable to counter play. The irony is that "High Sec Incursions" aren't really high sec pve content, they are NULL SEC PVE CONTENT , because that's where the money goes...

The same principle applies to all of high sec. In a more balanced situation many people would still choose high sec because they are casual and don't have much time to play or they aren't interested in spending time dodging the kinds of pvp that happen outside high sec. Nothing wrong with that, the problem is that high sec is so easy and profitable enough that it attracts people who otherwise WOULD have gone to low/null/WH space but don't because there is literally no need.

Everytime I say the above, high sec partisans reject it, but that's just because they are dumb. What I've been saying for years is NOT that high seccers need to be forced out of high, but that NON-high sec players shouldn't be tempted to play in high sec because it's too good to ignore.
Torin Corax
Iron Inquisition
Hisec Miners
#48 - 2017-03-10 17:03:46 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:


I've said it before when talking about Incursions. It's not a problem that high sec incursions exist, it's a problem that they are so good that many incursions runners are in fact alts of low sec and null sec players who use it as a safe way to generate a huge income instead of generating income in their own space where they would at least be vulnerable to counter play. The irony is that "High Sec Incursions" aren't really high sec pve content, they are NULL SEC PVE CONTENT , because that's where the money goes...

The same principle applies to all of high sec. In a more balanced situation many people would still choose high sec because they are casual and don't have much time to play or they aren't interested in spending time dodging the kinds of pvp that happen outside high sec. Nothing wrong with that, the problem is that high sec is so easy and profitable enough that it attracts people who otherwise WOULD have gone to low/null/WH space but don't because there is literally no need.


Very true this ^

Was certainly the case when I was living in Null...most of my corp at the time either used alts or Jump clones for HS incursion running, the payout was far too good to miss out on. Why on earth risk null sec PvE ( even with decent intel and defence fleets) when you could just alt+tab and make stupid amounts of isk in high sec incursions.
MadMuppet
Critical Mass Inc
#49 - 2017-03-10 17:03:53 UTC
In a way, someplace in EVE is going to be the crappiest place to live, so might as well leave it low-sec. Unless the blob mentality can be addressed, the big groups will kick everybody in the teeth and the solo players will run and hide a lot.

I hate DSCAN and that it the primary reason I hate hanging out in low-sec. Constantly clicking a box and reading a list while doing something is very immersion breaking and tedious. I would prefer a active/passive radar system instead, but that would make for a full rewrite of code, so forget that idea for now. In WH and Null it isn't as bad since it is more laid back, but in Low, being mostly transit systems, it is game breaking just enough to not make me want to go and hang out there.


This message brought to you by Experience(tm). When common sense fails you, experience will come to the rescue. Experience(tm) from the makers of CONCORD.

"If you are part of the problem, you will be nerfed." -MadMuppet

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#50 - 2017-03-10 17:08:56 UTC
Torin Corax wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:


I've said it before when talking about Incursions. It's not a problem that high sec incursions exist, it's a problem that they are so good that many incursions runners are in fact alts of low sec and null sec players who use it as a safe way to generate a huge income instead of generating income in their own space where they would at least be vulnerable to counter play. The irony is that "High Sec Incursions" aren't really high sec pve content, they are NULL SEC PVE CONTENT , because that's where the money goes...

The same principle applies to all of high sec. In a more balanced situation many people would still choose high sec because they are casual and don't have much time to play or they aren't interested in spending time dodging the kinds of pvp that happen outside high sec. Nothing wrong with that, the problem is that high sec is so easy and profitable enough that it attracts people who otherwise WOULD have gone to low/null/WH space but don't because there is literally no need.


Very true this ^

Was certainly the case when I was living in Null...most of my corp at the time either used alts or Jump clones for HS incursion running, the payout was far too good to miss out on. Why on earth risk null sec PvE ( even with decent intel and defence fleets) when you could just alt+tab and make stupid amounts of isk in high sec incursions.


That changed a bit when CCP made changes that made carrier ratting wayyyy more lucrative, but carrier ratting is still mainly the province of the bigger alliances that can counter drop anything strong enough to kill carriers. That's why the bounty isk faucet exploded like it did.

But yea, the guys in the smaller sov null alliances and in low sec that I know all still have incursion alts.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#51 - 2017-03-10 17:17:15 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
I've never supported such ideas, trying to force people who are in a voluntary situation (in this case, a video game) to do somehting never works and just builds resentment. High Sec needs adjusting not killing.

Except every time you buff null-sec it gets abused to h*ll, so the only real solution at this point is to nerf high-sec income so that ther's an actual incentive to move beyond high-sec. There's also no way to prevent null-sec alts from abusing high-sec income mechanics, either - which is another reason high-sec income needs to be nerfed.

Strange how every time one looks at a broken aspect of the game it's always being unduly influenced or outright f*cked over by null-sec. CSM monopoly... null-sec. Power creep... null-sec. High/low-sec space abuse... null-sec. Mining abuse... null-sec. it would be really interesting to see what would happen if null-sec players (and their alts) were actually forced to live and work out of null-sec...

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Torin Corax
Iron Inquisition
Hisec Miners
#52 - 2017-03-10 17:39:57 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:

Except every time you buff null-sec it gets abused to h*ll, so the only real solution at this point is to nerf high-sec income so that ther's an actual incentive to move beyond high-sec. There's also no way to prevent null-sec alts from abusing high-sec income mechanics, either - which is another reason high-sec income needs to be nerfed.


Agreed.

Quote:
Strange how every time one looks at a broken aspect of the game it's always being unduly influenced or outright f*cked over by null-sec. CSM monopoly... null-sec. Power creep... null-sec. High/low-sec space abuse... null-sec. Mining abuse... null-sec. it would be really interesting to see what would happen if null-sec players (and their alts) were actually forced to live and work out of null-sec...


To be fair, it's the inevitable result of large, organized and dedicated groups....which for the most part is a defining feature of null sec.
There are plenty of HS dwellers abusing the crap out of HS mechanics, but when it comes to numbers Null sec alliances tend to have the upper hand, and in all likelihood they always will. Change the mechanics how you will, those who have the numbers and organization will generally thrive....and I am in no way saying they shouldn't.


Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#53 - 2017-03-10 17:46:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
I'm not saying I'll like it - I won't initially. But I'll find a low-sec corporation to join and pay them a tidy sum for protection so I can continue running the activities I like. It might end up being even safer than high-sec... A lot of players will b*tch and moan - even threaten to quit. But most will adapt and probably be the better for it...

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Lulu Lunette
Savage Moon Society
#54 - 2017-03-10 18:07:49 UTC
Well I have no ideas on how to fix lowsec or any other sec, I have complaints and praise about each but I think other than having the most chance for wormholes, I think lowsec generally just sucks the most.

I was sold on this idea originally that lowsec was a prominent playground for 1v1 types and lowsec piracy types of things. Let me save you a ton of effort and time: It is not. Lowsec is a level 5 mission running alliance thing. The recent article on Crossing Zebras is completely overshadowed by the Rixx:Grath drama - THAT'S LOWSEC!

What I desired for 1v1 Frigate PVP was honestly better suited in nullsec. The most elite kills I got were beheading the rookie fleet tackles in front of their mostly clueless blobby fleets and moonwalking away. Suitonia is the modern day Frigate solo example.

Smile

@lunettelulu7

Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#55 - 2017-03-10 18:59:59 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
I've never supported such ideas, trying to force people who are in a voluntary situation (in this case, a video game) to do somehting never works and just builds resentment. High Sec needs adjusting not killing.

Except every time you buff null-sec it gets abused to h*ll, so the only real solution at this point is to nerf high-sec income so that ther's an actual incentive to move beyond high-sec.
Oh...they'll move beyond high sec all right.

They'll move right out of EVE.

Love it or hate it, high sec needs to have reasonable rewards. High sec players are people, not puppies. If you smack them with a rolled up newspaper, they don't stop peeing on the floor. They find a new place to live that will let them pee on the floor.

And also love it or hate it. EVE can't survive a mass exodus of players, which is essentially what you are suggesting CCP do to itself.

Mr Epeen Cool
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#56 - 2017-03-10 19:09:11 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
I've never supported such ideas, trying to force people who are in a voluntary situation (in this case, a video game) to do somehting never works and just builds resentment. High Sec needs adjusting not killing.

Except every time you buff null-sec it gets abused to h*ll, so the only real solution at this point is to nerf high-sec income so that ther's an actual incentive to move beyond high-sec.
Oh...they'll move beyond high sec all right.

They'll move right out of EVE.

Love it or hate it, high sec needs to have reasonable rewards. High sec players are people, not puppies. If you smack them with a rolled up newspaper, they don't stop peeing on the floor. They find a new place to live that will let them pee on the floor.

And also love it or hate it. EVE can't survive a mass exodus of players, which is essentially what you are suggesting CCP do to itself.

Mr Epeen Cool


What is reasonable for high sec?
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#57 - 2017-03-10 19:13:20 UTC
There has already been a mass exodus of players since Ascension - nevermind the steady decline we've been seeing for the past few years. If EVE is not already at the tipping point it soon will be. Instead of f*cking around with Fozziesov, blundering Citadels and the continued see-saw with capitals (jump fatique, rorqual mining, fighters) - they needed to be focusing on the outstanding issues in the game, ie: NPE, PvE, FW, module/ship tiericide and rebalancing.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#58 - 2017-03-10 19:34:23 UTC
Orakkus wrote:
So, does everyone have their own idea about how to make low-sec good, or have certain ideas/concepts started to get favor with the mass of low-sec players?


I do. Make low sec about making boosters and make smuggling a real thing. When Eve was designed CCP had the idea you could become a smuggler. There was even a skill to make you better at evading customs at the gates. Low sec should be changed to allow creation of "contraband goods" and make developing that smuggling skill a real thing. Maybe even look at creating a mechanism to improve faction with some pirate NPC's to aid in getting the contraband goods. I started out wanting to be a smuggler and have that now dead skill that I wish actually worked as it was intended.

The other thing I'd consider doing with low sec was introduce comets. These would be moving bodies you mined to get moon minerals. Putting them in low sec would make low sec more interesting and mining comets there more challenging since you would also have to deal with folks that would like to explode you will you got you comet goodness.


Vic Jefferson
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#59 - 2017-03-10 19:40:47 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
What is reasonable for high sec?


Lower than low, lower than NPC null, lower than sov-null, lower than WH.

Was I too honest?

They have the right idea with the variable bonuses on the industrial arrays.

The entire game right now is too hinged on big-ticket content with big-ticket objectives, leading the actual number of people with hands on the 'generate content' levers to be really small. CCP keeps making this worse by repeatedly focusing on regions which lend themselves to this sort of play, while whole-sale ignoring regions which should empower small, scrappy entities. Hi-Sec being more profitable than it should be is a band-aid which be painful to remove until they fix Low/NPC null.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?

Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#60 - 2017-03-10 19:42:34 UTC
Another thing I think you could do in low sec. Create a way for a corporation or alliance become "deputies" of Concord in low sec. So they could enforce the "law" in low sec with no consequence and have access to types of fire power to enforce the law. Give the players a path to be "the new sheriffs in town" in some part of low sec.