Capitals in Hisec? Well, Sorta

The key differences IMHO between this topic and others is the serious counters that go with it.

Without those this would be just another HighSecROFLStompSoloFarmingMoblie idea.

Except #4, that is just a loophole IMHO.

Ewwwww…how dare they do that to my beautiful thread :joy:

Bronson did u have something to do with this?

I’m just another capsuleer. That level of thread-fu would take someone at CCP.

1 Like

Just read an interesting piece about how the EvE economy is always in accretion (i.e. building more stuff than it destroys).

Want to see more stuff get destroyed? Let it into hisec! (At least somewhat, as per my OP)

(It’s worth noting that I didn’t have to update the “lore” section of my OP. If anything, Triglavians and Drifters are being far more aggressive now then when I posted, which makes this change all the more sensible from a lore standpoint.)

If you ever played on the test server you would know that CONCORD effectively one shots a titan. So how again would a carrier or dread be able to survive?

1 Like

why ? you can use carrier and dread in low and you can dock in low then what is the point of changing the rules for them to get to high so you can get it to jita and sell it ? you can just take a lowsec system that are in the jita region it will still show up on market

Jita is a 0.9 system, so under my proposal capital ships still wouldn’t be able to enter. Of the current trade hubs, only Hek would be accessible, but it’s possible that new trade hubs would spring up in 0.7 and lower systems near existing hubs, and the competition to get those hubs started would be interesting.

There’s more to this than the market aspects, but that’s definitely part of it.

Giving this a bump in light of he announcement of the upcoming cyno changes.

Given that capitals will be less useful and less mobile outside of hisec, why not let them operate there under limited circumstances?

On a practical point of view I see lots of development time for a feature that would be used by a few, maybe.
I’m not CCP but it’s not hard to see how little consideration this proposal will have just from a cost/benefit point of view.

Btw, I’m against caps in high sec.

In terms of development time, I can’t see how this would take long. There is already some mechanic for the servers to determine which ships can jump through which gates and altering that wouldn’t likely take long. The biggest time sink would likely be updating CONCORD responses to make sure that they’d be appropriate for capital ships.

As for cost/benefit, they seem to be taking steps to “shake things up” (a concept that I generally dislike, but hey, CCP is running with it) and there’s a broad consensus that seeing more capital ships get blown up would be good for the game (both in terms of player retention and in reducing the economic impact that having a huge cache of capital ships is having on the game). My proposal is in line with both of these concepts; allowing capital ships access to more of New Eden would only increase the number of them that get destroyed.

I’m definitely not in favor of supers, titans, or rorqs in hisec. And I’m not even in favor of capitals in all of hisec or even having easy access to hisec. So we’re not too far apart in terms of our views I think.

I’ve read some pretty good posts in this thread, as far as I’m able to judge. I think the idea of allowing capital/supercapital ships in hisec could possibly be a good one, so long as the pilot met certain criteria. Requiring them to have a very good standing with the empire whose space they’re entering is a must, and possibly a good security rating and/or militia status as well.

There would obviously be a need for additional restrictions, such as where the ship is allowed to go, when it would be permitted to open fire, etc. Anyone flying a capital ship through empire space would need to be on their best behavior to avoid having it taken away from them, either by getting CONCORDOKKEN’d or having their capsule ignominiously ejected so the empire can confiscate the capital ship.

Personally, I like the second idea better for two reasons:

  1. It would make (some) sense from a lore perspective; the empire in question would be getting a free capital ship for their own fleet while the individual who thought rules didn’t apply to them is publically humiliated for their actions.

  2. The thought of some fool who really should have known better raging over local as the NPCs publically confiscate (hijack?) their multi-billion ISK ship is profoundly amusing to me.

Minmatar Admiral: Now I have a Revenant. Ho ho ho.

Dumbass Player: (incoherent screams of rage)

1 Like

I’m in favor of rorquals, supers, and titans in highsec. And they should have free access through gates. To restrict them on mechanics of standings and other things is foolish. No other area of the game except wormholes, and this restriction is because of the inherent weakness of the wormhole itself, has ship restriction. I would rather not have capitals in highsec, then have capitals be so handicaped as your proposal wants them to be.

The best changes are drastic changes. Many people advocated for delayed local or other sort of nerf to local. CCP decided to simply remove it completely like in wormhole space. Drastic change is good, slight change filled with annoyances is not.

As much as the thought of that happening puts a smile on my face, I feel like the whole “forced ejection” mechanic is too much work for what could effectively be accomplished with CONCORD.

Agreed. I much like other suggestions that I’ve seen in order to help balance the introduction of capitals, especially the higher end supercarriers and titans into highsec by changing some mechanics that CCP themselves favor. For example, the removal of fax, and the introduction of a specific capital hunter killer ship class that is effectively a dreadnought on steroids, but very weak against sub capitals.

That mechanic would never work in the lore, since if capsuleers cannot control their ships, why would they go to highsec? The only faction that can effectively remote cripple our ships and cause them to die in only a few shots is CONCORD, and they only do this if their sensors detect criminal activity. Effectively, you consent to having your ship destroyed if you decide to stray from the decorum of highsec, yet only in highsec. So let CONCORD keep their advanced technology, and if a capsuleer acts up and bullies other capsuleers, let CONCORD take his revenant away in pieces.

Well, even though I agree with the idea that force auxiliaries are bad for the game’s long-term health I also believe it would be a crying shame for those beautiful hulls to be taken out completely. This got me thinking of what they might be used for, and I was at a loss for what that might be until I noticed a physical trait that every single FAX had in common.

They were all vertical.

The moment I realized this, my brain instantly connected EvE’s force auxiliaries to another vertical ship from a much-beloved sci-fi game:

Adagio for Strings

Ladies and gentlemen, we have our motherships.

Now, I’m well aware that there’s going to be more to fixing this situation than just slapping a new name on the hulls and calling it a day, but I’ve been brainstorming various ways a mothership-type vessel could be added to the game, and I’ll elaborate on these ideas when schooling ends for the day.

theres already massive rules against cap ship use in high sec, if you so much as use 1 for combat youll be banned.

Well we recommend changing it so it can be used for pvp. Why not have FAX limited to low/null, but allow all other supercarriers and titans and caps to use highsec gates?

Titans, supers, and Rorqs in hisec would be fundamentally game breaking I suspect. The fact that I’m already suggesting such heavy restrictions on lowly dreads and carriers speaks to that.

1 Like