# Players Requested idea's ((Life In Empire)) **URL:** \ **Category:** Player Features & Ideas\ **Created:** [April 17, 2018, 8:41pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/players-requested-ideas-life-in-empire/70358 "2018-04-17T20:41:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Lugh\_Crow-Slave](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/lugh_crow-slave/32/441552_2.png) [@Lugh\_Crow-Slave](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Lugh_Crow-Slave)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 3:43am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/players-requested-ideas-life-in-empire/70358/21 "2018-04-19T03:43:07Z")
that literally has 0 to do with this discussion as it has nothing to do with the core themes of eve ---
**Author:** ![Alopex-Lagopus](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/alopex-lagopus/32/407823_2.png) [@Alopex-Lagopus](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Alopex-Lagopus)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 3:54am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/players-requested-ideas-life-in-empire/70358/22 "2018-04-19T03:54:14Z")
> [@Lugh\_Crow-Slave](#): > > that literally has 0 to do with this discussion as it has nothing to do with the core themes of eve It has everything to do with the discussion… > [@Lugh\_Crow-Slave](#): > > to be fair the new space they are adding is going to be 100% safe from players because some one at eve hit their head and forgot one of the selling points was single server single shard and no place safe. then they made a 100% private instanced of area You bring up 100% safe… I’ll give you 100% safe. XD > [@Alopex-Lagopus](#): > > Ever heard of removing the firing pins? > > It is making weapons safe for inspections in the military, specifically for naval guns, but the principal carry’s over across all branches. > > All Capsuleer IFFs are lock disabled. > > AKA: Wepons disabled towards other players while in that system. > > Ever gone to some of the bars in more rural parts of America? > > They have gun check ins at the front before you are allowed in to the bar. > > Same principal. ROFL ---
**Author:** ![Lugh\_Crow-Slave](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/lugh_crow-slave/32/441552_2.png) [@Lugh\_Crow-Slave](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Lugh_Crow-Slave)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 4:56am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/players-requested-ideas-life-in-empire/70358/23 "2018-04-19T04:56:04Z")
not a single example you gave is 100% and thinking those examples are gets ppl killed ---
**Author:** ![Alopex-Lagopus](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/alopex-lagopus/32/407823_2.png) [@Alopex-Lagopus](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Alopex-Lagopus)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 5:32am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/players-requested-ideas-life-in-empire/70358/24 "2018-04-19T05:32:03Z")
> [@Lugh\_Crow-Slave](#): > > not a single example you gave is 100% and thinking those examples are gets ppl killed I’ll point you here. 🙂 > [@Alopex-Lagopus](#): > > All Capsuleer IFFs are lock disabled. > > AKA: Wepons disabled towards other players while in that system. I know I’m a bit all over the place, but I did cover that. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Lugh\_Crow-Slave](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/lugh_crow-slave/32/441552_2.png) [@Lugh\_Crow-Slave](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Lugh_Crow-Slave)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 5:33am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/players-requested-ideas-life-in-empire/70358/25 "2018-04-19T05:33:57Z")
smart bombs don’t require locks and are not directed towards anything… so even that fails. but that wasn’t the examples being talked about ---
**Author:** ![Alopex-Lagopus](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/alopex-lagopus/32/407823_2.png) [@Alopex-Lagopus](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Alopex-Lagopus)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 5:39am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/players-requested-ideas-life-in-empire/70358/26 "2018-04-19T05:39:34Z")
(edited) Smart bombs are not allowed in empire space without repercussions as is, so it is irrelevant. ---
**Author:** ![Scipio\_Artelius](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/scipio_artelius/32/408264_2.png) [@Scipio\_Artelius](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Scipio_Artelius)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 5:41am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/players-requested-ideas-life-in-empire/70358/27 "2018-04-19T05:41:12Z")
Yes they are Bombs, that are launched from a bomb launcher, are not usable in Highsec or Lowsec, but they are not smartbombs. Smartbombs can be used just fine. ---
**Author:** ![Lugh\_Crow-Slave](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/lugh_crow-slave/32/441552_2.png) [@Lugh\_Crow-Slave](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Lugh_Crow-Slave)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 5:42am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/players-requested-ideas-life-in-empire/70358/28 "2018-04-19T05:42:00Z")
holy ■■■■… you don’t even know basics about this game no wonder your ideas are such crap and don’t understand points people make. smart bombs are indeed useable in HS play the game a little more then come back ---
**Author:** ![Uriel\_the\_Flame](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/uriel_the_flame/32/490165_2.png) [@Uriel\_the\_Flame](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Uriel_the_Flame)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 5:49am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/players-requested-ideas-life-in-empire/70358/29 "2018-04-19T05:49:50Z")
Can confirm from personal experience that smartbombs are allowed in hi-sec, intentionally flown into them several times to get the smartbomb user who was either dueling, attacking a suspect/criminal or war target concordokken and also get a killright to sell in the process. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Black\_Pedro](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/black_pedro/32/257285_2.png) [@Black\_Pedro](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Black_Pedro)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 5:50am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/players-requested-ideas-life-in-empire/70358/30 "2018-04-19T05:50:27Z")
> [@Alopex-Lagopus](#): > > All Capsuleer IFFs are lock disabled. > > AKA: Wepons disabled towards other players while in that system. I agree, it’s trivial to make highsec into a safesec now that we have the safety system added in the last CrimeWatch. Just force every players to green when and be done with it. It’s probably one line of code too, yet CCP hasn’t done it. Why? Because that is how the game is suppose to work. You are intended to be at risk to criminals who are allowed to be able to steal your stuff and attack you (and suffer the consequences of that). This is an intentional game design decision. New Eden isn’t rural modern America - it is the Wild West. There are some more pacified areas, and some completely lawless ones, but it is a rough and tumble place where safety is something to have to create for yourself. It’s easy to be near perfectly safe in highsec if you understand the mechanics and are willing to spend any effort. Locking our safeties to green there would just kill all that game play around that removing the profession of highsec criminal, and any reason to pay attention or any chance to experience the unpredictable for everyone else. I see no reason why CCP would want to hamstring their game like that. ---
**Author:** ![Lugh\_Crow-Slave](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/lugh_crow-slave/32/441552_2.png) [@Lugh\_Crow-Slave](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Lugh_Crow-Slave)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 5:54am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/players-requested-ideas-life-in-empire/70358/31 "2018-04-19T05:54:35Z")
we can’t expect him to understand that when he doesn’t even understand basic weapon restrictions yet ---
**Author:** ![anas\_moraished](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/anas_moraished/32/135612_2.png) [@anas\_moraished](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/anas_moraished)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 9:44am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/players-requested-ideas-life-in-empire/70358/32 "2018-04-19T09:44:02Z")
I agree with the Drone repair and with the hiddin belts to be chossen. ---
**Author:** ![Ameko\_Tanaka](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/ameko_tanaka/32/62894_2.png) [@Ameko\_Tanaka](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Ameko_Tanaka)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 12:47pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/players-requested-ideas-life-in-empire/70358/33 "2018-04-19T12:47:44Z")
1. Making all asteroid belts like ice belts would just clutter the system scan and improve nothing about the gameplay - you would just have to look for your target asteroids in another place. 2. Even though it would be logical that repair drones could do that (what reasonable explanation stops a drone from repairing yourself as well in addition to just any other target), it would lead to another balancing nightmare - for self-repair, there already are armor repair modules, shield boosters etc. 3. There already are belts. Big bodies like moons and planets would be unlikely - they rightfully just pop up easily on eve hight tech ship sensors - hidden objects would be required to have a really low mass. A small planetoid, rogue asteroid, comet etc. might be something - sure, more exciting stuff to find in scans would of course be nice. More secret/hidden stuff always is 🙂 4. I’m with Alopex-Lagopus on this one. NOT Concord - but having faction forces to hop in and save their friend would be something I could imagine (hopefully earlier than Concord). But standing would have to be REALLY high for the faction forces to care - or to care quicker than Concord would respond. I mean why bother if Concord will be there in a few seconds anyway? 😛 Let them deal with the paperwork. 5. Definitely not - high sec already is as safe as it gets. I would understand something like this for just for the very few starter systems exclusively - and even then just for really, really new pilots. But I doubt this would improve anything atm. 6. I’d prefer a system where the NPC corp would take measures against any offenders in their ranks. They also have some reputation (more or less) and want to keep some kind of integrity, right? So why tolerate repeat offenders in their ranks? Aren’t there pirate factions for these types? Whether moving these pilots there would mark them as free to be shot at is another matter … (there already is sec rating). And I bet a lot of pilots would even embrace this opportunity to become members of the Angel Cartel etc. so easily. 7. Nope, no capitals in high sec. You could maybe argue just for the rorqual alone because it can be considered to be a “civilian” ship - under these circumstances it _might_ be the only allowed capital - IF it’s combat abilities would be nerfed, and maybe some other things that were meant for low/null anyway, oh wait, now it’s an Orca … 😛 If you think it through to the end, allowing capitals to high would have a huge impact - dreads to shoot player stations, really mean gatecamps on the main routes between the empires, and much more. ---
**Author:** ![Alopex-Lagopus](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/alopex-lagopus/32/407823_2.png) [@Alopex-Lagopus](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Alopex-Lagopus)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 8:50pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/players-requested-ideas-life-in-empire/70358/34 "2018-04-19T20:50:51Z")
> [@Ameko\_Tanaka](#): > > I’m with Alopex-Lagopus on this one. NOT Concord - but having faction forces to hop in and save their friend would be something I could imagine (hopefully earlier than Concord). But standing would have to be REALLY high for the faction forces to care - or to care quicker than Concord would respond. I mean why bother if Concord will be there in a few seconds anyway? 😛 Let them deal with the paperwork. Ok, so I’ll keep that Idea on the table and see if I can come up with a workable rough draft model. > [@Ameko\_Tanaka](#): > > I’d prefer a system where the NPC corp would take measures against any offenders in their ranks. They also have some reputation (more or less) and want to keep some kind of integrity, right? So why tolerate repeat offenders in their ranks? Aren’t there pirate factions for these types? Whether moving these pilots there would mark them as free to be shot at is another matter … (there already is sec rating). And I bet a lot of pilots would even embrace this opportunity to become members of the Angel Cartel etc. so easily. That might work well with tying in with empire standings and response! 😃 > [@Ameko\_Tanaka](#): > > Nope, no capitals in high sec. Dang no slipping a Veldnaught in this time… ☹ ---
**Author:** ![James\_Zimmer](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/james_zimmer/32/475633_2.png) [@James\_Zimmer](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/James_Zimmer)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2018, 6:04pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/players-requested-ideas-life-in-empire/70358/35 "2018-04-20T18:04:06Z")
As a general statement, I would say that these ideas are not necessarily bad, but they need some reasons. Explaining a problem, or something that could be made better and then explaining how your idea does that is a lot more effective than a laundry list of items that you want. **–\> Removal of belts from bookmarks and add them in local scan. Like ice belts.** I think it needs to be easy for new players in high sec to get to mining stuff, though I wouldn’t mind a separate category that requires scan. That being said, I don’t think it adds a whole lot to the game either other than a bit of logistical hassle. The only thing I could see this for is a way to combat botting, since I imagine it’s harder for a bot to scan things. **–\> Repair drones which allows you to repair yourself with them.** This should be everywhere. I’ve always found it annoying that I can’t use my repair drones to repair myself. **–\> Add hidden belts, moons and planets which are not booked marked.** I think this could be fun, if added in a lore-centric way where going to these places tells a story, unlocks unique missions etc. **–\> Paying concord to react faster to you for systems rated 0.7 or higher. (From few secs to instant)** No thanks. You can already influence Concord by doing something naughty and causing their fleet to show up and hang out for a while. The cost is in sec status rather than isk, but it serves the same purpose. **–\> Safe Zone systems, you can’t lock anyone why in this solar systems.** **(must war deck the target player in order to shoot them in these systems.)** Maybe for newb systems, though CCP is already pretty aggressive toward people who do bad things in newb systems, so I’m not sure if it’s needed, otherwise, it’s just too risk adverse. **–\> War deck systems which allows you to target anyone as single player to just stru.** **(players in newbie corps can’t gank anyone)** I’m not completely certain what this means, but if it means you can wardec individuals than no thank you. I do think wardecs need some serious work, since right now, they are used to either farm kills on trade routes or to seal-club new player corps. IMO, the former is boring, but not broken, but the later is detrimental to the game. Allowing people to wardec individuals would almost certainly result in new players being wardeced all the time, which would be horrible for the game. **–\> Allow small class capitals in empire: carriers, dreads and rorquals in 0.5 systems.** I don’t fly capitals yet, so I’ll leave this up to people who know more than me. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/original/3X/4/1/41ec4921cbaca7a6f9ea556e7cc20018461eae5e.png) [@system](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2018, 6:04pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/players-requested-ideas-life-in-empire/70358/36 "2018-07-19T18:04:07Z")
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed. [Previous page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/players-requested-ideas-life-in-empire/70358.md?page=1)