Highsec, lowsec, FW lowsec, NPC null, sov null, j-space, pochven?
Wait, that’s seven…
4 Likes
If lowsec and FW losec has it’s own “category”. I think that hisec islands also should be separated. As they are much different can of worms, compared to your normal hisec life. But a point has been made, regadles.
1 Like
Sounds good to me! Eight! Eight types of space Ah! Ah! Ahhhhh… [cue thunder] </Count von Count>
3 Likes
I’d consider adding minor victory systems to that list.
Thought of it because I recently discovered I have a research agent in one, and I can’t access it to cancel research.
High, low, null and wormhole with varieties thereof falling under these umbrellas. Your statement is irrelevant to the point though other than for you to massage your ego really. Shame because I’ve always thought your responses were well thought out and considered, I’m now disappointed.
No, in fact, there are significant differences between the types of null and the types of lowsec. The rules of structures themselves—which is the thrust of this thread—change in those areas, as they do in Poch, where no new structures can be added.
For example: in sov null, IHUB ownership impacts the time for structure anchoring. In FW low, only the militia that holds the space can anchor them at all. So in very notable ways, these parts of space are different from the more ‘anyone can anchor anything with the normal timers’ versions in NPC null and normal LS.
I’m glad you’ve returned to considered posts with substance. On that basis, would the idea of structure mechanics tailored to these categories of space be better than a one size fit all. Perhaps even limitations on structure types within these areas, could prevent things like the TTT happening.
Just because I sometimes couch my substance in humor doesn’t mean it isn’t there. 
It would depend very much on the specifics. As has been mentioned upthread, KISS is a very significant consideration when it comes to game design and user experience. Complexity isn’t inherently bad, but you have to make sure whatever complexity you add isn’t just making things harder for no real gain. And you have to make sure that that complexity flows as a natural consequence of the differences that give rise to it.
For example, the fact that Medium structures take a week to anchor in hostile space over a certain level of ADM? Once you hear it, it makes sense. It feels right: if the defenders are doing the work to make a system more defensible, then they have more time to react to attempts to establish a beachhead.
For FW, the same thing: if the system is currently held by the enemy Navy, your piddly little attempts to anchor a structure shouldn’t have a chance. And in that case, CCP’s kind of being nice by just not letting you do it. They could just have the controlling navy show up with overwhelming force—say, a full fleet of diamond rats—and blow the thing up literally the moment it’s out of anchoring, so you’re out the ISK.
As for limiting structure types by area, and preventing things like the TTT… don’t kid yourself. The TTT doesn’t function because of the Keepstar. It functions because of the cartel.
A Keepstar’s got a 75,000HP/s damage cap on the armor. For 202M ehp, if you go nuts. That’s 45 minutes of shooting it at damage cap, right?
Well, at 60.5M EHP and a 15K dps damage cap, a Moreau Fortizar takes longer: 66 minutes. And it’s got all of the combat options in highsec that a Keepstar has.
The Keepstar, otoh, is a statement. That’s all it is.The thing that makes it work is that none of the blocs are gonna come and push it over, and if anyone else tries, well, we’ll defend it.
So you won’t stop the cartels that way. You won’t stop them… period. The way to stop them would be to get people to not use it, but most folks in highsec don’t pay attention to the community or the messaging that would tell them to avoid it.
So basically, the exact same reason highsec can’t get off its collective asses to elect CSMs is why it won’t stop the cartels. To do that, you gotta organize.
HOWEVER… that’s getting a bit far afield of the ‘tailored mechanics or one size fits all?’
And to that, again, I have to say that there already is a level of tailoring (no AoE weapons in HS, for example), and that any additional complexity has to feel intuitive once it’s explained the first time. Complexity for its own sake just leads to confusion and frustration, and those encourage people to go be customers of some other game.
Sent off my application today. 
I was thinking along the lines of how ship restrictions are in place in highsec, should we be seeing, and benefitting from, L and XL structures in highsec? Should XL structures be purely for Null and WH with up to L in Low. Having lived in Null and currently High, there doesn’t feel like there is a clear distinction with regards to structures, should there be? Would it create a sense of progression for new players, seeing a Titan for the first time is seen as something special for a new player, perhaps seeing a Keepstar should be the same?
Just throwing stuff at the wall here (clearly).
Astras/raits in hisec and maybe up to forts/azbels in lowsec… with reducing the timers of the already existing structures in hisec to 1 (as are astras atm).
After which we’ll see certain null bloc representatives demanding and explaining how we absolutely need 5 timers and how important this is for the future of the game.
1 Like
This is innaccurate, however in FW low only controlling militia pilots(or non-FW neutrals) are able to tether, and if a structure from one side is in the space of another, it loses all tether entirely until system is flipped to the appropriate militia.
I say this currently living in FW lowsec as a neutral that’s deployed structures more than once through the many changes
Its worth noting though that ‘locking out’ of anchoring for neutrals and enemies is something a vocal few FW groups seem to want, completely ignoring the part where it very much does screw a portion of their own content and tramples the content of others 
1 Like
So nobody can set up structures with markets in highsec? That seems a bit… restrictive.
As for ‘creating a sense of progression’… that assumes low or null are somehow ‘endgame’ for EVE. For some players, sure, they are. For others… not even close. It just means you’re doubling down on the idea that highsec inhabitants are secondhand citizens in a game where low and null need the ore from highsec as much or more than highsec needs supplies from low and null.
1 Like
Fair enough. As you know, I don’t live there, and I apparently confused one of the proposals for the way things had been redone. Still, the ‘there are different rules in different parts of lowsec’ still applies.
Maybe he did not know you cannot fit a Market Hub on a medium structure. Only Azbel and up.
We’d need to return to pre-scarcity distribution of ore for this. I wouldn’t say highsec would be considered second class citizens, it just returns to the risk/reward.
Could CCP not allow markets in medium structures at with an elevated tax rate. We are discussing development rather than existing mechanics.
Would you really put a market hub in a structure that can be killed fast and easily? Or trust that the owner can defend something that actually now only has two timers?
I am ok with putting large structures like Azbel and Fortizars in highsec. They are easy enough to take down if the need is there to do so.
I don’t know, maybe structures in highsec should be harder to destroy given it’s “safer” space but just restrict the structure type. Structures in dangerous space give larger bonuses but are more vulnerable, structures in safe space give terrible bonuses but are resilient. Link the vulnerability to the security status of the system and/or ADM’s.
At this point I’m just staring at a bottle of wine not even thinking straight so apologies.
WTF CCP You NEED to change the notifications. Getting my stuff jizzed into asset safety with 0 warning!
You need to give players SOME form of notification that a station they have stuff in is going to die.
1 Like
A) Why would you want to put a market into such an easily-destroyed structure? and…
B) Why would they need an elevated tax rate? If the goal is to prevent players from operating markets, I have to ask: why? There are plenty of player-run market hubs out there to serve areas of highsec that aren’t close to Jita or Amarr. Why screw over highsec players like that?
Safer according to who? I know I feel much safer in nullsec than I ever do in highsec.