imagine the player interaction if the universe adjusted populated over used systems sec status. Then what if the resource spawn was based on that sec status… like a system could be -1.0 to start with have amazing resources and get mined out and over used over the course of a year and the sec status become 1.0 and the resources adjust accordingly… that would cause more large alliances and corps to have to migrate and fight over under used territories and cause more epic battles and strategic gameplay… also more players would end up interacting with each other that otherwise would never even meet …
1 Like
I really like that idea!
1 Like
I approve of this message, CCP can we get this for the Fall release ? 
2 Likes
How would the sec degrade? Being underused? Many highsec systems are still used just because they are High sec. Eventually eve would be entirely high sec because everyone does something in every type of security. Cool idea, but doesn’t apply well with the current meta
2 Likes
Off the top of my head, I’d say good old PvP explosions.
If capsuleer ships or structures explode in a system, the sec status drops a little. the size of the drop can be tied to ship or structure size or class, etc.
And if resources are mined, market fees are collected, or rats are killed by capsuleers, etc. the sec status goes up, again a sliding scale can be applied.
This could result in corporations based in a given system or constellation need to work for their interests.
An industrial corporation will want to up the sec status of their best mining spots for better CONCORD response times. Traders will want to increase the sec status of bottleneck systems like Uedama to try to reduce freighter losses.
And of course other people more interested in kicking over sandcastles will also need to make an effort to prevent the sec status from rising too high.
I’m not in FW myself, so I’m not 100% sure of the mechanics, but my understanding is that militia players can also “invest” their FW LP to improve station service efficiencies in a system they control, for example better manufacturing or market fees. An equivalent system for standard LP for NPCs that have stations in a system could maybe be a thing related to this?
It’s an interesting suggestion…
2 Likes
Yeah but, miners in Null want NULL ore, they dont want to mine themselves out of it and are forced back to Veldspar.
3 Likes
True, but then null miners should be relying on their alliance response fleets shouldn’t they?
And those response fleets would be exploding the people trying to explode their miners, and so it’s explosions all round, meaning the sec status is going down, not up.
Of course, there’s the argument that null is some of the safest space out there, so maybe it’ll encourage more conflict in null, to ensure the nullbears get to keep all of those null ores and minerals and the riches they bring.
1 Like
Yeah, but think about places like Niarja where ships are popped on the daily. It would most likely become low sec in the first day. The changing of geography ruins the game. Everything would constantly change, trade hubs would never be safe as all of a sudden surrounding system where people are ganked drop to low or null sec and makes places like Jita unreachable. Just saying this idea goes against the consistency one can expect from the geography in the game.
3 Likes
I think if this kind of mechanic was ever to see the light of day, New Eden would find its balance.
Yes, carebears want to reduce risk, but too much risks crippling their own income because of ore availability, just as you highlighted.
And at the same time, the PvPers want to explode ships, but push the envelope too far and space becomes too dangerous for some, and they run out of targets to shoot at.
And so, an equilibrium of sorts would settle out of the chaos.
The question is whether the entire map would become a homogeneous low-ish sec, which wouldn’t be very interesting.
Perhaps it’d have to be restricted to certain areas, but like with the FW system now.
2 Likes
I think geography should remain relatively the same I guess FW systems would be a cool place to implement it for there to be actual consequences for FW
2 Likes
Giving players control over security status would kill EVE in months (if it took that long). Imagine some nullsec alliances killing anyone that tried doing anything in Uedama, Niarja, Bei or a hundred other systems in highsec and extorting you to pass through systems they now control and keep eternally at -1.0 sec status.
It has long been a request from nullsec to chop up highsec into islands with nullsec, or lowsec between all those sections (no im not going to go looking up such posts and prove this to you, if you want proof go find them yourself).
Your idea gives them the tool to they need to finally do this, in fact it could become a situation where if you want to undock you pay nullsec or die because any market systems and surrounding systems are kept -1.0 status by nullsec forever ( you move the market hubs, they move their choke points).
p.s. if you do the reverse and start all systems at 1.0 status, then nullsec would farm important systems till their status becomes -1.0 and keep them there and again we are all extorted for as long as we can stand it before we find some other game to play (which for me would not be very long).
Im in favor of some kind of dwindling or shifting resource system that not just encourages nullsec alliances to fight each but would FORCES them do so. In my not so humble opinion, nullsec should be a massive ongoing fight to survive not a place to set up comfortable arrangements with your neighbors and, whereafter, you set up and play, ‘farmers in space’.
1 Like
with verry high activity in like jita you wouldnt see a drop in it or its surrounding systems…
and it would be usage… yes i agree once a null system is formed it would be hard to change it back… but they have to get in without their capitals in order to make that happen… high sec is a different animal than null … it would be zone control for everyone … if you wanted to keep it high sec you use the crap out of everything in system missions mining market industry… if you want it null you shut that activity down… so if your a null miner you would designate systems to be mined and then shift to a different one and use systems very little at all constant null resources… however that also spreads out the area you need to occupy in order to make that efficient … it would reach an equilibrium and set up protectorates in highsec to keep trade routs and major hubs highsec
there will always be a need though for rookie systems to be unaffected by this… but it would foster all activities do able in eve keep the pvp ers in pvp and industrialist in industry and the explorers exploring and force interaction where even in systems where people are relatively forgotten
You apparently have missed things like Burn Jita or at least misunderstood its true meaning, so i’ll spell it out for you…
When the goons control jita access for a few days they are telling all of EVE that they own any part of EVE they want, even 1.0 highsec systems with thousands of players in the system.
Trust me, the goons and every other major alliance would have highsec cut up and divided before this thing even went live (since they own the CSM and would know about it being implemented first) and then it is extortion to undock, extortion to mine, extortion to run missions, extortion (well you get the idea…).
2 Likes
to add to JUSTIFIED ARROGANCE
You are also forgetting that security status is slowly, patch by patch becoming less about resource provision and access, which is should.
This is a healthy and good change for eve. You are advocating a change that would be easily violated by the simple process of moon mining, since it provides access to all types of ores, just not all rarities of them.
I have long played with the idea of security status changing over time in various ways, either down or up and i think its subject to, to much abuse.
i realy think it would put eve in its essence a constant state of war… you wouldnt be able to control one area and expect it to provide you riches forever… it would be you used it now there is less you have to let it cool down to get it back… this process shouldnt take secounds to do but year or years… and as it adjusted it forced those who want or need those resources to go cut out another section of space… abuse … this game encourages abuse and extortion… get with the program if your ever played eve online… from isk dubblers to rentees … this game is all about the strong controlling the week and the cunning navigating the spectrum… but some areas of the game seem to stagnate and some groups have found themselvs self sustaining in the systems they control… no need to put money in the game we have all the isk there is… goons… its not about the goons its about moving resources arround so groups move arround and interact … its about not being able to establish a self sustaining orginization and more groups have to work together to survive… the game would auto rebalance itself allowing for more technological innovation and the increase in moneys needed to play omega would allow for some amazing expansions and innovations like universal translators in chat… and automatic drone recall or warp delay modules… realy… i think it would engage more of the client base than hurt it… once you become stagnate in one system you get soft… and isnt it more fun to find new space and meet new players and blow crap up… or do you all want a single player expeiriance where your never disturbed and the game never has anything new to offer
Jita is THE system that has highest amount of player ships destroyed on a daily basis. It could become -1.0 overnight.
The true sec shifting system should be restricted to null only (shifts between -1.0 to -0.0). That way devs can also avoid a lot of problems with claim space (concord-protected high sec claim space sounds stupid).
Yup, basically the whole donut would turn inside out and everything implemented to date would be ■■■■■■. There would be Titans in “High Sec” and warp bubles would be outlawed in “null sec”.
Talk about not well thought out.
-1
2 Likes
so you make it based on usage that way its just an index that controlls it not so much deths or kills… but usage makes alot of sence … if you drill the oil in a reserve it depleates it doesnt replenish verry fast… you have to wait for the cool down to make it happen … the cool down in real is millions of years so the exageration would be a year or two or 5 something like that… kills and kriminal activity would attract more police as criminals seem to be attracted to populated areas so are law inforcement so security would go up and resource availability would go down… it would be natural for systems that are not used to drop and eventualy be filled with all kinds of resources as most unused space grows and collects from the used space… it would be cool to try in a small space but if it proves to be the better mechanic than the current … “meta” i would like to see it in a larger scale… as no one alliance should be able to self sustain in any one area for long… if the game doesnt make you move and look at other places it becomes stagnate and no different than a single player game… who signed up for this one to play it single player realy
if it flipped like that would it not cause more people to move about… and interact with eachother… there would be more ganks and explosions… miners and mission runners would organize better and find new innovative ways to avoid being ganked and crushed… stay aligned first sign of trouble warp … remember… this would cause such a disubance to the stagnet peace eve will be at war for years to come… and this is why you signed up to play … this is what the new bro is looking for… come on guys well thought out this i have been told by many is brilliant … would change everything and those that cant handle getting ganked or loosing their ship or structure… well welcome to eve onliine
Yes, I like this, I think it would find balance and you could put additional criteria into the mix, like adding more guns to 1.0 gates to prevent ganking further in those highly traffic’d systems. Also, the choke systems would be further indexed with traffic, higher traffic = higher sec so that highly traffic systems would move up in sec status further reducing the ability of gank groups from exploiting it but yes, it would not be possible to bring a tradehub to low status b/c of a couple factors 1. high traffic, 2. destroyed structures create more movement in the sec status, and those systems are restricted from having them. Also, nearby systems would have an additional pull on the system weighting, so attacking just one system couldn’t bring it to zero, as the nearby system would act like a buoy. Just a couple ideas here…
1 Like