Yonis Kador wrote:After giving this more thought (mostly on my hour-long commute to work) I'm less confident in my earlier "magic feather" statement. I'm now convinced that this idea (and especially more loot) will not motivate risk-averse players to low/null.
And I think the proof this is true can be found in Incursions.
Not only do incursions offer increased isk and dynamic gameplay, but they appear in high sec and actually disrupt the lives of the risk-averse. Tanked rats appear in the systems these guys normally mine and mission in - totally inconveniencing all.
So if CCP brought the party to the risk-averse, gave them access to increased isk, and penalized them for inaction - and they still didn't fight - well, lvl 4s in low sec sure won't do the trick either.
For a diametric shift of any sort to occur, there has to be a concerted, designed effort to change the ways mining and pvp are utilized in this game. They are too incompatible. Ships with dual mining and pvp functions may be necessary. Random rats may have to start popping up in belts and outside stations. Safety from crime shouldn't translate to safety from the universe. I think people could survive a cruiser rat every now and then in 0.5s.
Maybe CCP could also spawn more gravimetric sigs in certain sec systems and have various rat spawns pop up every few minutes instead of every 15. Increase variation in the minimal risks the risk-averse do face on a daily basis. The risk-averse may bite on new high sec rocks to mine and would need protection while they mine the site.
Ideas need to be generated which cause mining and pvp to overlap in novel ways, offering incentives to miners to engage in pvp - but perhaps not on the massive scale of Incursions. And if the incentive is great mining in high sec with increased risk from pve elements, it might start the ball rolling. And then in a graduated way, you move more of the playerbase away from 100 percent risk-aversion and toward less apprehension to exploration with additional updates.
I may not support the risk-averse being offered up as scooby snacks for risk takers' gaming pleasure but I also recognize that a huge, stagnant, risk-averse playerbase is not conducive to the longevity of this game.
Yonis Kador
Good work. But a thought occured to me. Are you working under the assumption that the risk averse are that way continuously? I ask because I believe a lot of players that start out in high sec leave the game after about 6 months or less.
Long before they ever get to the point of wandering out of high sec. They get replaced by newer high sec players.
I think high sec is a constant rotation of new players with only a few that stay on past 6 months. That few are spread out all over the spectrum some going to nul some going to low and some going to industrialists in high. But the majority is turn over.
So while you see a lot of players in high I think that is mostly constant turn over. Perhaps the key to more low and null sec population is simply longevity. Get the player base to stay with the game longer. That is my take on it anyway.