I know, it's been batted so many times, but things are looking up to making it happen. I could care less about the AFK guy with his 4 alt accounts, he's afk anyhow not playing so why is he upset that he won't be playing what he doesn't play?

derp.

Oh no the mission runners might have to take some basic precautions while they make money

Oh no the mission runners might have to take some basic precautions while they make money

I dont play the game to give the bored 0.0 nubs their entertainment, I do it for mine.


I'm not here to let you ruin my game, I'm here to have fun in mine.


Cheers


Tal

Well, we can't have that can we? We have to keep L4 out of the Risk vs Reward EvE Balance.

We have to keep their risk free ISK fountain going.

Good exemple of a Theme Park MMO playstyle.

Lol at you and your poor trolling skills.

Tal

They are only two possibilities, you're either a troll or you are just insanely ignorant on this subject.

But then again, Theme Parkers are known for this, they don't have a clue about Sandbox MMO's, so you are probably just being ignorant.

Poor child

Indeed, sucks to be you. I would be mad too if i was playing world of warcraft thinking it was a Sandbox MMO.

Simply not going to happen because a recent offical survey issued by CCP has made clear that only 25% of players are interested in pvp.

Have all mission agents work on a supply and demand principle where the more players are running a particular agent's missions, the more he can lower his payouts to take advantage of the labour surplus, and vice versa.

This would do wonders for restoring risk/reward balance as the more daring mission runners ventured out to take advantage of little-used agents in unused corners of lowsec and npc 0.0.

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

You're also supersilly, missing the forest for the trees. You assume that every *high sec dweller* is exclusively that. Get a clue kid!

Simply not going to happen because a recent offical survey issued by CCP has made clear that only 25% of players are interested in pvp.

So - call it ragequit, or call it another way - CCP is simply not cutting incomes just to please 1/4 of their player base

Simply not going to happen because a recent offical survey issued by CCP has made clear that only 25% of players are interested in pvp.

So - call it ragequit, or call it another way - CCP is simply not cutting incomes just to please 1/4 of their player base

This.
Also to incentive low sec activity, you need to add new content to actually hook people interest to get in there.
Not taking one content and taking to low sec.
Adding new ships that stuffs comes from Low sec?(just throwing random ideas)

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.

Maybe he needs that isk to be his safe income to finance his pvp activities?

Lvl5 in low sec never made mission runners go there, moving lvl4's will only make some already bored with high sec broken/bad content leave definitively.

If they are bored, why don't they leave hisec? EVE is really exciting out there, every day.

It's quite simple really. Most people are not fighters. They would rather be protected then do the protection. The human race has always been that way. You expect people to pretty much change their nature in a virtual world?? Most people really are not capable of the idea of sacrifice. Plus, add in the fact that the human race has kind of teched itself out of having to struggle to survive. That is in most places.

Making the most active part of the game less enjoyable to play in is a silly business move. Making the less active parts more enticing to play in would be excellent.

To those thinking the solution to all problems is to keep nerfing Hisec - come up with ways to make the rest of the game more interesting instead. That would do much more for the game than cutting of its nose to spite its face.